bruce peterson handout 6 per page.pdf
TRANSCRIPT
-
8/20/2019 Bruce Peterson handout 6 per page.pdf
1/36
The Rehabilitation AlternativeHuey P. Long Bridge Case Study
Bruce E. Peterson, P.E.Project Manager
Modjeski and Masters, Inc.
March 22, 2010
Introduction• Replacement vs. Rehabilitation
• Project Background
• 4 Construction Contracts – Main Bridge – Substructure – Main Bridge – Superstructure
Truss Widening – Railroad Modifications – Approaches and Main Bridge
Deck Widening
BREAK
• Project Status – Project Timeline – Construction Photographs
EXISTING
PROPOSED WIDENING
Replacement vs. RehabilitationBridge construction represents a large capital investment.
Through time, all bridges receive “routine maintenance”.However, eventually they must be replaced or rehabilitated.
Beyond the obvious difference in cost, there are othersignificant differences between these two approaches.
How is the decision made?
What influences the choice between these two alternatives?
Replacement vs. RehabilitationLouisiana Dept. of Transportation and Development
(LADOTD)
Methodology for Selecting and Programming Bri dges forReplacement and Rehabilitation
Priority for the selection of bridges for replacement orrehabilitation with Federal bridge replacement funds basedon three (3) parameters:
1. Structural adequacy
2. Functional adequacy and serviceability
3. Essential for public use
Replacement vs. RehabilitationThe three parameters are based on the following information:
1. Structural deficiency
2. Posted bridges (weight limits below statutory limits)
3. Traffic count (ADT)
4. Class of highway
5. Available detour routes
6. Bridge geometry (particularly bridges < 20 ft. wide)
7. Bridge inspection reports
8. Local district recommendations for replacement(submitted annually)
Replacement vs. RehabilitationFederal Highway Administration (FHWA) formula for prioritizing
bridges
Overall rating called a “sufficiency rating”
Sufficiency rating assigns a numeric value ranging from 0 to
100 to a given bridge with the following percentage pointsapplied to each parameter
ITEM WEIGHT
Structural Adequacy 55 %
Functional Adequacy andServiceability 30 %
Essential For Public Use 15 %
-
8/20/2019 Bruce Peterson handout 6 per page.pdf
2/36
Replacement vs. RehabilitationRequirement f or replacement:
• Sufficiency Rating < 50
• Classification as structurally deficient or functionallyobsolete
Requirement for rehabilitation:
• Sufficiency Rating < 80
Replacement vs. Rehabilitation As previously noted there are three elements to the Sufficiency
Rating
1. Structural Adequacy2. Functional Adequacy and Serviceability
3. Essential for Public Use
Let’s examine each in detail.
Replacement vs. RehabilitationStructural Adequacy
Most important factor in evaluation process as a bridge failurecould be catastrophic
Determined from:
• List of posted bridges (bridges with load restrictions)
• Bridge inspection reports
• Local district recommendations
Replacement vs. RehabilitationFunctional Adequacy and Serviceability
Bridge geometry a key element
• Clear roadway width most important factor
• Narrow bridges, if structurally adequate, can be widenedrather than replaced
Determined from:
• Bridge inspection reports
• Local district recommendations
Replacement vs. RehabilitationFunctional Adequacy and Serviceability (con’d)
Serviceability is related to factors such as
• Stream scour
• Maintenance for movable bridges
• Deck deterioration
Other important factors include frequency and severity ofmarine, railroad, and automotive traffic accidents
Replacement vs. RehabilitationEssential For Public Use
Determined by the:
• Traffic count (ADT)
• Class of highway
• Available detour routes
Structural and functional adequacy of the bridge is evaluatedwith the traffic count in order to minimize exposure tounsafe conditions
Example: two bridges with the same degree ofinadequacy, the one with the higher traffic volumewould receive the higher priority
-
8/20/2019 Bruce Peterson handout 6 per page.pdf
3/36
Replacement vs. RehabilitationEssential For Public Use (con’d)
Bridges located on a truck or school bus route or crosses a
major river or stream receive extra attentionNon-redundant routes (no available detours) receive a higher
priority than bridges on redundant routes
Replacement vs. RehabilitationHow Select?
