Bridge_Inspection_ _Load_Analysis_O-11_Bridge.pdf
PDF 6 MB Posted
- Solicitation number
- DTFH70-16-B-00026
About this file
Bridge Inspection Load Analysis O-11 Bridge
View the file
Other files
Show all 14
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
BRIDGE INSPECTION AND LOAD ANALYSIS
OF
O-11 BRIDGE
FOR
MALMSTROM AFB, MONTANA
JOB NO: 08-099
Great Falls ● Bozeman● Kalispell, Montana Spokane, Washington ● Lewiston, Idaho
AUGUST 2008
Great Falls ● Bozeman● Kalispell, Montana
Spokane, Washington ● Lewiston, Idaho
CSW
Neil
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
O-11 Bridge – Executive Summary Page - 1 of 3 tdh #08-099
AGENCY: Malmstrom AFB, Montana
CONTRACT NO. FA 4626-08-P-0019
ENGINEER: Thomas, Dean and Hoskins, Inc., Great Falls, Montana
Project Manager: Neil Curry, P.E.
Bridge Inspection Leader: Bill Lloyd, P.E. (Great West Engineering)
Load Rating Calculations: Brian May, P.E.
Garrett Drake, EI
Final Review and Quality Check: Neil Curry, P.E.
Completion Date: August 6, 2008
BRIDGE LOCATION:
Missile Launch Facility O-11
Fergus County, Montana
Crosses Armell’s Creek approximately 25 miles northeast of Lewistown, approximately 8 miles off of US HWY 191.
GOVERNING CODES:
Manual for Condition Evaluation of Bridges, 2nd Edition.
AASHTO 17th Edition Bridge Design Specifications, 2002.
DESCRIPTION OF WORK:
Thomas, Dean and Hoskins, Inc., was contracted to complete this work on June 23, 2008. In general, the Statement of Work required the following:
NBIS Bridge Inspection with report.
Load Rating/Calculations providing Inventory and Operating Rating for the standard AASHTO Load Rating Vehicles and also the MCL Transporter-Erector Vehicle.
Executive Summary describing the bridges, inspection notables, and load rating results.
O-11 Bridge – Executive Summary Page - 2 of 3
BRIDGE SUMMARY
BRIDGE CHARACTERISTICS:
3-span timber bridge, 16’ wide one lane, crossing small waterway.
21’ long spans throughout = 63’ total bridge length.
Stringers: 8”w x 18”d, spacing varies 2’-2” to 2’-6”.
Abutments: Timber cap on timber piles, with timber backwall/wingwall.
Intermediate Piers: Timber cap on timber piles.
Deck: 2”x6” on end. No running planks. Some loose gravel surfacing (road mix) on deck, 3” thick in isolated locations.
Timber guide rail each side, with timber wheel guard.
GENERAL INSPECTION INFORMATION:
All bridge elements rated in GOOD condition except the following rated in FAIR condition:
o Bridge railings and curbs.
o Timber decking.
o Bridge drains and deck drainage.
Other notable inspection information:
o Railing is weathered and checked.
o Decking has significant wear in isolated locations.
o Moderate checking and minor damage within timber stringers.
o Timber diaphragms (between beams) have some damage.
Inspection did identify an element that reduced the load rating capacity of the bridge. This element was the decking planks, which were observed to have approximately 1¾” of wear in isolated locations. Although this significantly reduces the capacity of the deck, the overall load rating was only impacted slightly since the bridge stringers had similar rating capacity as the deck.
See Inspection Report for more detailed information and repair recommendations.
REPAIR REQUIREMENTS:
Repair recommendations are given within the Inspection Report.
The deck condition is reducing the load rating of the bridge, and is the only condition that is considered a capacity issue. The deck should be monitored to ensure no further wear or deterioration occurs. The installation of running planks should be considered.
O-11 Bridge – Executive Summary Page - 3 of 3
LOAD RATING SUMMARY:
The Load Rating does not require restrictions for any of the four design trucks analyzed.
