BRIDGE REPAIR/REHABILITATION FEASIBILITY STUDY

More documents

Recommendations

Info

6.0 SCOPE, COST AND SERVICE LIFE FOR <strong>REPAIR</strong> & <strong>REHABILITATION</strong> The scope of work, estimated construction cost and anticipated service life for recommended repairs and rehabilitation are summarized below. Costs are reported in 2011 dollars (see Appendix G) and include mobilization, traffic control, milling and resurfacing of the approach roadway pavement within the project limits, and a contingency to cover miscellaneous items not considered and anticipated tolerances in unit costs and quantities. The costs do not include engineering design, permitting and construction inspection and engineering. Because the factors that determine the rate of deterioration in timber members can vary significantly, it is difficult to accurately estimate the service life of timber components. As such, the anticipated service life associated with each scope of work is shown as a range that envelopes the likely best case to the worst case scenario. Recommended Repair Scope: As a minimum the existing bridge should be repaired to address those elements that require immediate corrective action. The recommended scope of work for these repairs include replacement of the wearing surface, structural deck, curbs, bracing and fenders; replacement of the operating equipment (i.e. wire ropes, deflector sheaves, pulleys, winches, and associated attachments); replacement of the electrical system; installation of FRP jackets on the piles; repair of the abutment concrete; and reattachment of the guardrail. The estimated cost of the repair work is $ 9,363,000 and is expected to provide a service life of 10 to 20 years before replacement of the bridge will be required. Recommended Rehabilitation Scope: A Rehabilitation Scope with modifications that correct a number of structural, functional, safety and reliability concerns would be a more cost effective solution compared to the Repair Scope in that it will be less expensive and would provide a longer service life. As such, a Rehabilitation Scope would be recommended over a Repair Scope. The recommended scope of work for major rehabilitation includes complete replacement of the timber structure (i.e. wearing surface, structural deck, railings, curbs, stringers and diaphragms, lifting beam, sheave poles, cap beams, sills, piles, bracing and fenders); replacement of the counterweight; replacement of the operating equipment (i.e. wire ropes, deflector sheaves, pulleys, winches, and associated attachments); replacement of the electrical system; repair of the abutment concrete; and reattachment of the guardrail. If desired, the timber railings could be temporarily removed and reinstalled on the reconstructed bridge. Modifications and improvements include replacement of the curbs with crash tested timber traffic railing including timber guardrail along the approach roadways; minor widening of the sidewalks to address accessibility including shifting the operating equipment and sheave poles, and widening the sidewalks on the roadway approaches; installation of additional horizontal timber railing elements or cable railing elements to the pedestrian railings to meet safety requirements; replacement of the guardrail with pedestrian railing along the abutment wing walls; increasing the capacity of the bascule span stringers and cap beams; increasing the capacity of the operating equipment (i.e. wire rope, deflector sheave, pulley, winch, lifting beam and sheave pole sizes); shortening of the counterweight arm to keep the counterweight from becoming submerged; relocation of the pivot point and sheave poles and increasing the opening angle to improve the Repair/Rehab. Feasibility Study March 10, 2011 Bridge No. C-07-001 (437) 53 Final Report
navigation opening. The estimated cost of the rehabilitation work is $ 4,781,000 and is expected to provide a service life of 20 to 30 years before complete replacement of the bridge will be required. Repair/Rehab. Feasibility Study March 10, 2011 Bridge No. C-07-001 (437) 54 Final Report