Numerous rational methods available
Recommended procedure for State of Louisiana1. Compile 3 lists
• Bridges with lowest sufficiency rating
• Bridges with the highest priority based on local districtrecommendations
• Bridges that are most severely posted for loadrestrictions
2. Generally, if a bridge makes all three lists, it will have a highpriority for replacement
Replacement vs. RehabilitationSTRUCTURAL
ADEQUACY
FUNCTIONAL
ADEQUACY AND
SERVICEABILITY
ESSENTIALLITY
TO THE PUBLIC
Sufficiency Rating
Sufficiency Rating
Sufficiency Rating
Posted Bridges List
Bridge Geometry,
Acci dents , etc.
Highway Class and
Traffic Count (ADT)
Bridge Inspection Report
District Recommendations
Bridge Inspection Report
District Recommendations
Avail able Detou r Rout es
District Recommendations
FINAL ORDER
OF PRIORITY
Traffic Type
Source: LADOTD Bridge Design Manual
Replacement vs. RehabilitationOther Considerations - ReplacementPros :
1. New structure would meet all currentstandards
• Loads
• Geomet ry
• Highway standards
2. New Construction
• Do not have to connect newcomponents with existing ones.
• Reduced potential for“surprises” during construction
3. Estimating construction costpotentially more accurate
Cons :
1. Potential for greater environmentalimpacts
2. Potential for greater costs
3. Potential need for more right-of-way
4. Can require time for public to agree ona location and other impacts related toa new structure
5. Can take more time from start ofplanning to final completion anddelivery to public
6. Removal of an historic structure
Replacement vs. RehabilitationOther Considerations - RehabilitationPros :
1. Have the potential to reuse existingelements, thus saving time andmoney
2. Potentially less environmentalimpacts
3. Potentially less right-of-wayrequirements
4. Can fix some “legacy issues” that donot meet current standards or areless than desirable
Cons :
1. Increased potential for problems andunknown discoveries with the existingstructure
2. Greater demands on determination ofexisting conditions, details, geometry,etc. in order to produce accurate plans
3. Ability to meet all current standardsmay be difficult
4. Accurate estimation of constructioncosts can be difficult
5. Modification of an historic structure
Replacement vs. RehabilitationOther Considerations (con’d)
Environmental
• Historic structure?
• Impacts?
Remaining life of structure
• Structural condition (corrosion) and capacity
• Remaining fatigue life
-
8/20/2019 Bruce Peterson handout 6 per page.pdf
4/36
Replacement vs. RehabilitationOther Considerations (con’d )
Owner’s Concerns and Issues
1. Time required to perform the work2. Funding
• Available local funding?
• Federal funds available?
3. Public• Wants the work completed “yesterday”
• Does not want to be inconvenienced during the work
• Low cost (no increased direct costs; e.g.. taxes, tolls, etc.)
• While doing this work, why not fix these other problems and/oraddress other needs.... ”it’s only a little more $$” (scope creep)
Replacement vs. RehabilitationWhere does the Huey P. Long Bridge fit within this
criteria?
Structurally Adequacy? - GOOD• Excellent condition; adequate strength
• Reduced fatigue life of stringers and floorbeam brackets
Functionally Adequacy and Serviceability? - POOR• 18 feet wide roadways
• Barriers not current standards
Essential For Public Use? - ESSENTIAL• Few Mississippi River crossings in metro region; essential for
highway traffic
• Only rail crossing of Miss. River south of Baton Rouge
Location
FrenchQuarter
Huey P. Long Bridge
New Orleans Metro Area
Before the Bridge
Before the Bridge Construction of The Existing Bridge
-
8/20/2019 Bruce Peterson handout 6 per page.pdf
5/36
Construction of The Existing Bridge Construction of The Existing Bridge
Construction of The Existing Bridge Construction of The Existing Bridge
Construction of The Existing Bridge Background – Huey P. Long Bridge
• Completed in December 1935, the bridge isone of the longest railroad bridges in the world.