Deck shear controls the load rating, followed closely by stringer bending (flexure).
No Load Rating issues are identified at this time for the rating vehicles used, including the MCL Transporter-Erector.
LOAD RATING SUMMARY TABLE: O-11 BRIDGE
Inventory Rating (tons) Operating Rating (tons)
Rating Vehicle Stringer Deck Stringer Deck
Flexure Shear Flexure Shear Flexure Shear Flexure Shear
T3 38.1 55.4 47.5 36.1
50.7 73.6 63.3 48.0
T3-S2 60.2 85.0 75.0 57.1
80.0 113.0 100.0 75.9
T3-3 74.0 107.3 80.7 61.4
98.4 142.7 107.6 81.6
T-E 86.9 130.5 134.7 102.6 115.6 173.5 179.5 136.5
1. See the Load Rating Calculations for additional information.
2. T3 trucks are AAHSTO trucks, T-E is the MCL Transporter-Erector (see “Miscellaneous
Information” Section for descriptions of the rating vehicles).
3. All values in tons.
4. Controlling bridge elements are shaded.
5. The “stringer” values for the T-E vehicle do not represent a rating for a total truck weight rating since the truck is significant longer than the span length. Deck values do represent a total truck weight rating.
LOAD RATING:
Inventory Load Rating: 36 tons (does not require posting)
Operating Load Rating: 48 tons
The Inventory Load Rating is the bridge load rating based on repeated loading. The Operating Load Rating is the bridge load rating based on an infrequent loading. Public bridges are typically posted for the Inventory Rating.
The above rating was controlled by the deck for a Type 3 AASHTO Truck, although the stringer capacity was similar in capacity.
The MCL Transporter-Erector vehicle did not control the above Load Rating, and does not require restriction since it falls under the Operating Rating criteria.
INSPECTION REPORTS
(8) NBI Structure Number: L14112007+05001
Structure Name: O-11
Road Name: Irish Road
Feature Intersected: Armells Creek
Location: Fergus County
Agency: MAFB
Geographic and Route Data Dimensionsal Data
1 State Code 308 32 Appr Rdwy Width (ft) 16
2 State Hwy District 5 39 Nav. Vert. Clr (ft) 0
3 County Code 27 40 Nav Horz Clr (ft) 0
4 Place Code 0 48 Max Span Length (ft) 21
6 Feature Under 49 Structure Length (ft) 63
7 Facility On 1 50a Lt Curb/Swlk Width (ft) 1
9 Location 50b Rt Curb/Swlk Width (ft) 1
16 Lattitude 47d23'24" 51 Br Width Curb-Curb (ft) 16
17 Longitude 109d08'12" 52 Deck Width Out-Out (ft) 18
98 Border Bridge 53 Min Vert Over Clr (ft) 99
99 Border Bridge Str No. 54 Min Vert Under Clr (ft) 0
103 Temporary Str 55 Min Lat Under Clr Rt (ft) 99
56 Min Lat Under Clr Lt (ft) 0
On and Under Record Data 112 NBIS Br Length? Y
5 Inv Rte L14112 116 Nav Min Vert Clr (ft) 0
10 Inv Rte Min Vert Clr (ft) 99
11 Inv Rte Mile Post 7.5 Proposed Improvements
19 Detour Length (miles) 75 Type of Work 361
20 Toll 76 Length of Str Imp (ft) 63
26 Functional Class 94 Br Imprv Cost (x1000) 5
