5570-109P-2018.pdf

STRUCTURE SUMMARY STRUCTURE NO. 5570-109P

POPLAR CREEK BRIDGE INSPECTION DATE: 11/30/18

BRIDGE IDENTIFICATION AND DESCRIPTION

MAIN SPAN MATERIAL: ....... CONCRETE NO. OF MAIN SPANS:

MAIN SPAN TYPE: ............... FRAME NO. OF APPR. SPANS:

# OF BEAMS, MAIN SPAN: .. 1 STRUCT. TOTAL LENGTH: .. 34.7 FT (10.6 M)

DECK TYPE: ......................... CONCRETE CAST-IN-PLACE MAX. SPAN LENGTH: .......... 34.7 FT (10.6 M)

WEARING SURFACE: .......... BITUMINOUS DECK WIDTH: ...................... 32.4 FT (9.9 M)

ABUT. FOUNDATIONS: ........ SPREAD FOOTING ON PILES CURB TO CURB WIDTH: ..... 28.0 FT (8.5 M)

PIER FOUNDATION(S): ........ N/A YEAR BUILT:

ABUTMENT / PIER MAT'L: ... CONCRETE YEAR RECONSTRUCTED: .. N/A

PROJ./PLAN REF. NO: ......... 3J8 / 2294C SKEW ANGLE: ..................... 30 °

NPS ROAD CLASS: .............. 1 - PRINCIPAL PARK ROAD FRACTURE CRITICAL: ........ N/A

STRUCTURE HISTORY: ...... 1982-JOINT REPAIR.

LOCATION

NATCHEZ TRACE PARKWAY MILE POINT: ..................... 180.88 (KM PT 291.09)

STATE: ................................. MISSISSIPPI LOCATION: 14.5 MILES SOUTH OF MS ROUTE 9

FACILITY CARRIED: ............ NATCHEZ TRACE PARKWAY

FEATURE INTERSECTED: .. POPLAR CREEK

STRUCTURE EVALUATION SUMMARY

This concrete frame bridge is in fair condition overall. Problems include moderate efflorescence on the deck underside along the construction joints, and severe deterioration of the expansion joint material in vertical joints.

Other problems include spalling with exposed rebar on rails at the north expansion joints; minor erosion at the abutments due to roadway runoff; moderate erosion of the northeast embankment, with sink holes present; moderate erosion at the end of the southeast parapet and along the southeast wingwall; and moderate to severe sloughing of embankment channels.

Corrective measures should be taken as outlined in this report to help prevent the possible development of more serious or costly problems in the future.

INSPECTION TEAM: M. REGER, Z. BAILEY

CONDITION ASSESSMENT:

MICHAEL REGER, P.E., FIELD TEAM LEADER 703-948-1424

REPORT REVIEW:

MARCUS MILLER, P.E., BRIDGE INSPECTION ENGINEER 703-404-6252

REPORT APPROVAL: DATE: 3/31/19

JORGOMAI CEESAY, PH.D., P.E., BIP SUPERVISORY ENGINEER 703-404-6244

RECOMMENDATIONS AND ESTIMATED COSTS STRUCTURE NO. 5570-109P

A (Critical) - Structure is closed, in imminent danger of collapse, or presents a critical safety hazard.

B (Major) - Structure exhibits severe deterioration, presents a safety hazard, or is designated a high priority due to age and/or condition.

C (Moderate) - Structure is deficient, functionally obsolete, or requires substantial repairs to prevent a serious deficiency or unsafe condition.

D (Minor) - Structure is generally in good condition. Preventative maintenance may be required.

E (Special) - Structure is under construction or reconstruction.

D 226 PRIORITY OF IMPROVEMENT

ITEM

NO.

ROUTINE MAINTENANCE QTY. UNIT UNIT

COST

PRELIM.

COST

ESTIMATE

58.2, 60.8 REPLACE EXPANSION JOINT MATERIAL IN VERTICAL JOINTS.