-
8/20/2019 Bruce Peterson handout 6 per page.pdf
6/36
Background – Huey P. Long Bridge
• Combinedrailroad – highwaybridge
– 2 tracks
– 4 lanes – 9 ft.width
Background – Huey P. Long Bridge
• Very heavilybuilt• Carries largest
modern RRload withoutdistress
• Many years ofservice liferemaining
Project Background
• By widening the existingstructure rather thanconstructing a new rivercrossing: – Reduce environmental
impact, property takings. – Reduce project cost. – Reuse existing right-of-
way and traffic corridors.
• Final report published April 1988.
Project Background
EXISTING PROPOSED WIDENING
Project Background
1982Study of new bridge in corridor; 5 alternates considered.High cost and large amount of ROW; project dropped.
1986LADOTD authorized M&M to perform conceptual widening study.3 widening alternates considered.
1990 Geotechnical investigation of soil capacity under caissons.
1992-1996
Preliminary Design Main Bridge; Fatigue Evaluation.Line and Grade Study Approaches.
1999-2000
Environmental Processing Agency Consensus
2000-2007
Completion of final design plans; main bridge widening, railroadmodifications, and approaches,
2006-Present
Construction main bridge substructure widening, railroadmodifications, and main bridge superstructure widening.
START PROJECT
END PROJECT
WEST BANK APPR.
WEST BANK RR MOD
EAST BANK RR MOD
EAST BANK APPR.
MAIN BRIDGE PIER, TRUSS, ANDDECK WIDENING
Huey P. Long Widening Project
-
8/20/2019 Bruce Peterson handout 6 per page.pdf
7/36
START PROJECT
END PROJECT
WEST BANK APPR.
WEST BANK RR MOD
EAST BANK RR MOD
EAST BANK APPR.
MAIN BRIDGE PIER, TRUSS, ANDDECK WIDENING
Main Bridge Pier Widening Main Bridge Pier Widening
Pier A Piers I & II Pier III Pier IV
EXISTING
PROPOSED WIDENING
Widened Pier
Caisson
SteelFrame
LowerEncase
UpperEncase
Widened Pier - Details
• The steel frame significantly reduces the loads onthe pier by eliminating concrete and permits thecenter bearing to be jacked, relieving load from theexterior bearings.
• This is beneficial by reducing load on the end facesof the existing concrete distribution block on top ofthe existing caisson.
• The upper portion ofthe pier widening iscomposed of a steelframe.
Widened Pier - Details
• Inspection access will be provided for the steel metalworkin the upper portion of the pier widening.
• The steel frame willalso permit moreaccurate setting andadjustment of the finalbearing elevations after
the lower encasementis poured.
Widened Pier - Details
Constructability of Pier Frame• Must be constructed around existing pier • No construction access from above due to
existing superstructure• Staged construction• Key splice locations.
-
8/20/2019 Bruce Peterson handout 6 per page.pdf
8/36
Widened Pier - DetailsThe lower portion of the
encasement serves
several functions• The nose areas arecolumns to support thewidening truss supportbearings.
• The remainder confines the existing pier concreteand granite masonry blocks which currently hasminimal reinforcing.
Widened Pier - Details
Widened Pier - Details Strength of the Existing Concrete• One of the major questions for widening the
substructure was the strength of the existingconcrete.
• Existing concrete was specified for 2000 psi.• Based on construction records, actual strength
much higher • Using methods to estimate moderate amount of
additional concrete strengthening with aging,4000 psi could be used with confidence for thestrength of the existing concrete.