28 Lanes on/under 1/0 95 Rdwy Imprv Cost (x1000) 0
29 ADT 100 96 Total Project Cost (x1000) 7
30 Year of ADT 2003 97 Year of Cost Estimate 2008
47 Inv Rte Tot Horiz Clr (ft) 16 114 Future ADT 100
100 Defense Hwy 115 Year of Future ADT 2020
101 Parallel Bridge N
102 Direction of Traffic 2 Condition Ratings
104 Hwy System 1 58 Deck 6
109 Percent of Trucks 59 Superstructure 7
110 National Truck Network 60 Substructure 6
61 Channel 8
General Data 62 Culvert N
13 Appraisal Ratings
21 Maint. Responsibility 2 67 Structural Evaluation 6
22 Bridge Owner 2 68 Deck Geometry 2
31 Design Loading 0 69 Underclearance N
33 Bridge Median 0 71 Waterway Addequacy 8
34 Skew 35 72 Appr Rdw Align 6
35 Structure Flared 0 36a Bridge Rail 0
37 Historical Significance 5 36b Transition Rail N
38 Navigation Control 0 36c Appr Guardrail N
42 Service Type 0-5 36d Appr Guardrail Ends N
43 Str Type, Main 702 113 Scour Critical Rtg 6
44 Str Type, Appr 0
45 Number of Main Spans 3 Load, Rate, and Post
46 Number of Appr Spans 0 41 Open, Post, Close A
27 Year Built 1962 63 Method Used Oper Rtg 5
105 Federal Land Highways 64 Oper Load Rtg
106 Year of Reconstruction 65 Method Used Inv Rtg 5
107 Deck Str Type 8 66 Inv Load Rating
108 Wear Surf Prot System 0 70 Bridge Posting Code 5
111 Nav Pier/Abut Prot
Over 200 Items
Inspection Data 200
90 Inspection Date 7/8/2008 201
91 Inspection Frequency (mos) 24 202
92a Fracture Critical N 0 203
92b Underwater Insp N 0 204
92c Special Insp N 0 205
93a Date Fract Crit Insp 0 209
93b Date Underwater Insp 0 210
93c Date of Special Insp 0 216
Structure Inventory and Appraisal Sheet
Inspection Page 1 of 4
ROUTINE ROAD BRIDGE INSPECTION REPORT
IDENTIFICATION and LOCATION:
Structure Name: O-11
Route: Irish Road Milepost: 7.50
County Fergus MDT District: 5
Feature Crossed: Armells Creek
BRIDGE RATING SUMMARY:
Date: July 8, 2008 Time Started: 10:00 am Time Completed: 12:00 pm
Inspection Team: Bill Lloyd, PE
Weather: 60°, Sunny, Calm, Dry
Rerating required based on current inspection?
Organization:
YES NO (Circle One) N/A Insp Team
Leader:
Signature
RECOMMENDED WORK
TASK ID DESCRIPTION
UNIT
TYPE
UNIT
COST
TOTAL
COST
WEAR SURF
INSTALL LONGITUDINAL RUNNING PLANKS/LEVEL
EXISTING DECK SURFACE
$5,000
58-1 REMOVE ROAD MIX SURFACE FROM BRIDGE DECK $200
58-C4 PAINT BRIDGE RAIL $200
58-C5 CLEAN SCUPPERS $100
60-20 REMOVE DEBRIS ACCUMMULATED ON PIER PILES $100
36-2 INSTALL OBJECT MARKERS $1,000
36-1
INSTALL “SINGLE LANE BRIDGE AHEAD” SIGN ON
NORTH APPROACH
$500
Inspection Page 2 of 4
CONDITION CODES AND REMARKS
CONDITION RATING REMARKS: Abut #1 – SW Abut, Span #1 – SW Span, Girder #1 - Downstream
WEARING SURFACE NO WEARING SURFACE
58. DECK: 6
*1. DECK SLAB/PANELS/JOISTS F 2x6 NAIL LAMINATED, WEAR DEPTH 1-3/4” + AT WHEEL LINES.
