OT: I-35W bridge collapse in Minneapolis

[Anonymous]

http://www.nytimes.com/slideshow/2007/08/02/us/20070802BRIDGE_index.html

http://www.nytimes.com/slideshow/2007/08/02/us/20070802_BRIDGEB_index.html

http://www.visi.com/~jweeks/bridges/pages/ms16.html

http://media.startribune.com/smedia/2007/08/01/21/bridges200110.source.prod_affiliate.2.pdf

 

Dave

[Semper Vaporo]

Link please. 

Yes, I'm a subscriber but am unfamiliar with this newswire and do not find it referenced on the front page.  Tnx.

Ain't it the pits what we have to go through just to read what they earned money for us to read????

On the TRAINS.COM website, in the center column is a link about "Where to find the Trains News Wire".

It is an explanation of WHY you can't find it, but really does NOT tell you HOW to find it.  There are some images that are too small to be intellegable that do show the link you can use to find the newswire, but unless you KNOW already where to find it, you won't recognize it.

Fortunately, on that page, at the top is a slightly different banner/header that contains a link to the "news wire". 

Unfortunately, that link took me to a fairly non-functional page that has a search function where all you can do is select one or more checkboxes and click a SEARCH button.  I had no idea which category to select, so I picked "General" and the result of the search WAS that there are no articles that matched my search.

At the top of the Search page there is a link to the bridge collapse and clicking on it shows you an early article about the collapse, but there WAS no photo on that page. 

Now that I have gone back to verify my sad tale, the SEARCH seems to be functional and there is a photo on the article page.... but I cannot find the original article I read.

Sorry if I don't include a direct link to the article here... my humblest apologies... but since it is a subscriber only area, I am not sure what would happen for a non-subscriber that happened to click on a link I supply.

It only took me about 10 minutes of clicking on links to get to the article, since I didn't read EVERYTHING on EVERY page, I missed the simple links to the area I wanted.

Hopefully my words here will spare you the inane random clicking.

Oh yeah, the photo in the article is small (as is the article), but if you click on it, a new window will open giving you a much enlarged view.  (Clicking the article will not give you an "expanded view", if you get my drift.)

[wctransfer]

I live in the Twin Cities, and went down there today to see for my own eyes. The camera's really dont do justice. Ive had two or three people who would have taken that bridge yesterday, but decided not too. A friend of mines dad left work early because he didnt have a good feeling about something, and my mom decided not to take the bridge (at around 10 minutes before it happened) because of the construction and rush hour.

Yes, the line is Minnesota Commercial, and the train was not moving. At the other end, most cars had bad order tags on them.

Alec

[steinjr]

Link please. 

Yes, I'm a subscriber but am unfamiliar with this newswire and do not find it referenced on the front page.  Tnx.

Ain't it the pits what we have to go through just to read what they earned money for us to read????

On the TRAINS.COM website, in the center column is a link about "Where to find the Trains News Wire".

 Or you can do it the simple way instead of taking the scenic route.

  At the bottom of every page on this website there are some blue ribbons with links. Look at the row that says "Magazines". Click on "Trains".

 The Trains Magazine News Wire is on the middle of the page that comes up.

 Stein

 

[Anonymous]

Thank You, SV.  I totally missed it amongst the subtle blast of RED on the front page which I guess is meant to get attention. Maybe I should have tried it with the polaroids before commenting.

 

And I do agree with your comments.

[Anonymous]

Thank You, Stein. I have been through your fair town on the way from Oslo to Stockholm, if that is the route it takes.

[Kevin C. Smith]

This incident, occuring so close to the Stone Arch (Jim Hill) bridge, brought back thought of a column in the Chicago Tribune many years back. They had a columnist who must've been a fan (the name escapes me...Graham something?)-he often wrote of trains & railroads; a little too often and too accurately to have been a "civilian". One of the columns I clipped and saved for many years was about the Stone Arch bridge and how all the things we build today are built to be good for 20 years and we think that's good enough, but that someone built something to last for the ages and it still was doing just that. Kind of a generic lament that "we don't build 'em like that anymore" but a good one. I wonder if the I-35 bridge was one of the "good enough" structures he had in mind when he was there?