Strength of the Existing Concrete
PIER AND CAISSON CONCRETE STRENGTHS
LOCATION 1930 2000 - 1 2000 - 2 USED
Piers 3,800 4,500 8,800 4,000
Caisson 3,300 3,870 7,565 3,800
2000-1 = ACI Committee 209, “Prediction of Creep, Shrinkage, andTemperature Effects in Concrete Structures” (ACI 209R-92)
2000-2 = Properties of Concrete” by A. M. Neville
Existing Pier ConditionsUnderwater Acoustic Inspection performed April 2006 by C.
H. Fenstermaker & Associates.
Piers I, II, III, & IV examined and found to be in goodcondition.
The equipment provided detailed information of the existingconditions.
Examination though the use of a diver would be more costly,must be performed in extreme low to no visibility, and isdangerous.
-
8/20/2019 Bruce Peterson handout 6 per page.pdf
9/36
Existing Pier Conditions
Pier I – North Face
Existing Pier Conditions
Pier II – West Nose
START PROJECT
END PROJECT
WEST BANK APPR.
WEST BANK RR MOD
EAST BANK RR MOD
EAST BANK APPR.
MAIN BRIDGE PIER, TRUSS, AND
DECK WIDENING
Main Bridge Truss Widening Main Bridge Truss Widening
Cantilever Truss Span
SimpleThrough
Truss Span EXISTING
PROPOSED WIDENING
Cross Sections – Existing Bridge
• 2 new trusses added, parallelto existing trusses.
• Roadways widened from 18ft. to 43 ft.
• Currently: 2 – 9 ft. lanesNo offset
• Proposed: 3 – 11 ft.lanes
8 ft. shoulder 2 ft. offset
Widened Main Bridge Features
-
8/20/2019 Bruce Peterson handout 6 per page.pdf
10/36
Nomenclature• Normal terminology
for truss bridges
would be U.S. & D.S.trusses.• Widened HPL Bridge
is a multiple trussplane structure – U.S. Widening Truss – U.S. Existing Truss – D.S. Existing Truss – D.S. Widening Truss
2D versus 3D Analysis and DesignTraditional Truss Analysi s (2D)• Vertical loads, e.g. D & L, supported by main (vertical)
trusses• Transverse loads, e.g. W, supported by top and bottom
lateral trusses, sway frames, and portals
3 Dimensional Analysis Used• Widened bridge is multiple truss plane
system• 3D analysis reflects the reality of the
structure and its behavior • Load sharing will occur and it is beneficial• Members not normally supporting live load
will have live loads• Need to know the amount of live load in
non-traditional live load supportingmembers.
2D versus 3D Analysis and Design 2D versus 3D Analysis and Design
3D SAP Computer Model
Floorbeam and Hangers• Superposition needed to
solve final forces in theexisting and widenedhangers
• Moment and sequence ofconstruction affect forces
Construction and Erection
• Method and Sequenceof Constructionprovided in ContractPlans
• Contractor proposedoption also available incontract plans
• Contractor proposedhis own method
-
8/20/2019 Bruce Peterson handout 6 per page.pdf
11/36
Maintenance of Traffic Through Construction
• Marine Traffic Maintained – same vertical and horizontal
clearances
• Rail Traffic Maintained
• Vehicular Traffic Maintained – by use of staged construction
Main BridgeMaintenance of Traffic
WORK PERFORMED INTRUSS WIDENING
CONTRACT
Main BridgeMaintenance of Traffic - Stage 1
WORK PERFORMED INTRUSS WIDENINGCONTRACT
Main BridgeMaintenance of Traffic - Stage 2
PREVIOUS STAGE
WORK PERFORMED INTRUSS WIDENINGCONTRACT
Main BridgeMaintenance of Traffic - Stage 3
PREVIOUS STAGE
WORK PERFORMED INTRUSS WIDENING
CONTRACT
Main BridgeMaintenance of Traffic - Stage 4
PREVIOUS STAGE
WORK PERFORMED IN APPROACH AND DECKWIDENING CONTRACT
-
8/20/2019 Bruce Peterson handout 6 per page.pdf
12/36
Main BridgeMaintenance of Traffic - Stage 4 - 5
SWITCH TRAFFIC
Main BridgeMaintenance of Traffic - Stage 5
PREVIOUS STAGE
WORK PERFORMED IN APPROACH AND DECKWIDENING CONTRACT
Main BridgeMaintenance of Traffic - Stage 6
PREVIOUS STAGE
WORK PERFORMED IN APPROACH AND DECKWIDENING CONTRACT
Main BridgeMaintenance of Traffic - Stage 7
PREVIOUS STAGE
WORK PERFORMED IN APPROACH AND DECKWIDENING CONTRACT
• Top laterals, bottomlaterals, swayframes, and portalframes must hinge
to permit movement• Erect rigid part overroadways open totraffic; hingeremaining part.