60% COVERED WITH ROAD MIX UP TO 3” DEEP
C1. DECK JOINTS
C2. CURBS F DAMAGED AT ABUT #2 UPSTREAM
C3. SIDEWALKS
C4. BRIDGE RAILINGS F WEATHERED AND CHECKED, PAINT GONE ON RAIL. DAMAGE
AT ABUT #2 UPSTREAM
C5. DRAINS AND DRAINAGE F SCUPPERS PLUGGED WITHROAD MIX
C6. RIDEABILITY F
C7. CLEANLINESS P
C8. UTILITIES
59. SUPERSTRUCTURE: 7
*1. GIRDERS 8 LINES. G
A. DIAPHRAGMS G ABUT #1: SPLIT BETWEEN GIRDERS 2 & 3
ABUT #2: SPLIT BETWEEN GIRDERS 1 & 2, 2 & 3
B. BRACING G
*2. FLOOR BEAMS
*3. STRINGERS
*4. TRUSSES
A. CHORDS
B. PORTALS
C. VERTICALS/DIAGONAL
D. BRACING
C1. BEARING DEVICES G PAINTED STEEL CLIP ANGLE
C2. PAINT
C3. DEFLECTION UNDER LOAD NOT OBSERVED
C4. VIBRATION UNDERLOAD NOT OBSERVED
60. SUBSTRUCTURE: 6
A *1. ALIGNMENT (TIPPING, TILTING,...) G ONLY CAP VISIBILE AT ABUT #1
B *2. EROSION OR SCOUR
U *3. SETTLEMENT
T TIMBER ABUTMENTS (INCL. WW)
M *4. CAPS G ABUT #1 CAP CHECKED FULL LENGTH
E *5. POSTS/PILES G ABUT #2: TWO UPSTREAM BATTER PILES OUT OF ALIGNMENT
N *6. BACKING PLANKS G
T *7. SILLS/FOOTINGS
S *8. WINGWALLS G
OTHER ABUTMENTS
*9. CAPS
*10. FOOTINGS
*11. WALLS G
*12. PILES
*13. WINGWALLS
P *14. ALIGNMENT (TIPING, TILTING,…) G
I *15. EROSION OR SCOUR G
E *16. SETTLEMENT
R *17. CAPS G PIER #2 CAP CHECKED FULL LENGTH
S *18. COLUMNS OR WALLS G
*19. FOOTINGS
*20. PILES G PIER 2: PILE 5 REPAIRED WITH STEEL SLEEVE, PILE 7 HAS
GRADER BLADE FOR PROTECTION, VERTICAL CHECKING
TYPICAL
*21. BRACING G
* Only these items are used in the determination of the overall condition rating for that category ie. Deck, superstructure, substructure. Other items should be rated and remarked on but NOT included in determining the overall category rating. Items enumerated using a C (ex C1) should be commented on but not rated. See the FHWA Coding Guide for further information as to what is included in condition rating.
Inspection Page 3 of 4
CONDITION CODES AND REMARKS (Continued)
CONDITION RATING REMARKS
61. CHANNEL AND CHANNEL PROTECTION 8
*1. CHANNEL SCOUR/EROSION G 18” SCOUR HOLE ADJACENT PIER #2, PILE #7. DEBRIS
COLLECTED ON PIER #2
*2. CHANNEL PROTECTION G
*3. VEGETATION G
*4. WATERWAY OBSTR./DRAFT G
*5. ADEQUACY OF OPENINGS G
C1. CLEAR HEIGHT 13’-6” MAXIMUM
APPROACH CONDITION: G
*1. SURFACING G ¾” ROAD MIX
*2. SHOULDER EMBANKMENT G
*3. ROADWAY EMBANKMENT G
*4. APPROACH SETTLEMENT G
APPRAISAL CODES and REMARKS
36. TRAFFIC SAFETY FEATURES: 0
*A. BRIDGE RAILING F TIMBER. NON-COMPLIANT
*B. RAIL TRANSITIONS
*C. APPROACH GUARDRAILS
*D. APPROACH RAIL ENDS
1. SIGNING
2. OBJECT MARKERS
72. APPROACH ROADWAY ALIGNMENT: 6
1. HORIZONTAL G TANGENT SECTION
2. VERTICAL P SHARP VERTICAL CREST CURVE APPROXIMATELY 70
YDS NE OF BRIDGE. POOR SIGHT DISTANCE
Bridge Appraisal Rating items may change as a result of this inspection. Use FHWA Coding Guide and
Regional Office direction for appraisal rating code determination.
