 sj |
||
|
||
BS: bridge collapse in Washington usa
|
|
|
Subject: BS: bridge collapse in wa usa From: mg Date: 24 May 13 - 03:27 AM mighty strange..bridge seemed to collapse spontaneously..near mount vernon wa over skagit river. but later they said that there seemed to be a pilot truck and then there was a huge truck that clipped some of it..even so seems like it shouldn't have brought it down like that. think there were 3 cars and all survived..some on tops of cars. it happened in good weather in daylight so that was good..could have been worse. hope they don't find anything tomorrow... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: bridge collapse in wa usa From: Richard Bridge Date: 24 May 13 - 04:01 AM One vaguely wonders why one hears sporadically of bridge collapses in the USA but hardly ever from anywhere else. Is it evidence of inadequate infrastructure maintenance spending? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: bridge collapse in wa usa From: Joe Offer Date: 24 May 13 - 04:48 AM It does make one wonder, Richard. California has spent $6.3 billion on the replacement for the eastern span of the San Francisco Bay Bridge. Several inspections have been defective, and one wonders how many flaws they missed. After we spend $6.3 million, will the new bridge be any better than the one it's replacing? I'm afraid the much-touted American Work Ethic has gone to hell. -Joe- P.S. we're having earthquakes in Northern California this evening. Maybe it's just a bad day for America's west coast. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: bridge collapse in wa usa From: GUEST,Alan Date: 24 May 13 - 05:30 AM Could someone tell me why a lot of bridges in America have something that resembles a wooden shed over them ? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: bridge collapse in wa usa From: Jack Campin Date: 24 May 13 - 05:42 AM It is not just the US, and there have been many more fatalities at bridge collapses elsewhere. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_bridge_failures From that list, it seems Canada has had far more collapses than its share by population, while the Soviet Union has had far less. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: bridge collapse in wa usa From: ragdall Date: 24 May 13 - 05:58 AM mg, An eye witness reported that the truck hit the superstructure and knocked pieces from it. If the superstructure is not intact, the bridge deck has no support. They said that after some was knocked loose the rest of the superstructure buckled and folded. I'm glad that it appears that all who went down with the bridge were rescued alive and are okay. I feel very sorry for the truck driver. If he's found to be responsible, his company must pay for the cost of the bridge repairs. I hope that they carry lots of insurance. Rags |
|
Subject: RE: BS: bridge collapse in wa usa From: Richard Bridge Date: 24 May 13 - 07:05 AM Good link thanks Jack. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: bridge collapse in wa usa From: Greg F. Date: 24 May 13 - 07:14 AM Is it evidence of inadequate infrastructure maintenance spending? Absolutely. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: bridge collapse in wa usa From: GUEST,leeneia Date: 24 May 13 - 08:19 AM Hello, Alan. Modern bridges in America do not have wooden structures over them. There are historic bridges, which we call 'covered bridges' that have roofs over them, to keep off rain, ice and snow. They are considered charming and quaint, rather like thatched cottages. ========== A few months ago I read a book by Phillip Wearne called "Collapse: why buildings fall." I recommend it to everyone. It's on Amazon, or your library might have it. Mine did. It covered buildings, yes, but also bridges and a drilling platform. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: bridge collapse in wa usa From: Bat Goddess Date: 24 May 13 - 08:49 AM In theory we have three bridges over the Piscataqua River in Portsmouth, NH -- all connecting New Hampshire with Maine. Memorial Bridge, the oldest, connecting downtown Portsmouth with Kittery, ME (and Portsmouth Naval Shipyard, among other things) has been unavailable since January of last year. It's been demolished and is being rebuilt and we hope it will reopen this July. Memorial Bridge Project The "middle bridge" -- the Sarah Long Bridge -- is due to be replaced sometime within the next couple years (after completion of the new Memorial Bridge), but was out of commission for some time a few weeks ago because a tanker broke its mooring and hit the bridge. So for awhile, only the newest bridge (built in the '70s) on I-95 was open. Memorial Bridge (and the Long Bridge) should really have been replaced years ago, but Maine and NH spent a lot of time squabbling about who pays what and how much. Meanwhile the bridges were sporadically closed for safety reason while various patches and cables were cobbled together to keep traffic going and keep businesses alive. Linn |
|
Subject: RE: BS: bridge collapse in wa usa From: GUEST,crazy little woman Date: 24 May 13 - 09:42 AM I watched the film on the Skagit River bridge collapse on ABC. I'm no expert, but the steel beams in that bridge sure look lightweight. Too lightweight to be part of the interstate system. As for the truck that hit the bridge (where is this alleged truck?), we all know that sometime, some year, some truck is going to hit any given bridge. If nothing else, bridges get ice on them before roads do, and vehicles go out of control. It's just something that engineers need to design for and governments need to pay for. By the way, the bridge is in Washington State, in the Seattle area, on I-95, and it was built in 1955. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: bridge collapse in wa usa From: Stilly River Sage Date: 24 May 13 - 10:21 AM I can't count the number of times I raced over that bridge on my drive between Seattle/Everett and Bellingham. It was always nice to take a look at the river. It might be in it's banks, or it might be in flood and an amazing site to behold - especially if it pushed over the levees. Good thing it was apparently fairly low or it would have been a different story for those cars. America's infrastructure is crumbling. After the huge push of the Eisenhower administration to build up the Interstate highways (but not limited to Interstate highway bridges) American politicians seem reluctant to repair the aging infrastructure. Look at the bridge collapse in Minnesota on I-35 (I live near the Texas end of that major traffic artery), there was a large collapse in Connecticut on I-95. Those are just plucked from memory, I'm sure Joe's list is much longer. The House of Representatives has the purse-strings. They're in a rut, demanding austerity (which has been shown to not work, and the report that fueled the recent push around the world was shown to be a mistake by it's authors who couldn't read their own Excel spreadsheet). They have now wasted enough time to vote 37 times to "defeat" established law (the Health Care legislation that is far from perfect, but better than what we had). Why discuss financial health of the nation, health care, and bridges in one sentence? Because the GOP politicians in the U.S. House refuse to acknowledge that by putting forward a program to do major bridge replacement the economy would recover to the level of the Clinton administration or beyond. They are blinded by a decrepit political "vision" that can't see beyond their ability to hold onto the offices they were elected to. Washington is quite a liberal state, the home of the Wobblies, and as much as they'd like to see that work underway, they can only do so much when it comes to funding such a massive program. The federal government is responsible for many of the roads where the work needs to be done. SRS (native-Washingtonian) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: bridge collapse in Washington usa From: Bill D Date: 24 May 13 - 11:11 AM truck hit overhead girder |
|
Subject: RE: BS: bridge collapse in Washington usa From: Deckman Date: 24 May 13 - 11:49 AM The story is just now surfacing. The truck that hit the bridge girders was FORCED over at the last minute by another semi-truck that speeded alongside of him. The truck driver had no choice. bo(deckman)nelson |
|
Subject: RE: BS: bridge collapse in Washington usa From: JohnInKansas Date: 24 May 13 - 12:08 PM There has been quite a lot of concern over bridges in the US and a Federal survey classified the Skagit River Bridge that collapsed as "substandard" several years ago. Washington State did their own survey and listed this bridge as "marginally satisfactory" but did NOT have it on their list of bridges for priority in repair/replacement. Even in Kansas, where you can spit across most "rivers" that require a bridge**, the last count I saw was something like 1,800 (?) bridges in need of serious maintenance. Most of these are posted with reduced "load limits" far below what they were originally designed to carry, but remain in use. The problem is common to bridges and to the "overpasses" quite common in major highway interchanges - or to almost any kind of fairly long unsupported span structures. It's still not impossibly hard to get funding for a new highway with bridges, but money for proper maintenance is very difficult to find, almost everywhere. ** We do have some rivers that are pretty wide. They just don't have any water left in them. John |
|
Subject: RE: BS: bridge collapse in Washington usa From: GUEST,crazy little woman Date: 24 May 13 - 12:45 PM Okay, it sounds like a truck really did hit the bridge. I made a mistake, apparently its I-5, not 95. I still think the steel looks lightweight. Thanks for the link, Bill D. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: bridge collapse in Washington usa From: Bat Goddess Date: 24 May 13 - 01:01 PM Stilly, I wish Mudcat had a "Like" button because everything you said is altogether too true. Maine and New Hampshire had to try to come to some agreement so that federal funds could be applied for. But everything was right down to the wire, and we have been very fortunate that despite the deplorable shape of both Memorial and Long bridges, neither collapsed or endangered people traveling between Portsmouth and Kittery. Major INCONVENIENCE to both people and businesses while the new Memorial Bridge is being constructed (and even more inconvenience when the Long Bridge also had to be closed after the ship damaged it), but there's a free shuttle workaround for Memorial Bridge (bikers and pedestrians). Point is that it reached the point years ago where it would have been more economical to replace the bridges than to continue putting Band-aids on... Linn |
|
Subject: RE: BS: bridge collapse in Washington usa From: gnu Date: 24 May 13 - 01:48 PM "I still think the steel looks lightweight." Nope. It's fine but there is a "procedural" flaw, not a design flaw. This flaw is no where near the bridge. I have said since I was an engineering student over 30 years ago that weigh scale stations should have a "sizer", as I called it back then, thru which vehicles must pass. If they cannot pass thru, they have to park until they have the proper paperwork. This paperwork is REQUIRED to be obtained in EVERY jurisdiction in NA, Europe and beyond prior to entering a jurisdiction with any "overload". But, every now and then, some yahoo without a clue overloads or oversizes for whatever reason and serious shit happens. My idea would add less than $6k to each set of weigh stations. Simplicity is beauty and safety is paramount to an engineer. One penny extra is ugly to a pencil pushing accountant or politician. Sad. Also, the modern weigh-in-motion stations would almost preclude provision of this simple device because some lawyer would file a law suit eventually. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: bridge collapse in Washington usa From: GUEST Date: 24 May 13 - 03:37 PM http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_bridge_failures |
|
Subject: RE: BS: bridge collapse in Washington usa From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 24 May 13 - 04:01 PM I ALMOST hate to bring it up, but weren't those 'shovel ready jobs' supposed to be for bringing up our infrastructure????....The money was given...but no 'shovel ready jobs. Maybe if I were to ask, "What happened?", you'd start blaming everybody, except where the blame lies! Oh, speaking of 'lies'....... GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: bridge collapse in Washington usa From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 24 May 13 - 04:24 PM A drilling rig, attached to the Kenworth semi, caught the superstructure of the bridge, according to police, causing the collapse. The driver, according to his wife, had all the permit papers and a pole car had traveled the route beforehand, to make sure the rig would fit. The driver is from Spruce Grove, Alberta. An average of 77,000 drivers used the bridge every day. Highway infrastructure is poorly kept up, not only in U. S., but in Canada as well. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: bridge collapse in Washington usa From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 24 May 13 - 04:28 PM Above from Global News, based on Associated Press and Canadian Press. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: bridge collapse in Washington usa From: gnu Date: 24 May 13 - 04:56 PM Q... had all the permit papers? Hmmmm... it will get sorted and, hopefully, the error won't be repeated. And, just for interest sake re the comment that the steel looked "light". Sand will bear a lot of weight but a child can scoop it up with it's fingers. You are looking at a truss which was not designed to bear a compression with one member but a truss that was designed to engage and bear the load by the members in tension within the truss. If we could build the tension members of a truss with spider silk, we could build a stairway to heaven. As it is, we have to be satisfied with 80,000 psi tension stength steel. Here is the ultimate demonstration of the simplest engineering observation made by humans to date (and employed in simple truss design, among many designs). What is easier?... push a piece of string or pull a piece of string? In either case, if you drive over the string with a truck... yer trucked. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: bridge collapse in Washington usa From: Don Firth Date: 24 May 13 - 05:09 PM The bridge was built in the 1950s and it was part of Eisenhower's program for establishing a national interstate highway system. It was not "make work," Eisenhower considered it, first, an essential part of the nation's national highway infrastructure—and an essential as part of a national defense system (fast transportation of troops and materiel from place to place). This was in the middle of the Cold War. There was nothing wrong or shoddy about the Interstate 5 bridge over the Skagit River. It was state-of-the art at the time, and it was well built. Better designs have come along since, but the engineers and contractors can't be faulted for poor or "cut-rate" workmanship. The interstate highway system has proven to be of great benefit and convenience to the population at large. Within recent years there have been people calling for necessary maintenance, repair, and upgrading of the system. I've been across this bridge many times on my way to and from Seattle and points north, such as Bellingham, WA or Vancouver, B.C. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: bridge collapse in Washington usa From: GUEST,crazy little woman Date: 24 May 13 - 07:29 PM That's a good idea about the sizer, gnu. I still think that a bridge that collapses when there's one accident is aa bridge that's too lightweight. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: bridge collapse in Washington usa From: Bill D Date: 24 May 13 - 08:31 PM updated link |
|
Subject: RE: BS: bridge collapse in Washington usa From: GUEST,crazy little woman Date: 24 May 13 - 09:48 PM It just occurred to me that maybe the truck hit the bridge member because it was sagging. Maybe the bridge was ready to fail and the truck was the last straw. It does seem that if a truck clips a bridge, the truck sustains a dent (see link) and the bridge collapses 25 feet into a river, that there is something wrong with the bridge. But what's the story on the side of the truck? In the picture, the side of it seems to be missing. We seem to be looking into perfectly clean, white partitiions. What are we looking at there? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: bridge collapse in Washington usa From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 24 May 13 - 09:55 PM crazy little woman, It appears to be part of a structure, like part of a modular building....but I'm not sure...and you're correct, it shouldn't have collapsed the bridge, if the bridge was in good shape. You'd think the trailer or load would show signs of hitting something, at least.... GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: bridge collapse in Washington usa From: Bill D Date: 24 May 13 - 10:21 PM why The truck needed only to break one beam. Fracture-Critical A fracture-critical bridge is one that does not contain redundant supporting elements. This means that if those key supports fail, the bridge would be in danger of collapse. This does not mean the bridge is inherently unsafe, only that there is a lack of redundancy in its design. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: bridge collapse in Washington usa From: Don Firth Date: 24 May 13 - 10:34 PM From Bill's link: "State officials approved the trucking company to carry a load as high as 15 feet, 9 inches, according to the permit released by the state. However, the southbound vertical clearance on the Skagit River bridge is as little as 14 feet, 9 inches, state records show. The bridge's curved overhead girders are higher in the center of the bridge but sweep lower toward a driver's right side." And further: "The bridge that collapsed was inspected twice last year and repairs were made, Peterson said. It was not classified as structurally deficient, but a Federal Highway Administration database lists it as "functionally obsolete"—a category meaning that the design is outdated, such as having narrow shoulders and low clearance underneath." As I said. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: bridge collapse in Washington usa From: GUEST Date: 24 May 13 - 11:04 PM The truck hit the bridge because the bridge was too low or the truck was too high--your call. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: bridge collapse in Washington usa From: Stilly River Sage Date: 24 May 13 - 11:30 PM Gust from Sanity, you only asked a question in a way to try to spark an argument. Why is it so important to you to always try to change subjects by causing arguments, or by actually bringing to subject to you and your bad behavior. You don't really want an answer to your "questions." Don't you remember? weren't those 'shovel ready jobs' supposed to be for bringing up our infrastructure? Congress DIDN'T APPROVE funding those shovel ready jobs. They couldn't stomach so much success in the stimulus plan. They stopped short of that last push into better economic times. Crazy Little Woman, are you in the U.S.? I don't know about in the UK or Europe, bit in the US there are signs everywhere along all highways, though most people in regular vehicles don't probably notice them, that state the clearance on the overpasses and the height restrictions on bridges. Clearly this truck with its over-the-limit height hit the sweet spot in that bunch of girders to bring the whole thing down. Wasn't this one of bridges that had a steel decking that you could see through? It wasn't built to raise and lower like some of the bridges in Everett over the sloughs, but to keep them lighter they have steel decks that isn't a solid sheet. SRS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: bridge collapse in Washington usa From: Don Firth Date: 24 May 13 - 11:58 PM There's physics involved here. Before one leaps to the conclusion that the bridge was make of cardboard and tissue paper, one needs the answers to two questions. 1. What was the gross weight of the truck? 2. How fast was the truck going when it hit the bridge girder? It's called "kinetic energy." Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: bridge collapse in Washington usa From: Stilly River Sage Date: 25 May 13 - 12:39 AM You know that mobile home park outside the levee? It looks like they had a security camera that caught the whole thing. SRS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: bridge collapse in Washington usa From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 25 May 13 - 02:13 AM SRS, I don't see the argument you are alleging....nor can I vouch for where ever you get your news! My post was accurate, and was not meant to be argumentative. GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: bridge collapse in Washington usa From: Jack Campin Date: 25 May 13 - 04:57 AM Romania has an excellent solution to overheight trucks trying to get under low bridges. Each side of the bridge, maybe 20-50 metres away, there is a steel beam across the road at the clearance height. Solid enough to smash up and stop any high vehicle trying to get through and far enough away to protect the bridge itself. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: bridge collapse in Washington usa From: Richard Bridge Date: 25 May 13 - 05:01 AM That may be so but is it not the case here that the truck would have cleared the bridge until it was forced to the right of its lane by another truck? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: bridge collapse in Washington usa From: gnu Date: 25 May 13 - 05:02 AM I am searching for a different way to say it... 77k vehicles per day, 60 to 70 years in service and still functional in terms of load bearing. That is not "lightweight". I still want to read the permit. Just because a permit was issued does not absolve the company IF the permit was written to account for a "special requirement". In this case, that requirement COULD have been a guided crossing supervised by the highway maintenance authority. If the permit did not have such a provision, someone in the state DOT is in deep shit and quite rightly so. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: bridge collapse in Washington usa From: Joe Offer Date: 25 May 13 - 03:26 PM Way up in about the second or third message, Alan asks:
Bridges fascinate me, and I've made a hobby out of walking across famous bridges. I've walked the Brooklyn Bridge, the Golden Gate Bridge, the Charles Bridge in Prague, the Key Bridge in DC, the Chain Bridge in Budapest, every bridge I could find in Paris, and of course the Tower Bridge in London. I recently crossed the London Bridge in Lake Havasu City, but I'm not sure I want to admit that. -Joe- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: bridge collapse in Washington usa From: Don Firth Date: 25 May 13 - 03:27 PM GoofuS: ". . . weren't those 'shovel ready jobs' supposed to be for bringing up our infrastructure????....The money was given...but no 'shovel ready jobs. Maybe if I were to ask, "What happened?", you'd start blaming everybody, except where the blame lies! Oh, speaking of 'lies'......." There has been talk for several years now—following a similar collapse of other bridges—that the 1950s built infrastructure is in much need of updating and repair, with darn little being authorized by the Federal authorities. Congress keeps refusing to authorize the necessary funds. CONGRESS! Knowing your posting history, it is obvious from your first post on this thread that you were tuning up to blame the Skagit River bridge collapse on President Obama. That's just plain stupid, and it's not going to wash. (Okay, folks. Here comes the barrage of insults.) Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: bridge collapse in Washington usa From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 25 May 13 - 03:29 PM The "final" answer could be weeks in coming, and probably will be drowned in legal prose, if the basic story is told by the reports posted here. 1. Bridge 14 feet six inches (but actually 14 feet nine inches). Issued Permit reads 15 feet nine inches. 2. A local pilot vehicle preceded the semi. 3. Statement by Washington State Dept. verifying the 15 feet nine inch permit, but adding- "ultimately up to the trucking company to figure out whether it can get through.." I would like a piece of the legal pie coming out of this accident. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: bridge collapse in Washington usa From: Joe Offer Date: 25 May 13 - 03:33 PM After the 1989 Loma Prieta Earthquake, California has been rebuilding every bridge in the state that wasn't up to earthquake standards. The project is almost done, although the Foresthill Bridge near me is still under construction [this is one heckuva bridge - fourth-highest in the U.S. - and yes, I've walked it]. Mostly, the bridge reconstruction work appears to be quite satisfactory, but somehow the San Francisco Bay Bridge has been plagued with problems. -Joe- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: bridge collapse in Washington usa From: Bat Goddess Date: 25 May 13 - 03:43 PM Here's a YouTube video of the tanker that crashed into the Sarah Mildred Long Bridge over the Piscataqua River in April, putting that bridge out of commission for a month at the same time one other of the three bridges over the Piscataqua was also unavailable (being reconstructed). Tanker Trouble Linn |
|
Subject: RE: BS: bridge collapse in Washington usa From: catspaw49 Date: 25 May 13 - 03:44 PM Seriously Folks.....If you're done ramblin' here, Rachel explains it all in 15 minutes.....and she is right.....please read Spaw |
|
Subject: RE: BS: bridge collapse in Washington usa From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 25 May 13 - 04:09 PM Meadow's cowpie explanation adds soft shit but nought else. I still would like a piece of the legal pie. (Besides, her voice makes me climb the wall) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: bridge collapse in Washington usa From: Don Firth Date: 25 May 13 - 04:18 PM Thanks for posting that, Spaw. She explains it, chapter and verse! Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: bridge collapse in Washington usa From: GUEST,Peter Laban Date: 25 May 13 - 04:56 PM Speaking of collapsing infrastructure: Missouri overpass |
|
Subject: RE: BS: bridge collapse in Washington usa From: Bill D Date: 25 May 13 - 05:26 PM "Meadow's cowpie explanation.." It's **Maddow**, and there's nothing at all strange about HER voice. I have a list of female 'news' folk who sound like gossiping high school girls... Rachael is an A- Picky, me? naawwww... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: bridge collapse in Washington usa From: gnu Date: 25 May 13 - 05:51 PM What kinda bugs me at the moment is $15M to fix it??? $15M for one simple section??? The design is already done FFS! Fabricate it and place it. And, news reports say traffic will be disrupted a long while? Send in the Army Corps of Engineers and traffic moves, albeit slowly, in 48 hours. In two weeks, 4 tops, the bridge could be servicable. Granted, it should be twinned and then used for another purpose but this shit ain't rocket science. Where is the will to get it done? Or are all the Army Corps of Engineers Afghanistan while the politicians make hay with sound bites? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: bridge collapse in Washington usa From: Greg F. Date: 25 May 13 - 05:57 PM Uh, Gnu- they're talking replacement, not repair. It wouldn't be legal to use the 1950's design today. And they'd just be asking for another collapse next time a vehicle stuck one of the main supporting members. Send in the Army Corps? The Gang Who Couldn't Shoot Straight? Yer kidding, right? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: bridge collapse in Washington usa From: gnu Date: 25 May 13 - 06:05 PM You ain't listenin... "fix" costs little and can easily be done in two weeks to keep traffic moving while twinning takes longer. Read my post again... and again if required. Surely fixing the existing structure is job one and twinning (fixing the received problem) is job two. BTW, I don't actually know if wholesale replacement is the correct solution. As an engineer, I would actually have to study the situation to offer an informed analysis... unlike 99% of the reports and comments I read and view herein and elsewhere. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: bridge collapse in Washington usa From: gnu Date: 25 May 13 - 06:14 PM BTW... 58 years and a PROCEDURAL error takes it out? Carrying 77k vehicles per day as of late until it was struck down by a mistake in some paperwork? Built on the cheap? Damn good engineering! Taxpayers should thank the engineers that designed that bridge. All hail The Invisible E! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: bridge collapse in Washington usa From: Stilly River Sage Date: 25 May 13 - 06:16 PM The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers will have to be involved with that bridge. Although it was fixed in place, it wasn't a draw bridge or a rotating bridge, the Skagit is still a navigable waterway that far up. And navigable waterways come under the exclusive jurisdiction of the USACE. The commercial navigation may be only history now, I don't know how many log booms come down river versus logs being driven to the mills on trucks. But it used to be a working river, like most of the rest of the big ones in Western Washington. Other modern businesses would include commercial fishing, tourism, etc. The Skagit has levees that the Corps maintains. Lots of things people don't think about often that the Corps keeps track of. SRS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: bridge collapse in Washington usa From: JennieG Date: 25 May 13 - 06:59 PM Joe, come to Oz.....you can climb the arch of the Sydney Harbour Bridge! Himself and I have done so. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: bridge collapse in Washington usa From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 25 May 13 - 07:33 PM In 1978, The Skagit Wild and Scenic River System was established by Congress. It is managed by the U.S. National Forest Service. The Skagit River Hydroelectric System provides electricity to Seattle. It has three dams, and according to Wiki, is popular for whitewater rafting and fly-fishing. The Nature Conservancy is working with farmers in the delta area. I doubt that its navigable status is in effect or that the Corps of Engineers would be involved in replacement or repair of the bridge. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: bridge collapse in Washington usa From: gnu Date: 25 May 13 - 08:04 PM Q... too bad... the job of restoring traffic flow(again, slowly) would be done or almost done by now. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: bridge collapse in Washington usa From: Don Firth Date: 25 May 13 - 08:48 PM It strikes me that faulting those who built the bridge in the 1950s is a bit like faulting Douglas for not equipping the piston-driven DC-7 with jet engines. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: bridge collapse in Washington usa From: Stilly River Sage Date: 25 May 13 - 09:16 PM Q - you're talking about entities way upstream. The US Forest Service portion (Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie National Forest, the Baker River District) is in the Cascade Mountains, as is the National Park Service portion (Ross Lake Natl. Recreation Area in North Cascades National Park - where Gorge Dam, Diablo Dam, and Ross Dam were built on the upstream Skagit). Seattle City Light was in there first with the dams so the national recreation area is around the dams and lakes which were built for hydroelectric power. The land surrounding the recreation area has stricter usage rules and is National Park. To be clear, the bridge that fell is in the flatlands, the delta of the river, near Mt. Vernon. It is navigable, and you need to get a map. I grew up there, I worked for the National Park Service in the Cascades in THAT PARK and I worked for the Forest Service in THAT FOREST and I drove up and down that Interstate highway hundreds of times in my lifetime. My cousin Norman Ronning was the last captain of the sternwheeler Preston, which was the last working sternwheeler on the west coast until it was retired, and he retired. It was owned by the Corps of Engineers and one of the jobs it was used for in all of those rivers was to pull out "deadheads" - logs that had sunk after being part of booms of lumber (trees logged, trimmed, cut to length, dropped in the water, floated downstream in large booms or rafts). These deadheads were deadly to navigation on the river, so they were flagged when spotted, and the Preston went and pulled them out. This ship would have travled upstream from Mt. Vernon. Not sure if they got as far as or farther than Sedro Woolley, but the Preston was a flat bottomed boat and got into some very shallow water when needed. SRS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: bridge collapse in Washington usa From: Deckman Date: 25 May 13 - 09:37 PM SRS ... I used to fish alongside the north bridge foundation abutment that collapsed. bob |
|
Subject: RE: BS: bridge collapse in Washington usa From: Stilly River Sage Date: 25 May 13 - 09:41 PM In fishing season, one hopes! Steelhead? Trout? SRS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: bridge collapse in Washington usa From: gnu Date: 25 May 13 - 09:55 PM Deckman would only fish IN season with proper bait. Out of season?... with explosives, of course. Time is of the esscence out of season, eh? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: bridge collapse in Washington usa From: Don Firth Date: 25 May 13 - 10:08 PM Dynamite? Nah, that's kinda crude. Well, actually, he uses a school of trained piranha like a pack of hunting dogs. There are few things more pathetic looking than a steelhead cowering in a treetop! Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: bridge collapse in Washington usa From: Deckman Date: 25 May 13 - 11:55 PM WHAT ARE YOU FOLKS DRINKING? sheeeuh! Actually, there's always been a run of early Spring Chinook (salmon). Come late September, in come the steelhead. but ... I digress! bob |
|
Subject: RE: BS: bridge collapse in Washington usa From: Deckman Date: 26 May 13 - 12:02 AM BACK TO THE SUBJECT ... In all seriousness, this bridge failure is really a big deal here. I-5, the freeway, is THE one and only major roadway between Mexico and Canada, on the West coast. Thousands of trucks, not to mention cars, travel it always. So far. the temporary side roads they are trying to set up are adding hours to the travel time between my home in Everett, and Bellingham. Bellingham is where my three children live. Also in Bellingham are: two granddaughters, one dog, one daughter-in-law, one turtle, and one lizard. The only good I can find in this bridge collapse is that come father's day, no one from up north will have to try to travel to my place for the BBQ ... look at the money I'll save! bad bad bob |
|
Subject: RE: BS: bridge collapse in Washington usa From: Ebbie Date: 26 May 13 - 02:33 AM How does it happen, I wonder, that Portland has an I 5 bypass in I 205 while Seattle does not? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: bridge collapse in Washington usa From: Joe Offer Date: 26 May 13 - 04:01 AM When bridges go out here in California, the California Department of Transportation (CalTrans) often calls on C.C. Myers, Inc.. The firm has built itself a reputation for rebuilding broken freeways within budget, and well ahead of deadline. It's an interesting concept - to build a reputation for always getting the job well and on time, no matter what it takes. I wish more companies would follow the example of this firm. Gnu has a point that the broken section of the bridge could probably be fixed quickly, but a broken bridge section is a good tool for getting politicians to replace the entire bridge, which is what should be done. The State of Washington is nearly as susceptible to earthquakes as California, so rigid truss bridges need to be replaced with something more flexible. I really love steel truss bridges, and I'm especially partial to the truss portion of the San Francisco Bay Bridge that's being replaced. Thanks to Spaw for the link to the excellent Rachel Maddow program on this bridge. She gave a great explanation of truss bridges and their fatal flaw (and threw in a wonderful explanation of the St. Lawrence Seaway). We recently lost a beautiful cantilevered truss bridge at Carquinez Straits, which was replaced by a suspension bridge. You in the UK who wonder about bridges in the U.S., don't forget the Tay Bridge Disaster. And yes, I know it happened a long, long time ago - but it has affected bridgebuilding in the UK to this very day. The State of Washington has had a number of memorable bridge collapses - most interesting to me was the 1990 demise of the Lake Washington Floating Bridge - see this link (click) for the top five Seattle bridge disasters. Seattle is a city of fascinating bridges - no wonder it has bridge disasters every once in a while. Pittsburgh and New York City are two other towns with lots of fascinating bridges, but I don't know of bridge disasters there. -Joe- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: bridge collapse in Washington usa From: Deckman Date: 26 May 13 - 04:25 AM The main north/south highway, even in Oregon,is I-5. The bi-pass in Portland that you mention only avoids I-5 for a short distance. In the area where the bridge collapsed, Skagit County, I-5 is sandwiched between Puget Sound and the Cascade mountains. There really is no place for a bi-pass. bob(deckman)nelson |
|
Subject: RE: BS: bridge collapse in Washington usa From: gnu Date: 26 May 13 - 07:09 AM Indeed, Joe... but fixing the existing bridge ASAP (like I said, two weeks if the Army Corps is called in) would be paramount to me at the present time. And, yes, I know I haven't stood on the bridge and assessed the damage but I really can't give a "no-can-fix" much of a chance. If such actually is the case, I surely wish I could see it. I'll have to wait for the report. That is one thing I really like about you Yanks... the dissemination of information by your highway authorities, especially the umbrella USDOT, is nothing short of superb. When I was in Boston and Washington, the various authorities and universities bent over backwards to accomodate our group. We even brought home well over $5000 of technical lit free of charge although Customs gave us a real hard time. BTW, four of us ordered a large pizza at a pub in Boston one eve. Large in Boston means something different here. Here, we call it "Holy Crap! No way we're gonna eat all that!" Second best pizza I ever tasted. Jose Feliciano playing... what an evening! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: bridge collapse in Washington usa From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 26 May 13 - 12:35 PM SRS, you are correct and I was wrong. The Skagit is still classed as a navigable stream. The Corps of Engineers has a role because waterworks are involved, also the Coast Guard. Funds will probably come from DOT, if the fix is declared an emergency. The U.S. Corps of Engineers produced a flood reduction and ecosystem restoration feasibility study in 2009. They can ask for restriction of flow from the dams. Skagit County has 108 bridges, 42 are 50 years old or older. (Skagit County Public Works Dept.) The U.S. Dept. of Transportation (DOT) says it has funds to rebuild. $1,000,000 in emergency funds authorized. "Scenarios" for repair or rebuild are being considered. DOT has sent their chief engineer to inspect the span. Washington's governor says cost to fix will be $15 million. Repair probably will be the outcome. A good summary- Seattle Post Intelligencer: http://blog.seattlepi.com/seattlepolitics/2013/05/24/federal-available-to-repair-skagit-sec/lahood/ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: bridge collapse in Washington usa From: Stilly River Sage Date: 26 May 13 - 03:57 PM Thanks, Q. Joe, have you seen this aspect of the Fremont Ave bridge>? Some of them are simply beautiful (the Montlake cut, from Lake Washington to Lake Union) We spent a lot of time waiting for this one from West Seattle into the Harbor Island area when I was a kid. Maybe the locals will know about the drawbridge west of the Hiram M. Chittenden Locks that I believe has been in the up position for decades. Was it ever fixed or torn down? SRS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: bridge collapse in Washington usa From: Don Firth Date: 26 May 13 - 05:39 PM Actually, the troll is under the north end of the Aurora Avenue (George Washington Memorial) Bridge. CLICKY. Here he is, being a gracious host at a little gathering, CLICKY. At the north end of the Fremont drawbridge and immediately around the corner, standing at the bus stop, is a group of statues called "Waiting for the Interurban." Rather whimsically, people are given to decorating them from time to time, often around holidays. CLICKY. Someone has placed a scarf around the shoulders of one of the statues. The young woman at the far end is real. Lotsa bridges around here. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: bridge collapse in Washington usa From: Stilly River Sage Date: 26 May 13 - 05:54 PM I Googled him and the site said Fremont - I used that because I thought I had mis-remembered it - I should have looked further. I've been under there, but it has been a long time. My Dad took a whole bunch of photos of it shortly after it was finished. Thanks, Don! He also took photos of the Fremont statues. SRS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: bridge collapse in Washington usa From: Don Firth Date: 26 May 13 - 06:18 PM Yeah, the Fremont bridge is only a couple of blocks south and west of the Aurora bridge, but the troll is essentially in the Fremont District, right under the Aurora bridge. Quite a tourist attraction, as is Waiting for the Interurban. The Fremont district in general is a pretty interesting area, complete with the annual nude bicycle race. Dusty Strings is right in the middle of it (the district, not the bike race!), and a block or two to the west is the shop of one of the best luthiers I've ever encountered, at Sound Guitar Repair. She does beautiful repair work! Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: bridge collapse in Washington usa From: gnu Date: 26 May 13 - 06:24 PM Q... "Washington's governor says cost to fix will be $15 million. Repair probably will be the outcome." I am gobsmacked! No way it could actually cost that much to "fix" it. It's just a simple span and the design drawings are done... all the truss caculations are done. I got a buddy across town that could have a JUNIOR engineer detail that sucker with steel avaialble today IN STOCK in less than 48 hours. Anyone know how I can bid on the job? Gimmie $2M and I am goin ta Disneyland... wait... no... Bobert's pool party and yer all invited on my dime. $15M? to replace a tiny span? WTF? I see wolves closing in on the flock. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: bridge collapse in Washington usa From: Don Firth Date: 26 May 13 - 06:35 PM Gnu, I've been across that bridge some eleventy-fourteen times, and it's a bit more than a "simple span." I think some folks are underestimating extent and nature of the problems here. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: bridge collapse in Washington usa From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 26 May 13 - 06:58 PM $15 million is peanuts these days. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: bridge collapse in Washington usa From: Stilly River Sage Date: 26 May 13 - 10:35 PM It is peanuts - but they'll also probably put warnings in place on both sides if anyone is overheight. The technology involved, the ability to pull off and avoid the bridge - all of that could be factored into this "repair." SRS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: bridge collapse in Washington usa From: Joe Offer Date: 26 May 13 - 11:28 PM I've always had a pretty good impression of the Army Corps of Engineers. They seems to be concerned about doing things right. For the most part, they are citizens of the communities where they work, and they really seem to care about the work they're doing. This bridge is very important to the economy of the community. I'm sure they won't delay repairs any longer than they have to. -Joe- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: bridge collapse in Washington usa From: JohnInKansas Date: 26 May 13 - 11:33 PM The most recent report I've seen suggests a plan that would put a temporary "prefab" replacement span in place of the span that failed, with a permanent replacement later. The temporary span would require reduced load and speed for a while, and the permanent fix would just put the bridge back to whatever capacity was being allowed before the breakup. As to the cost, recent simple highway projects, with concrete just laid on the dirt, have run close to $1,000,000 PER MILE when there are no "complications" to contend with. A recent estimate for a new Texas road ran quite a bit higher because the soil was considered so unstable they'd have to "glue some of it together" before it would hold a slab of concrete so it wouldn't slide out across the prairie when somethin' rolled over it. (And some opinions were they they weren't planning for enough glue.) As to the truss bridges, later designs in some cases used "multiple redundancy" designs, with a requirement that no single failure would cause anything to fall down. The more sophisticated designs added "only a little" to the cost of the original construction, but less techie methods might easily double the cost. Some afficionados claim to be able to spot the differences "on sight" but it can be difficult even for good bridge engineers to tell without the blueprints and analyses, especially for the more sophisticated "redundant" designs. Recent reports are that the "official" surveys find something like 66,000 "structurally inadequate" bridges in current use in the US. The news reporters don't seem to think that they need to note where they get their "facts," but the numbers agree with previous reports well enough to be considered "good for talkin' purposes." SOME OF THESE structurally inadequate bridges have been posted to reduce loads, traffic, and speeds, but others just sit there waiting for someone to fall in the creek. It should be noted that not all of these are "big bridges" and lots of little "local traffic" structures are included in the count. "Classified lists" that show traffic affected by number of "defectives" have been rare. Counts of "functionally deficient" bridges, as the one in the news was reportedly classified, have not been frequently seen, and none that appear to be as complete as the reports on structurally deficient ones have appeared in any of my sources for some time. The most recent reports have claimed that this bridge has had a number of "incidents" very similar to the recent one, with no visible change in functionality. Construction of new projects is usually pretty clear cut and the politicians can guess whether to pander to the "fors" or to the "agins." MAINTENANCE is a lot more "iffy," so decisions (and funding) get deferred. I don't know whether there's a significant difference between the US and elsewhere, but major new projects here quite often include program provisions for funding continued maintenance, but as the maintenance funds accumulate (before the major repairs are needed?) they're seen as a "honeypot" for politicians and frequently get "diverted to something more important." Then when someone disappears into the bottom of a pothole there's "no funds" for the roadway. John |
|
Subject: RE: BS: bridge collapse in Washington usa From: gnu Date: 27 May 13 - 06:54 AM 2 hours ago, 680 Radio... SEATTLE – Gov. Jay Inslee announced plans to install temporary spans across the Skagit River within weeks after the collapse of a Washington state bridge that was struck by a semi-truck. Sunday's announcement came a day after the chairwoman of the National Transportation Safety Board called last week's Interstate 5 bridge collapse a wake-up call to the state of safety of the nation's infrastructure and the Saturday destruction of a highway overpass in Missouri that was struck by a cargo train. The Washington state collapse, caused by a semi-truck carrying an oversize load striking the bridge, fractured one of the major trade and travel corridors on the West Coast. The interstate connects Washington state with Canada, which is about an hour north of Mount Vernon, where the bridge buckled. After the collapse, semi-trucks, travel buses and cars clogged local bridges as traffic was diverted through the small cities around the bridge. But overall, traffic was flowing as well as expected during the holiday weekend. "We're going to get this project done as fast as humanly possible," Inslee, a Democrat, said Sunday. "There are no more important issue right now to the economy of the state of Washington than getting this bridge up and running." Inslee said he hopes the temporary spans, each with two lanes for northbound and southbound traffic, will be finished in about three weeks' time or about mid-June. The spans will be pre-built and trucked to Mount Vernon. The state plan also calls for a permanent span to be built and competed by autumn, officials said. Officials say there are remaining inspections to the spans left standing to make sure they are safe to use. The federal government is expected to cover 100 per cent of the costs of the temporary bridge and 90 per cent the replacement, said state Transportation Secretary Lynn Peterson. http://www.680news.com/2013/05/27/2-temporary-spans-planned-for-collapsed-washington-i-5-bridge/ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: bridge collapse in Washington usa From: gnu Date: 27 May 13 - 08:19 AM I just flew to the bridge, entered street level, drove to the frame with the white pickup truck, walked outside and measured my truck, returned to the white pickup (nice truck, 2011 I think), estimated the bay length at 25', drove to the semi and counted 10 bays in the damaged, estimated the deck width at 50', saw the custom box beams and arch beams, googled pictures showing the deck support and noted the transverse deck beams and stringers, did a cost guestimate based on my empirical investigation and drew the only logical conclusions: $15M sounds pretty good; I was talkin outta my ass again. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: bridge collapse in Washington usa From: gnu Date: 27 May 13 - 08:46 AM There is another observation I made whilst driving over the bridge and it is an odd coincidence. If you look in the rear view mirror, there is an oversize load following you... white semi driving in the centre of the lanes. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: bridge collapse in Washington usa From: Stilly River Sage Date: 27 May 13 - 12:05 PM :-) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: bridge collapse in Washington usa From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 27 May 13 - 12:44 PM Repairs and cleanup to cost approx. $15 million, acc. to Governor. The Washington State Department of Transportation has awarded an emergency contract to remove the fallen section and remove vehicles, and start repairs on the I-5 bridge. Atkinson Construction, part of the large Clark group, has sent in cranes to effect the removal of the debris. Some suggest the $15 million estimate for removal and repair is too low. Atkinson has not made a public estimate of the cost. Replacement of the bridge would be "significantly more". The article says that if replacement of the 160-foot collapsed section is decided upon (depending on "recommendation by investigators"), it is unclear whether Atkinson would automatically get the contract or a new contract bid would be sought by WSDOT. A bailey-bridge has been recommended as a temporary solution, but even that would take "months". Puget Sound Business Journal, May 26, 2013. "WSDOT awards emergency Skagit Bridge contract to Atkinson Construction." For some reason, two of my posts have been removed, including the one leading to the post by Gnu about the $15 million cost to replace a section. [No posts have been removed. Perhaps one never got through.] |
|
Subject: RE: BS: bridge collapse in Washington usa From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 27 May 13 - 12:54 PM A misplaced phrase- 160-foot collapsed section. The sentence should be-- The article says that if replacement of the bridge is decided upon ..... it is unclear whether Atkinson would automatically get the contract or a new contract bid would be sought by WSDOT. The collapsed section is 160 feet long, and its removal and replacement is part of the emergency contract awarded by WSDOT |
|
Subject: RE: BS: bridge collapse in Washington usa From: Bill D Date: 27 May 13 - 03:03 PM I see there is another 4-lane river crossing just to the East of the broken bridge.(Riverside Drive, going North) It has no overhead superstructure. I also see no load limit restrictions on it. I wonder what its official status is in this situation? Looks like it could carry a lot of traffic. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: bridge collapse in Washington usa From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 27 May 13 - 03:22 PM Riverside Drive river crossing is listed at the primary detour route by WSDOT. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: bridge collapse in Washington usa From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 27 May 13 - 03:45 PM Temporary spans for I-5 bridge expected by mid-June. The replacement permanent span is expected by Autumn. The Federal government is expected to cover 100% of the costs of the temporary spans and 90% of the cost of the replacement span. The temporary spans can carry card and trucks with "normal" loads. The speed limit would be reduced (was 60mph). Bridges that can collapse are called "fracture critical," if a "single, vital component is compromised." Apparently these designs are widespread. The semi's cargo was headed to Alaska via Vancouver, WA, where it was to be loaded on a barge. The Bellingham Herald, May 26. "Temporary fix set for crumpled I-5 bridge in Wash." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: bridge collapse in Washington usa From: gnu Date: 27 May 13 - 04:35 PM 160' span? That would be 5 bays at... WTF> I gotta fly all the way back there? My arms are gettin tired! BRB... I'll crank the afterburners. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: bridge collapse in Washington usa From: gnu Date: 27 May 13 - 05:04 PM Oh dear! Apparently, posting the morning after is just as bad as posting the night before. The frame with the picup truck CLEARLY shows an expansion joint ONE bay behind the truck. There are four full bays and one end bay. Hmmm... now I am startin ta wonder about that $15M again. But I ain't gonna start talkin outta my ass again... right away. Maybe later tonight while I am watchin the Red Wings advance in the playoffs (that's trash talk - completely different). BUT... I will ask/say... how long ARE the bays? That truck is 19' long. Distortion of image on the 360 camera? Not that it matters in any case. Fact is, I was dead wrong from the get go. First of all, I was thinkin two lanes which, in itself is stunnedasmearse. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: bridge collapse in Washington usa From: gnu Date: 19 Jun 13 - 11:55 AM Today is the day. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: bridge collapse in Washington usa From: Deckman Date: 19 Jun 13 - 11:02 PM I drove over the bridge twice today. A pretty slick repair, except, the State Patrol are severly enforcing the 40 MPH speed limits. They are passing out $140 tickets like candy. I'm also impressed that they opened the bridge at 5 AM with no fanfare, they just wanted to get traffic moving again. bob(deckman)nelson |
|
Subject: RE: BS: bridge collapse in Washington usa From: gnu Date: 20 Jun 13 - 06:31 AM "severly enforcing the 40 MPH speed limits"... Likely a design consideration. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: bridge collapse in Washington usa From: Deckman Date: 20 Jun 13 - 08:22 AM "Monetary" as well as structural consideration! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: bridge collapse in Washington usa From: Stilly River Sage Date: 20 Jun 13 - 12:15 PM There may also be some rubbernecking as people drive across the bridge - they want that at slower speeds so there are no more accidents on it. SRS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: bridge collapse in Washington usa From: Deckman Date: 20 Jun 13 - 01:27 PM If you really think about it, collapsing bridges are really GOOD for the economy. bob |