Deflection Issues
START PROJECT
END PROJECT
WEST BANK APPR.
WEST BANK RR MOD
EAST BANK RR MOD
EAST BANK APPR.
MAIN BRIDGE PIER, TRUSS, ANDDECK WIDENING
Railroad Modifications - Westbank
-
8/20/2019 Bruce Peterson handout 6 per page.pdf
13/36
Railroad Modifications - Westbank
Project Site
LA 18 Hwy. 90
Railroad
EXISTING
Huey P. Long Widening ProjectWestbank Railroad Modifications
Existing Site Conditions
To Huey P. Long Bridge
L A 1 8
U S H W Y 9 0
Huey P. Long Widening ProjectWestbank Railroad Modifications
Final Site Conditions
To Huey P. Long Bridge
L A 1 8
U S H W Y 9 0 F u
t u r e R o
a d w a y
Replacement Support
Huey P. Long Widening ProjectWestbank Railroad Modifications
Huey P. Long Widening ProjectWestbank Railroad Modifications
Huey P. Long Widening ProjectWestbank Railroad Modifications
-
8/20/2019 Bruce Peterson handout 6 per page.pdf
14/36
WestbankSequence of Construction
1. Construct foundations for newcross girders
2. Install falsework to lift existinggirder spans
3. Begin 24 hour rail traffic closure
4. Lift existing girder spans off steeltower
5. Remove upper portion steel tower
6 . Erect cross girders
7. Lower existing girder spans ontonew cross girders
8. Restore rai l t raff ic
9. Remove remaining portion of steeltower
2 4 H O U R R A I L C L O S U R E
START PROJECT
END PROJECT
WESTBANK APPR.
WESTBANK RR MOD
EASTBANK RR MOD
EASTBANK APPR.
MAIN BRIDGE PIER, TRUSS, ANDDECK WIDENING
Railroad Modifications - Eastbank
Railroad Modifications - Eastbank
Project SiteJefferson Hwy
Clearview Pkwy.
EXISTING
Huey P. Long Widening ProjectEastbank Railroad Modifications
Existing Site Conditions
QWEST Line
V a c a n
t G a s
S t a t i o
n
C l e a r v i e w
P k w y.
J e f f e r s o n
H w y
.
To Hu e y P . Lo ng Br id g e
Power Poles & Power Line
Existing Superstructureand Towers to beReplaced
Huey P. Long Widening ProjectEastbank Railroad Modifications
Final Site Conditions
QWEST Line
V a c a n
t G a s
S t a t i o
n
C l e a r v i e w
P k w y.
J e f f e r s o n
H w y
.
To Hu e y P . Lo n g Br id g e
F u t u r e
R o a d w
a y
F u t u r e
E l e v a t e
d
R o a d w a
y
New Bents
Huey P. Long Widening ProjectEastbank Railroad Modifications
-
8/20/2019 Bruce Peterson handout 6 per page.pdf
15/36
EastbankSequence of Construction
1. Construct new concrete straddlebents
2. Prepare steel tower and otherfalsework
3. Begin 24 hour rail traffic closure
4. Remove girders under one of thetracks
5. Erect new girders for one track
6. Re-establ ish t rack
7. Restore rai l t raff ic
8. Repeat girder replacement forother track (Steps 3 – 7 above)
9. Remove s teel tower
2 4 H O U R R A I L
C L O S U R E
START PROJECT
END PROJECT
WEST BANK APPR.