67. STRUCTURAL EVALUATION: 6 68. DECK GEOMETRY: 2
71. WATERWAY ADEQUACY: 8 113. SCOUR CRITICAL BRIDGES:
STRUCTURE LIFE REMAINING SCOUR VULNERABILITY:
CONDITION RATING OF EACH MEMBER OR ELEMENT
NA -NOT APPLICABLE
NOB -APPLICABLE, BUT NO OBSERVED. (Give reason unless obvious)
G = GOOD -ELEMENT IN NEW OR GOOD CONDITION WITH NO REPAIRS NECESSARY.
F = FAIR -ELEMENT IS STILL PERFORMING THE FUNCTION FOR WHICH IT WAS
INTENDED BUT MAY NEED MAINTENANCE.
P = POOR -ELEMENT STILL PERFORMING THE FUNCTION FOR WHICH IT WAS INTENDED
BUT IS IN NEED OF REPAIRS.
C = CRITICAL -ELEMENT IS NOT PERFORMING THE FUNCTION FOR WHICH IT WAS INTENDED
Inspection Page 4 of 4
ITEM #
REFERENCE
ADDITIONAL REMARKS
59-C1 SPAN 1 – GIRDER 3: CHECKED @ MID-HEIGHT, HALF SPAN
SPAN 1 – GIRDER 4: SLIGHT DAMAGE AT DIAPHRAGM CONNECTION
SPAN 2 – GIRDER 7 CHECKED MID-HEIGHT, MID SPAN
SPAN 3 – GIRDER 2 SPLIT AT BEARING BOLT CONNECTION
SPAN 3 – GIRDER 3: CHECKED MID-HEIGHT, FULL SPAN
View looking southwest
View looking northeast – note impaired sight distance
View looking downstream
View looking upstream
View of wear on deck surface
View of damage to curb and rail at northwest corner
View of timber rail – note weather checking
View of split in end of Girder 2, Span 3
View of Pier 3 cap – note weather checking
View of Pier 3 – note debris accumulation
View of Abutment 2 piling – note poor bearing at pile cap
View of repair to pile on Pier 3
View of northeast wingwall – note broken column
LOAD RATING CALCULATIONS
PROJECT: MAFB TIMBER BRIDGE RATING; O-11 BRIDGE
JOB NO. 08-099
BY: DATE:
CHECKED: DATE:
Stringer: Flexure Stringer: Shear Fb 1700 psi Fv 145 psi
DF 0.466 Distribution Factor Area 144 in2
Mavail 51.7 ft-k Vavail 20.0 kips Inventory
Vavail 26.6 kips Operating
Mact Weight Inv Operat ft-k tons tons tons Vlu Vll fv Vact Weight Inven Operat
T3 72.8 25 38.1 50.7 kips kips psi kips tons tons tons
T3-S2 66.4 36 60.2 80.0 T3 11.3 6.02 62.7 9.03 25 55.4 73.6
T3-3 60.0 40 74.0 98.4 T3-S2 10.6 5.65 58.9 8.48 36 85.0 113
T-E 93.5 73.25 86.9 116 T3-3 9.33 4.97 51.8 7.46 40 107 143
T-E 14.0 7.46 77.7 11.19 73 130 174
Deck: Flexure Deck: Shear s 2.17 ft Max Deck Span clear dist 1.83 ft b 1.67 ft Tire Width b 1.67 ft Tire Width a 0.42 ft AISC 13th Ed. Table 3-23 Case 4 Area 72 in2
Mavail 5.7 ft-k Inventory Vavail 7.8 kips Inventory
Mavail 7.6 ft-k Operating Vavail 10.3 kips Operating wl^2/8
Wheel w R1 Mact Mact Weight Inven Operat Wheel w Rmax Vx fv Vact Weight Inven Operat kips klf kips ft-k ft-k tons tons tons kips klf kips kips psi kips tons tons tons
T3 8.5 5.10 4.250 3.56 3.00 25 47.5 63.3 T3 8.5 5.10 4.629 3.59 74.8 5.39 25 36.1 48
T3-S2 7.75 4.65 3.875 3.24 2.74 36 75.0 100.0 T3-S2 7.75 4.65 4.221 3.27 68.1 4.91 36 57 76
T3-3 8 4.80 4.000 3.35 2.83 40 80.7 107.6 T3-3 8 4.80 4.357 3.38 70.4 5.07 40 61 82
T-E 8.75 5.25 4.375 3.66 3.09 73 134.7 179.5 T-E 8.75 5.25 4.765 3.69 76.9 5.54 73 103 136