58.6 CLEAN AND SEAL EXPOSED REBAR AND REPAIR SPALLING OF RAILINGS AT

NORTH EXPANSION JOINTS.

PRELIM. MAINTENANCE TOTAL :

ITEM

NO.

REHABILITATION/RECONSTRUCTION

(TYPICALLY NEEDED WITHIN 5 YEARS)

QTY. UNIT

UNIT

COST

PRELIM. COST

ESTIMATES

REHAB. RECONSTR.

61.2 REPAIR SLOUGHING OF CHANNEL BANKS WITH ENGINEERED

RIPRAP.

58.1 RESTRIP EAST LANE PAVEMENT MARKINGS.

CONTRACT COSTS FOR MOBILIZATION, TRAFFIC CONTROL,

DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING (70% TOTAL REHAB COST)

PLUS PARK LOCATION FACTOR.

PRELIM. REHABILITATION/RECONSTRUCTION TOTAL :

PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE TOTAL* :

(*Includes typical contract costs for mobilization, traffic control, and design/construction engineering; but does not include detour bridges, work beyond the bridge limits, or work not listed above. Estimates are approximate and are for preliminary planning purposes only; they should not be used as a complete or final engineers estimate.)

REMARKS: Cost estimates assume that recommended actions will be combined with similar work being performed on other structures.

FIELD INSPECTION REPORT STRUCTURE NO. 5570-109P

G = GOOD (CODES 7 - 9) F = FAIR (CODES 5 - 6) P = POOR (CODES 0 - 4)

CONDITION RATING CODE EQUIVALENTS FOR SUB-ELEMENTS

SERIOUS CONDITION - loss of section, deterioration, spalling, or scour have seriously affected primary structural components. Local failures are possible.

Fatigue cracks in steel or shear cracks in concrete may be present.

CRITICAL CONDITION - advanced deterioration of primary structural elements. Fatigue cracks in steel or shear cracks in concrete may be present or scour may have removed substructure support. Unless closely monitored it may be necessary to close the structure until corrective action can be taken.

“IMMINENT” FAILURE CONDITION - major deterioration or sec ion loss present in critical structural components or obvious vertical or horizontal movement affecting structure stability. Structure is closed to traffic but corrective action may return structure to light service.

FAILED CONDITION - out of service; beyond corrective action.

CONDITION RATING CODES FOR ITEMS 58 - 62, 222, 223

NOT APPLICABLE

EXCELLENT CONDITION

VERY GOOD CONDITION - no problems noted.

GOOD CONDITION - some minor problems.

SATISFACTORY CONDITION - structural elements show some minor deterioration.

FAIR CONDITION - all primary structural elements are sound but may have minor section loss, cracking, spalling, or scour.

POOR CONDITION - advanced section loss, deterioration, spalling, or scour.

N

58. DECK ITEM REFERENCE AND REMARKS

OTHER

ALIGNMENT

DEFLECTION AND/OR VIBRATION

FASCIA(E)

DIAPHRAGMS AND BRACING

TRUSSES

FLOOR BEAMS AND STRINGERS

ARCH(ES) OR SLAB(S)

GIRDERS OR BEAMS

BEARING DEVICES

59. SUPERSTRUCTURE

OTHER

DEFLECTION AND/OR VIBRATION

UTILITIES

DRAINS AND DRAINAGE

PARAPETS AND/OR RAILINGS

CURBS, SIDEWALKS, AND MEDIAN

RIDEABILITY

WEARING SURFACE

EXPANSION JOINTS

DECK SLAB

OTHER

SETTLEMENT OR DEFLECTION

EROSION AND/OR SCOUR

FOUNDATIONS

CAPS AND/OR BEARING SEATS

PILE BENTS

WALLS AND/OR COLUMNS

PIER(S)

OTHER

SLOPE PROTECTION

SETTLEMENT OR DEFLECTION

EROSION AND/OR SCOUR

EXPANSION JOINTS

WEEP HOLES

WINGWALLS

FOUNDATIONS

BACKWALLS AND/OR BULKHEADS

CAPS AND/OR BEARING SEATS

PILE BENTS

BREASTWALLS OR COLUMNS

ABUTMENTS

60. SUBSTRUCTURE

1.

10.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

9.

8.

7.

6.

5.

4.

3.

2.

1.

PAINT

11.

(TREE GROWTH)

N N F N N N N N G

N G

G N N N N G F P F G N N

N N N N N N N

11.

10.

9.

8.

7.

6.

5.

4.

3.

2.

1.

12.

13.

14.

15.

16.

17.

18.

19.

58.1, 59.3 MODERATE EFFLORESCENCE ON DECK UNDERSIDE ALONG

CONSTRUCTION JOINTS AT BOTH EDGES. DETERIORATION OF

EAST LANE LINE MARKING.

58.2 CURB JOINTS HAVE BEEN SEALED SINCE LAST INSPECTION.

58.5 MINOR TRANSVERSE CRACKING OF CURBS. SURVEY PLAQUE IN

NORTHWEST CURB.

58.6 MINOR TO MODERATE TRANSVERSE CRACKING, DELAMINATION,

AND SPALLING WITH EXPOSED REBAR IN RAILING AT NORTH

EXPANSION JOINTS; OTHERWISE MINOR CRACKING. CRACK IN

SOUTHWEST AND NORTHWEST RAIL AND RAIL POST.

58.10 TREE GROWING UNDER NORTHEAST CORNER OF STRUCTURE.

60.6 MINOR CRACKING WITH EFFLORESCENCE ON WINGWALLS; MINOR

POPOUTS. MINOR SPALLING ON ENDS OF ALL WINGWALLS DUE TO

MOWER COLLISION. MOWER SCRAPES ALONG ALL WINGWALLS.

60.7 SEDIMENT FILTERS INSTALLED INSTALLED IN WEEP HOLES.

60.8 SEVERELY DETERIORATED VERTICAL EXPANSION JOINT MATERIAL

BETWEEN WINGWALLS AND ABUTMENTS.

60.9, 222.5 MINOR EROSION AT BREASTWALLS DUE TO DISCHARGE FROM

WEEP HOLES. MINOR EROSION ALONG BOTH ABUTMENTS DUE TO

ROADWAY RUNOFF. MODERATE TO SEVERE EROSION ALONG

SOUTHEAST WINGWALL; MINOR ALONG SOUTHWEST.

EROSION AT END OF SOUTHEAST PARAPET WITH UNDERMINING OF

APPROACH APRON.

G G G F G N

F

P

G

F

FIELD INSPECTION REPORT STRUCTURE NO. 5570-109P

ITEM REFERENCE AND REMARKS

STREAM BED COMPOSITION : 9.

AVERAGE CLEAR OPENING 8.

NORMAL VELOCITY 7.

ADEQUACY OF OPENING 6.

OTHER 5.

WATERWAY OBSTRUCTIONS 4.

CHANNEL PROTECTION 3.

EROSION AND/OR SCOUR 2.

ALIGNMENT 1.

61. CHANNEL 6

G P N G N

MED

SUFF

12 FT.

SILT

222. APPROACHES 7

1. APPROACH SLABS

2. RELIEF JOINTS

3. APPROACH GUARDRAIL

4. SURFACING

5. EROSION

6. SETTLEMENT

7. SIGNS

8. ALIGNMENT

9. OTHER

N N N G G G G G N

223. RETAINING WALL N

1. WALL

2. WEEP HOLES

3. FOUNDATION

4. EROSION AND/OR SCOUR

5. SETTLEMENT OR DEFLECTION

6. OTHER

36. TRAFFIC AND SAFETY FEATURES

A. BRIDGE RAILINGS

B. TRANSITIONS

C. APPROACH GUARDRAILS

D. APPROACH GUARDRAIL ENDS

N N N

61.2 MODERATE TO SEVERE SLOUGHING OF CHANNEL EMBANKMENTS.

61.2 SEE BRIDGE FILE FOR SCOUR EVALUATION.

222.7 TYPE 3 OBJECT MARKER AT ALL CORNERS. DETERIORATION OF

EAST LANE LINE.