WEST BANK RR MOD
EAST BANK RR MOD
EAST BANK APPR.
MAIN BRIDGE PIER, TRUSS, ANDDECK WIDENING
Approaches & Deck Widening
Approaches & Deck Widening
WEST BANK APPROACH
Start Project Bridge City Ave.Interchange
Conflict w/Existing Rdwy
Approaches & Deck Widening
Cantilever Truss Span
SimpleThrough
Truss Span EXISTING
PROPOSED WIDENING
Approaches & Deck Widening
EAST BANK APPROACH
End Project
Jefferson HwyInterchange
Conflict w/Existing Rdwy
NOPBRR Spur
Approaches & Deck Widening
-
8/20/2019 Bruce Peterson handout 6 per page.pdf
16/36
Approaches & Deck Widening
EB APPR.
EB APPR.
Created using Google SketchUp
Approaches & Deck Widening
CAP
TRUMPET
COLUMN
TRUMPET PC
FOUNDATION
W.P.
Approaches & Deck Widening
184 - TOTAL SUBSTRUCTURE UNITS
123 - 4’ X 6’ COLUMN BENTS
4’x 6’8’ x 12’ 6’ x 12’8’ x 14’
Approaches & Deck Widening
Column Type 1: 4’ x 6’
Column Type 3: 8’ x 12’
Column Type 2: 6’ x 12’
Column Type 4: 8’ x 14’
Approaches & Deck Widening
Trumpet for 4’x 6’ columns
4’x 6’
Trumpets for 6’
& 8’ x 12’columns
Trumpet for 8’ x14’ Columns
8’ x 14’
8’ x 12’
6’ x 12’
Approaches & Deck Widening
-
8/20/2019 Bruce Peterson handout 6 per page.pdf
17/36
TypicalBent
FullHeight
Trumpet
Sub-Trumpet
Size 1
Sub-Trumpet
Size 2
Adj ust Fo oti ng Dept h As Neces sary
Approaches & Deck Widening
WORK PERFORMED IN APPROACH CONTRACT
Main Bridge Deck Widening
East Bank Approach - East Bank Bound
West Bank Approach - West Bank Bound
Approaches & Deck Widening
West Bank Approach
East Bank Bound
Approaches & Deck Widening
WB APPR.Location of West Bank
Steel Girder Spans
East Bank Approach
West Bank Bound
Approaches & Deck Widening
EB APPR.
Location of East BankSteel Girder Spans
Approaches & Deck Widening
-
8/20/2019 Bruce Peterson handout 6 per page.pdf
18/36
Approaches & Deck Widening
SWITCH TRAFFIC
Project Timeline
• Work Completed – Railroad Modifications – Main Bridge Pier Widening
• Work Under Construction – Main Bridge Truss Widening – West Bank Approach, Main Bridge Deck Widening,
East Bank Approach
Project Schedule
Main Bridge Substructure
Railroad Modifications
SuperstructureFabrication & Erection
Appro aches & Mai n Bridg eRe-d ecking
2012 20132004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
Project Status – Completed
Main B ridge Pier Widening• Letting Date:
– December 14, 2005
• Notice To Proceed Date: – April 10, 2006
• Construction Bid: – $ 98,826,907
• Contractor: – Massman Construction Co.