SAFE LOAD CAPACITIES (Tons)
Flexure Shear Flexure Shear Flexure Shear Flexure Shear
T3 38.1 55.4 47.5 36.1 50.7 73.6 63.3 48.0
T3-S2 60.2 85.0 75.0 57.1 80.0 113.0 100.0 75.9
T3-3 74.0 107.3 80.7 61.4 98.4 142.7 107.6 81.6
T-E 86.9 130.5 134.7 102.6 115.6 173.5 179.5 136.5
Timber Bridge Rating = 36.0 Tons
DeckStringer
Inventory Operating
Stringer Deck
AISC Eq 5.
BDM
AISC Eq 4.
7/31/2008
J:\2008\08-099\STRUCTURAL\Load Rating\O11 Bridge_final revision.xlsx Page 1 of 1
MISC. INFORMATION
Kick-Off Meeting
BRIDGE INSPECTIONS AND LOAD RATING FOR A-6 & O-11 BRIDGES
Malmstrom Air Force Base
Contract No. FA 4626-08-P-0019
AGENDA:
Project Overview
Project involves the formal NBIS inspection and load capacity rating of 2 bridges in north-central Montana. Deliverables include an inspection report for each bridge and a load capacity report for each bridge. Work will be completed in compliance with the Statement of Work and the Engineering Technical Letter 07-5; Bridge Inspections.
Individuals assigned to Project Tasks
Project Manager……………………. Neil Curry, P.E. (TD&H)
Bridge Inspection Leader…………...Bill Lloyd, P.E. (Great West Engineering)
Load Rating…………………………Neil Curry, P.E. (TD&H)
Brian May, P.E. (TD&H)
Garrett Drake, EI (TD&H)
Load Capacity Report ………………Neil Curry, P.E. (TD&H)
Garrett Drake, EI (TD&H)
Bill Lloyd, P.E. is a certified NBIS bridge inspector meeting the qualifications as listed in the
Statement of Work section 5.1 Qualifications of Personnel IAW 23 CFR § 650.309.
Project Schedule
Kick-Off Meeting………………….. July 7 th
, 9:00 am, at TD&H Office
On-Site Bridge Inspections………… July 8 th
, July 9 th
Load Rating Completion…………… July 25
Load Capacity Report Completion and Mailing to MAFB ………August 6
(Required Delivery Date…………….August 9
, 2008)
MEETING MINUTES:
• Meeting was held at the TD&H office on July 7 th at 9:00 am, and was attended by Mr.
Mike Miner with Missile Engineering, and Neil Curry with TD&H.
• Discussion of project schedule. Mr. Miner was made aware that our on-site inspections would be occurring July 8 th and possibly extending into July 9 th
. Final delivery date was discussed, as well as its occurrence on a Saturday. TD&H will strive for completion prior to the Saturday date.
• Water level at the A-6 bridge (Belt Creek) was discussed. It is felt that the inspection can take place at the current water levels, but the inspector will need to determine if full inspection can occur once he views the current water runoff.
• Mr. Miner delivered additional information including: A-6 bridge re-deck information, Military Truck loading information, and the O-11 bridge ID number (for obtaining previous inspection information).
| O-11 Bridge Inspection.pdf |
| O-11 SIA Sheet.pdf |
| O-11 Bridge Field Inspection .pdf |
| O-11 Photos.pdf |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .