 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? |