Main Bridge Pier Widening
Pier A Piers I & II Pier III Pier IV
EXISTING
PROPOSED WIDENING
Main Bridge Pier Widening Main Bridge Pier Widening
-
8/20/2019 Bruce Peterson handout 6 per page.pdf
19/36
Main Bridge Pier Widening Main Bridge Pier Widening
Main Bridge Pier Widening
DistributionBlock
Main Bridge Pier Widening
Main Bridge Pier Widening Main Bridge Pier Widening
-
8/20/2019 Bruce Peterson handout 6 per page.pdf
20/36
Main Bridge Pier Widening Main Bridge Pier Widening
Main Bridge Pier Widening Main Bridge Pier Widening
Main Bridge Pier Widening Main Bridge Pier Widening
-
8/20/2019 Bruce Peterson handout 6 per page.pdf
21/36
Main Bridge Pier Widening Main Bridge Pier Widening
Main Bridge Pier Widening Main Bridge Pier Widening
Main Bridge Pier Widening
New Orleans
G&G Steel
Main Bridge Pier Widening
-
8/20/2019 Bruce Peterson handout 6 per page.pdf
22/36
Main Bridge Pier Widening Main Bridge Pier Widening
Main Bridge Pier Widening Main Bridge Pier Widening
Main Bridge Pier Widening Main Bridge Pier Widening
-
8/20/2019 Bruce Peterson handout 6 per page.pdf
23/36
Main Bridge Pier Widening Main Bridge Pier Widening
Main Bridge Pier Widening Main Bridge Pier Widening
Main Bridge Pier Widening Main Bridge Pier Widening
-
8/20/2019 Bruce Peterson handout 6 per page.pdf
24/36
Main Bridge Pier Widening Main Bridge Pier Widening
Main Bridge Pier Widening Project Status - Completed
Railroad Modific ations• Letting Date:
– May 10, 2006
• Notice To Proceed Date: – August 28, 2006
• Construction Bid: – $ 13,782,713
• Contractor: – Boh Bros. Construction Co.
Railroad Modifications - Westbank
Project Site
LA 18 Hwy. 90
Railroad
EXISTING
Railroad Modifications - Westbank
-
8/20/2019 Bruce Peterson handout 6 per page.pdf
25/36
Railroad Modifications - Westbank Railroad Modifications - Westbank
Railroad Modifications - Westbank
New Orleans
G&G Steel
Railroad Modifications - Westbank
Railroad Modifications - Westbank Railroad Modifications - Westbank
-
8/20/2019 Bruce Peterson handout 6 per page.pdf
26/36
Railroad Modifications - Westbank Railroad Modifications - Westbank
Railroad Modifications - Westbank Railroad Modifications - Westbank
Railroad Modifications - Eastbank
Project SiteJefferson Hwy
Clearview Pkwy.
EXISTING
Railroad Modifications - Eastbank
-
8/20/2019 Bruce Peterson handout 6 per page.pdf
27/36
Railroad Modifications - Eastbank Huey P. Long Widening ProjectEastbank Railroad Modifications
Railroad Modifications - Eastbank Railroad Modifications - Eastbank
Railroad Modifications - Eastbank Railroad Modifications - Eastbank
-
8/20/2019 Bruce Peterson handout 6 per page.pdf
28/36
Railroad Modifications - Eastbank Railroad Modifications - Eastbank
Railroad Modifications - Eastbank Railroad Modifications - Eastbank
Railroad Modifications - Eastbank Project Status – Under Construction
Main Bri dge Truss Widening• Letting Date:
– March 28, 2007
• Notice to Proceed Date: – November 5, 2007• Construction Bid:
– $ 452,605,568
• Contractor: – Massman Construction Co., Traylor Brothers
Inc., and IHI, Inc.
-
8/20/2019 Bruce Peterson handout 6 per page.pdf
29/36
Main Bridge Truss Widening
Cantilever Truss Span
SimpleThrough
Truss Span EXISTING
PROPOSED WIDENING
Main Bridge Truss Widening
New Orleans
Industrial SteelConstruction
Gary, IN
Main Bridge Truss WideningTruss Monitoring
STATIC MONITORINGSYSTEM – 433 Members (777
Vibrating Wire StrainGages)
– 5 Piers (10 VibratingWire Tilt Meters)
– WindSpeed/Direction
DYNAMIC (LIVE LOAD)MONITORINGSYSTEM – 31 Members (50
Electrical ResistanceStrain Gages)
Main Bridge Truss WideningWork Platform
Main Bridge Truss WideningWork Platform
Main Bridge Truss WideningFloorbeam Modifications
Template Fit Up Check
-
8/20/2019 Bruce Peterson handout 6 per page.pdf
30/36
Main Bridge Truss WideningFloorbeam Modifications
Installation of Wedge Fill
Main Bridge Truss WideningFloorbeam Modifications
Installation of Wedge Fill
Main Bridge Truss WideningWork on Existing Structure – Bottom Chord
Main Bridge Truss WideningWork on Existing Structure – Top Chord
Main Bridge Truss WideningWidening Truss Bottom Laterals
Main Bridge Truss WideningRemove Existing Sidewalk – Install Temporary Steel Barrier
-
8/20/2019 Bruce Peterson handout 6 per page.pdf
31/36
Main Bridge Truss WideningMain Bridge Erection - Methods
A = “ Stick Buil d” B = “ Span by Sp an”
A B A B B
Main Bridge Truss WideningMain Bridge Erection
Main Bridge Truss WideningMain Bridge Erection
Main Bridge Truss WideningMain Bridge Erection
Main Bridge Truss WideningMain Bridge Erection
Main Bridge Truss WideningMain Bridge Erection
-
8/20/2019 Bruce Peterson handout 6 per page.pdf
32/36
Main Bridge Truss WideningMain Bridge Erection
Main Bridge Truss WideningMain Bridge Erection
Main Bridge Truss WideningMain Bridge Erection
Main Bridge Truss WideningMain Bridge Erection
December 2009
Main Bridge Truss WideningMain Bridge Erection
December 2009
Main Bridge Truss WideningContractor’s Erection Scheme – “Span by Span” Erection
• East Anchor Arm• Suspended Span• Through Truss
Span
-
8/20/2019 Bruce Peterson handout 6 per page.pdf
33/36
Project Status – Under Construction
West B ank Appro ach, Main B ridge DeckWidening, East B ank Approach
• Letting Date: – March 19, 2008
• Notice to Proceed Date: – May 5, 2008
• Construction Bid: – $ 433,950,000
• Contractor: – Kiewit Massman Traylor Constructors
START PROJECT
END PROJECT
WEST BANK APPR.
WEST BANK RR MOD
EAST BANK RR MOD
EAST BANK APPR.
MAIN BRIDGE PIER, TRUSS, ANDDECK WIDENING
Approaches & Deck Widening
Approaches & Deck Widening
Box Culverts
Approaches & Deck Widening
At Grade Roadways – West Bank
Approaches & Deck Widening
Foundations - Westbank
Approaches & Deck Widening
Foundations - Westbank
-
8/20/2019 Bruce Peterson handout 6 per page.pdf
34/36
Approaches & Deck Widening
Substructure - Westbank
Approaches & Deck Widening
Substructure -Westbank
Approaches & Deck Widening
Superstructure- Westbank
Approaches & Deck Widening
Superstructure- Westbank
Approaches & Deck Widening
Superstructure- Westbank
Approaches & Deck WideningSuperstructure - Westbank
-
8/20/2019 Bruce Peterson handout 6 per page.pdf
35/36
Approaches & Deck WideningSuperstructure - Westbank
Approaches & Deck WideningSuperstructure - Westbank
Approaches & Deck WideningSuperstructure - Westbank
Approaches & Deck Widening
Created using
Google SketchUp
Substructure – Pier IVA
Approaches & Deck Widening
Substructure – Pier IVA
The Rehabilitation AlternativeHuey P. Long Bridge Case Study
-
8/20/2019 Bruce Peterson handout 6 per page.pdf
36/36
Q & A1. Priority for the selection of bridges for replacement or rehabilitation with Federal
bridge replacement funds based on three parameters. Name them.
?
2. Of the three parameters above, which is given the highest weight?
?3. What Sufficiency Rating is required for replacement? ?
4. Bridge geometry is a key element of Functional Adequacy and Serviceability.What is the most important f actor within bridge geometry?
?
5. For the case study project, name one key design challenge?
?
6. For the case study project, how was approach bent formwork simplified?
?