Page 1 and 2:
BRIDGE REPAIR/REHABILITATION FEASIB
Page 3 and 4: 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The existing
Page 5 and 6: such there is a risk that the proje
Page 7 and 8: 3.0 BRIDGE DESCRIPTION Bridge Numbe
Page 9 and 10: Photo 2 - Present Mitchell River Br
Page 11 and 12: 4.0 ELEMENT CONDITION & REHABILITAT
Page 13 and 14: Based on the 1997 load rating analy
Page 15 and 16: promotes growth in the number and s
Page 17 and 18: 4.2.2 Deck NBIS Condition Rating: 5
Page 19 and 20: Rehabilitation Scope: In order to m
Page 21 and 22: 4.2.5 Railings NBIS Condition Ratin
Page 23 and 24: Functionality and Safety: Eliminati
Page 25 and 26: Although in-place preservative trea
Page 27 and 28: The bascule span timber stringers c
Page 29 and 30: Repair Scope: Although the timber m
Page 31 and 32: Use of an all steel counterweight w
Page 33 and 34: additional force effects, the speci
Page 35 and 36: typically loose. The steel guardrai
Page 37 and 38: Functionality and Safety: The cap b
Page 39 and 40: The surface decay and deterioration
Page 41 and 42: the interior of the piles where the
Page 43 and 44: Load Capacity: The current loss in
Page 45 and 46: Visual Impacts: Replacement of the
Page 47 and 48: Condition Description: There are cu
Page 49 and 50: 5.0 OTHER CONSIDERATIONS 5.1 Naviga
Page 51 and 52: SUMMARY OF TIMBER ELEMENT SERVICE L
Page 53: 5.3 Funding The project is currentl
Page 57 and 58: • Continued replacement, repair a
Page 59 and 60: APPENDICES A. Existing Bridge Plans
Page 74: APPENDIX B Structures Field Inspect
Page 123 and 124:
PAGE 3 OF 22 CITY/TOWN B.I.N. BR. D
Page 125 and 126:
Page 127 and 128:
Page 129 and 130:
CITY/TOWN B.I.N. BR. DEPT. NO. 8.-S
Page 131 and 132:
Page 133 and 134:
Page 135 and 136:
Page 137 and 138:
Page 139 and 140:
Page 141 and 142:
Page 144 and 145:
PAGE 2 OF 7 CITY/TOWN B.I.N. BR. DE
Page 146 and 147:
Page 148 and 149:
Page 211:
APPENDIX C Load Rating Summary (199
Page 237 and 238:
MAINTENANCE AND REHABILITATION OF T
Page 239 and 240:
Figure 14-1. - Many covered bridges
Page 241 and 242:
(discussed later in this chapter),
Page 243 and 244:
Figure 14-5. - Liquid wood preserva
Page 245 and 246:
wood, and other openings to the atm
Page 247 and 248:
Table 14-1. - Number and size of ho
Page 249 and 250:
member noting treatment information
Page 251 and 252:
Figure 14-11. - Splicing and scabbi
Page 253 and 254:
STRESS LAMINATING Stress laminating
Page 255 and 256:
ond between separated sections, inc
Page 257 and 258:
onding the old and new pile section
Page 259 and 260:
GENERAL PROCEDURES FOR EPOXY REPAIR
Page 261 and 262:
openings will allow epoxy to escape
Page 263 and 264:
Another quality control problem is
Page 265 and 266:
6. Avent, R.R. 1985. Factors affect
Page 267 and 268:
Integrated Remedial Protection of W
Page 269 and 270:
Figure l-Effect of fumigant applica
Page 271 and 272:
Table 1- Residual MITC content in D
Page 273 and 274:
of reinvasion (Forsyth and Morrell,
Page 275 and 276:
might represent the best option, wh
Page 277 and 278:
In: Ritter, M.A.; Duwadi, S.R.; Lee
Page 279 and 280:
Present and Potential Commercial Ti
Page 281 and 282:
2 U.S. DEPT. OF AGRICULTURE HANDBOO
Page 283 and 284:
Page 285 and 286:
Page 287 and 288:
Page 289 and 290:
10 U.S. DEPT. OF AGRICULTURE HANDBO
Page 291 and 292:
Page 293 and 294:
Page 295 and 296:
Page 297 and 298:
Page 299 and 300:
Page 301 and 302:
Page 303 and 304:
Page 305 and 306:
APPENDIX F FRP Pile Jackets
Page 307 and 308:
about its hazard to human health. T
Page 309 and 310:
Fig. 5. Cross section of wood pile
Page 311 and 312:
(Lopez-Anido et al. 2004c). For exa
Page 313 and 314:
Table 1. Cost Items for FRP Composi
Page 315 and 316:
Hardcore Composites. (2000). Hardsh
Page 317 and 318:
CALCULATION COVER SHEET Project Nam
Page 319 and 320:
URS Corp. 260 Franklin Street Bosto
Page 321 and 322:
Page 323 and 324:
Page 325 and 326:
Page 327 and 328:
Page 329 and 330:
Page 336:
APPENDIX I Correspondence
show all

BRIDGE REPAIR/REHABILITATION FEASIBILITY STUDY

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?