TRAFFIC SAFETY RATING CODES

N

Does not meet standards or a safety feature is required and none is provided.

Meets currently acceptable standards.

Not applicable or a safety feature is not required.

STRUCTURE LOAD RATING STRUCTURE NO. 5570-109P

TRUCK TYPE

INVENTORY RATING (NORMAL TRAFFIC) OPERATING RATING (MAXIMUM LOAD)

TONS METRIC TONS TONS METRIC TONS

H 12 11 20 18

HS 21 19 35 32

TYPE 3 18 16 31 28

TYPE 3S2 28 25 48 44

TYPE 3-3 36 33 61 55

DESIGN LOADING: H15 (M13.5)

X CAPACITY MEETS OR EXCEEDS DESIGN LOAD

CAPACITY IS LESS THAN DESIGN LOAD

ORIGINAL LOAD RATING CALCULATION APPLICABLE

ORIGINAL LOAD RATING CALCULATION REVISED

DATE OF LOAD RATING CALCULATION: 5/15

LOAD RATING CONTROLLED BY:

REMARKS: SEE BRIDGE FILE FOR LOAD RATING CALCULATIONS.

STRUCTURE INVENTORY AND APPRAISAL STRUCTURE NO. 5570-109P

STRUCTURE IDENTIFICATION

(201) PARK: NATCHEZ TRACE PARKWAY (1) STATE: ....................................... 284 - MISSISSIPPI (MS)

(202) STRUCTURE NAME: .......... POPLAR CREEK BRIDGE (2) STATE HWY. AGENCY DIST:

(203) STRUCTURE KIND: ............1 - BRIDGE (3) COUNTY CODE: ........................ 019 - CHOCTAW

(204) STRUCTURE NUMBER: ..... 5570-109P (4) CITY/PLACE CODE:

(205) NPS REGION: .................... 4 - SOUTHEAST (5) INVENTORY ROUTE:

(206) ROUTE CODE NUMBER: ... 1 (6) FEATURES INTERSECTED:....... POPLAR CREEK

(207) ROAD SECTION NO: ..........109P (7) FACILITY CARRIED: .................. NATCHEZ TRACE PARKWAY

(208) NPS ROAD CLASS: ............ 1 - PRINCIPAL PARK ROAD (8) STATE STRUCTURE NO: .......... 5570109P0000000

(209) WITHIN NPS BNDRY?: .......YES (9) LOCATION: ................................ 14.5 MILES SOUTH OF MS RO

(210) OPERATING UNIT: ............. KOSCIUSKO (10) INV. RTE. - MIN. VERT. CLR: .. 99.99 FT (99.99 M)

(211) PROJECT NO(S): ................3J8 (11) MILE POINT: .............................180.88 (KM PT 291.09)

(212) DRAWING NUMBERS: ....... 2294C (27) YEAR BUILT:

(21) MAINTAINED BY: ................. 66 - NATIONAL PARK SERVICE (106) YEAR RECONSTRUCTED: .... N/A

(22) OWNER: ............................... 66 - NATIONAL PARK SERVICE (20) TOLL: ........................................3 - FREE ROAD

(37) HISTORICAL DESIGNATION: .. 5 - NOT ELIGIBLE

STRUCTURE DESCRIPTION, FOUNDATION, AND DECK TYPE

(43A) MAIN STR. MATERIAL: ..

(43B) MAIN STR. TYPE:

(45) NO. OF MAIN SPANS:

(48) MAX. SPAN LENGTH:

(49) STRUCTURE LENGTH:

(216A) ABUTMENT #1 FDN:

(216B) ABUTMENT #2 FDN:

(217A) PREDOM. PIER FDN.: ..

(217B) SECOND. PIER FDN: ...

(107) DECK TYPE:

1 - CONCRETE

07 - FRAME

34.7 FT (10.6 M)

34.7 FT (10.6 M)

3 - SPREAD FOOTING ON PILES

3 - SPREAD FOOTING ON PILES

6 - N/A

6 - N/A

1 - CONCRETE CAST-IN-PLACE

(44A) APPR. STR. MATERIAL: ........ 0 - OTHER

(44B) APPR. STR. TYPE: ................ 00 - OTHER

(46) NO. OF APPROACH SPANS: .. 0

(108) WEAR SURFACE/PROTECT SYSTEM:

A) TYPE WEARING SURFACE: .. 6 - BITUMINOUS

B) TYPE MEMBRANE: ................. 0 - NONE

C) TYPE PROTECTION: .............. 0 - NONE

(218) IS SALT USED?: ..................... NO

LOAD RATING AND POSTING

(31) DESIGN LOAD: ................. 2 - H15 (M13.5) (41) LOAD RESTRICTION: ......... R - POSTED (OTHER)

(66) INVENTORY RATING: ...... 21.0 TONS (19.1 METRIC TONS) (70) BRIDGE POSTING: .............. 5 - NO POSTING REQUIRED

(64) OPERATING RATING: ...... 35.0 TONS (31.8 METRIC TONS)

INSPECTION DATES

(90) INSPECTION DATE: 11/18 (91) FREQ. OF INSP: 48 MONTHS (92 / 93) CRITICAL FEATURE INSPECTION (CFI):

(219) ADD. STUDIES NEEDED: N - 0 - NONE (A) FRACTURE CRITICAL: ... NO

INSP. EVERY: MONTHS - LAST INSP. : (220) SPECIAL STUDY TYPE: 0 - NONE

(B) UNDERWATER: .............. NO

(221) SPECIAL STUDY DATE: INSP. EVERY: MONTHS - LAST INSP. :

(C) SPECIAL INSPECTION: .. NO

INSP. EVERY: MONTHS - LAST INSP. :

STRUCTURE INVENTORY AND APPRAISAL STRUCTURE NO. 5570-109P

GEOMETRY, TRAFFIC, AND NAVIGATIONAL DATA

(16) LATITUDE: ............................. 33°17'38.60"

(17) LONGITUDE: ......................... 89°24'10.20"

(19) DETOUR LENGTH: ............... 25 MI (40 KM)

(28A) LANES ON STRUCT:

(28B) LANES UNDER STRUCT: ... 00

(42A) SERVICE ON: ..................... 1 - HIGHWAY

(42B) SERVICE UNDER: .............. 5 - WATERWAY

(29) AVG. DAILY TRAFFIC:

(30) YEAR OF ADT:

(114) FUTURE ADT:

(115) YEAR OF FUTURE ADT:

(101) PARALLEL STRUCTURE: ... N - NONE

(38) NAVIGATION CONTROL?: ... 0

(39) VERTICAL CLEARANCE: ...... 0.0 FT (0.0 M)

(40) HORIZ. CLEARANCE: ........... 0.0 FT (0.0 M)

(111) ABUT. OR PIER PROT:

LATERAL UNDERCLEARANCE:

(55) RIGHT: ....................... 0.0 FT (0.0 M)

(56) LEFT: ......................... 0.0 FT (0.0 M)

(51) CURB TO CURB WIDTH:

(52) DECK WIDTH:

(32) APPR. ROADWAY WIDTH:

(213) APPR. PAVEMENT WIDTH:

LEFT SHOULDER:

RIGHT SHOULDER:

(33) BRIDGE MEDIAN:

(34) SKEW ANGLE:

(35) DECK FLARE?:

(47) TOTAL HORIZ. CLEARANCE:

(50) SIDEWALKS:

LEFT :

RIGHT :

(214) BRIDGE RAIL TYPE:

RAIL CONFIGURATION:

MATERIAL:

DESIGN TYPE:

(215) BRIDGE RAIL HEIGHT:

(53) MIN. VRT. CLEAR. OVER DECK:

(54) MIN. VRT. UNDERCLEARANCE:

28.0 FT (8.5 M)

32.4 FT (9.9 M)

32.0 FT (9.8 M)

22.0 FT (6.7 M)

5.0 FT (1.5 M)

5.0 FT (1.5 M)

0 - NO MEDIAN

30 °

NO

28.0 FT (8.5 M)

0.0 FT (0.0 M)

0.0 FT (0.0 M)

1 - FULL HEIGHT (NO PARAPE

1 - CONCRETE

1 - CONTINUOUS RAIL

2.42 FT (0.74 M)

99.99 FT (99.99 M)

0.00 FT (0.00 M)

CONDITION AND APPRAISAL DATA, PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS, AND COST

(58) DECK:

(59) SUPERSTRUCTURE:

(60) SUBSTRUCTURE:

(61) CHANNEL:

(62) CULVERT: ...........................N

(222) APPROACHES:

(223) RETAINING WALL: ........... N

(36) TRAFFIC SAFETY FEAT: ... 1NNN

(75A) TYPE OF WORK:

(75B) WORK DONE BY:

(76) IMPROVEMENT LENGTH: ..

(67) STRUCTURAL EVALUATION:

(68) DECK GEOMETRY:

(69) UNDERCLEARANCES:

(71) WATERWAY ADEQUACY:

(72) APPROACH ALIGNMENT:

(113) SCOUR CRITICAL:

(225) PURPOSE OF IMPROVEMENT:

(226) PRIORITY OF IMPROVEMENT:

(227) MAINTENANCE COST:

(228) REHAB./RECONSTR. COST: ...

(229) CONSTRUCTION COST:

N

5 - Stable; scour within limits of

2 - REHAB/RECONSTRUCTION

D - MINOR

$5,000

$87,000

$0

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

(230) STRUCTURE HISTORY:

1982-JOINT REPAIR.

(231) ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATIONS:

(330) ADDITIONAL CONFIG. INFO.:

APPENDIX STRUCTURE NO. 5570-109P

PHOTOGRAPHS STRUCTURE NO. 5570-109P

PHOTO #1 - LOOKING NORTHBOUND TOWARD TUPELO

FLOW

PHOTO #2 - EAST (UPSTREAM) SIDE

PHOTO #3 - GENERAL TOPSIDE VIEW, LOOKING SOUTH

PHOTO #4 - GENERAL UNDERSIDE VIEW LOOKING SOUTH; NOTE

EFFLORESCENCE AT DECK CONSTRUCTION JOINTS (PHOTO FROM

1/22/2016 INSPECTION REPORT)

PHOTO #5 - TYPICAL VEGETATION GROWTH ALONG SOUTH CHANNEL

BANK, EAST END OF STRUCTURE

PHOTO #6 - SPALLING WITH EXPOSED REBAR ON WEST RAIL AT

NORTH JOINT; NOTE CRACK IN RAIL POST

PHOTO #7 - DELAMINATION AND CRACKING OF NORTHEAST RAIL

JOINT; NOTE CRACKING IN RAIL POST

PHOTO #8 - DETERIORATION OF EAST LANE LINE, PHOTO LOOKING

SOUTH

PHOTO #9 - EROSION AT SOUTH END OF EAST

PARAPET WITH UNDERMINING OF APPROACH

PAVEMENT APRON

PHOTO #10 - EROSION ALONG SOUTHEAST

WINGWALL; NOTE TYPICAL MOWER SCRAPES

(PHOTO FROM 1/22/2016 INSPECTION

REPORT)

PHOTO #11 - TYPICAL CRACKING WITH

EFFLORESCENCE ALONG CONSTRUCTION

JOINT, EAST SIDE (PHOTO FROM 1/22/2016

INSPECTION REPORT)

PHOTO #12 - GENERAL VIEW OF SOUTH

ABUTMENT

PHOTO #13 - TYPICAL RUNOFF EROSION CHANNEL, NORTHEAST

EMBANKMENT SHOWN

PHOTO #14 - VIEW LOOKING UPSTREAM

PHOTO #15 - VIEW LOOKING DOWNSTREAM