[Icemanmike]

A few winters ago we had a part of the Hoan bridge "sag" or
realisticly a beam cracked and almost gave way durring morning rush
hour. People called the police when they noticed a "dip" in the road.
That section of the bridge was imploded (cool to see first hand) and
re-built. I never even questioned that bridge before hand I worry more
anout the little "lift" bridges that cross the Milwaukee river
downtown. My 16,000lb truck empty Im ok........when theres 9 skids
loaded and then I have to cross a bridge I have watched them woking on
for the last few years.....scare the crap out of me EACH DAY!

This is a sad day in transportation and enginering history. I only pray that we learn from our mistakes.

My thoughts and prayers go to those who have to burden this event. 

[tree68]

This incident, occuring so close to the Stone Arch (Jim Hill) bridge, brought back thought of a column in the Chicago Tribune many years back. They had a columnist who must've been a fan (the name escapes me...Graham something?)-he often wrote of trains & railroads; a little too often and too accurately to have been a "civilian". One of the columns I clipped and saved for many years was about the Stone Arch bridge and how all the things we build today are built to be good for 20 years and we think that's good enough, but that someone built something to last for the ages and it still was doing just that. Kind of a generic lament that "we don't build 'em like that anymore" but a good one. I wonder if the I-35 bridge was one of the "good enough" structures he had in mind when he was there?

True enough.  I just did a 'pilgrimage' to Starrucca Viaduct.  Built  in 1853 and still in use...

[daveklepper]

An engineer friend, wishes to be anonymouse, suggested that the pile drive set up oscillations in the bridge structure, which were at the rsonant frequency of many of the car-weight plus rubber tire sprint vehicles on the bridge, and the cars began oscillation with the magnetude increasing. 

[Anonymous]

Unless this collapse turns out to be an act of God, the cause will be negligence.  The I35W bridge was rated structurally deficient; and it did fall down.  However it is not true that all bridges rated structurally deficient have achieved that status through negligence and are in danger of collapse. Yet that was the blatantly dishonest theme of the "Aging Infrastructure" pieces last night on ABC, CBS, and NBC.  That was complete and utter political propaganda put forth by those who want to expand the role of government and their willing accomplices in the media.  They even broke down the price tag so we would know how much it would cost us individually.

In order to drive home their lie that structurally deficient bridges are dangerous, they presented an old concrete bridge with holes through the deck and rebar hanging out of crumbling concrete.  The bridge was closed, blocked, and obviously out of service.  But all that mattered was that it was in the group of bridges rated structurally deficient, and it could therefore serve as an example to reinforce the bald face lie that all bridges rated structurally deficient are dangerous.   

[SALfan]

I heard on CNN about an hour ago that an average of one bridge collapses each week in the US. I  wasn't aware of this. I thought these structures are made to last forever. How come the Romans could make stuff last and we can't?

Because if we built things the way the Romans did, with today's costs, the bridges would be so expensive that there would be very few built.  Have you priced stone or stonemasons lately?

[StillGrande]

Bridges get the "structurally difficient" tag for all sorts of reasons, not safety reasons.  If a bridge looks like it is going to fall, they close it.  A 2 lane bridge with 3 lanes on either end is "structurally difficient" because it does not match up to the roads (the Bay Bridge in Maryland is a good example).  A bridge designed to carry 150,000 cars a day is difficient when it carries 160,000.  The news channels like to make it sound like they are all going to fall down tomorrow.

I just hope while people are cringing driving over the bridges and overpasses tonight that they hang up their phone and pay attention so they don't hit me or someone else. 

[Anonymous]

I live in the TC area, and yes, you can (could) see the GN Stone Arch Bridge from the overpass to the right as you travel south on the interstate.  I've travelled over that section of I-35W countless times.  I was surprised to hear the speculation about the Minnesota Commercial train moving slowly underneath possibly having something to do with the collapse.  I hardly think so - I'm no structural engineer but I have been down in that area before and I'd never believe the vibrations from a train moving at 8 MPH in that area could affect the highway bridge. 

[jclass]

Here are some photos.  Miraculous that so many people came out of this alive.  Thoughts and prayers to the families, friends, and others affected.

The media?

We got the bubble-headed-bleach-blonde who
Comes on at five
She can tell you bout the plane crash with a gleam
In her eye
Its interesting when people die-
Give us dirty laundry

-Eagles- 

http://www.conphoto.net/collapse.html

[jeaton]

Unless this collapse turns out to be an act of God, the cause will be negligence.  The I35W bridge was rated structurally deficient; and it did fall down.  However it is not true that all bridges rated structurally deficient have achieved that status through negligence and are in danger of collapse. Yet that was the blatantly dishonest theme of the "Aging Infrastructure" pieces last night on ABC, CBS, and NBC.  That was complete and utter political propaganda put forth by those who want to expand the role of government and their willing accomplices in the media.  They even broke down the price tag so we would know how much it would cost us individually.

In order to drive home their lie that structurally deficient bridges are dangerous, they presented an old concrete bridge with holes through the deck and rebar hanging out of crumbling concrete.  The bridge was closed, blocked, and obviously out of service.  But all that mattered was that it was in the group of bridges rated structurally deficient, and it could therefore serve as an example to reinforce the bald face lie that all bridges rated structurally deficient are dangerous.   

I'm confused here.  I know that a very few public highways, toll roads actually, and their bridges have been sold to private parties.  The Chicago Sky Way and the Indiana Toll Road come to mind.  However, hasn't it always been role of government to build and maintain highway bridges along with the rest of the public highway system?  Where on earth did you get the idea that there is some sort of conspiracy on the part of the media and the government to "expand" their roll?  How would that even be possible, given the fact that that is their roll.

"Negligence" means not paying attention.  In fact, the Minnesota Highway Department and the Federal Highway Administration have been paying attention to the I-35W Bridge and every other bridge in Minnesota.  The same is true in every other state.  The reason that bridges are deficient is a shortage of funds.  Unless you have another idea for getting the money to do the repairs or replacements, I am afraid it is going to come from taxes.

I agree with you that not every bridge that is considered deficient is dangerous, but the simple truth is that we are not keeping up with repairs, rebuilds or replacement of either our bridges or highways-let alone building more to meet growing demand.  One doesn't need to read government studies to get that.  Just go for a drive.  If we don't start to catch up, eventually deficient bridges will become dangerous.  I guess if we don't want to spend the money we could just close them down.  Yeaah!  That's the ticket!

[steinjr]

I was surprised to hear the speculation about the Minnesota Commercial train moving slowly underneath possibly having something to do with the collapse.  I hardly think so - I'm no structural engineer but I have been down in that area before and I'd never believe the vibrations from a train moving at 8 MPH in that area could affect the highway bridge. 

 There was no train moving under the bridge. The tracks under the bridge is a dead end - a very small single ended storage yard, where the Minnesota Commercial keeps a few old cars.

 Hadn't been an engine there for days before the accident, according to the Trains Magazine News Wire.

 Whatever it was that made the bridge fall, it was not a moving train passing under the bridge at the time of the collapse. 

  Stein

 

[railroadyoshi]

On the note of construction occurring along I-35W, an initial thought when this happened was whether the construction along the highway actually saved lives. I was in the Twin Cities about a month back when they were doing construction on segments north of the bridge. As a result, we generally followed the Cedar Ave detour. I wonder if people were actually saved because they were on Cedar Ave instead of I-35W. This assumes the decking work on the bridge was not involved in the collapse. Hopefully so.

And, again, still keeping the victims in my thoughts this evening.

[blhanel]

I think the fact that they had at least two lanes closed both ways probably saved alot of lives.  Less cars on the bridge, and the ones there were slowed to a crawl.  Can you imagine the horror of approaching that bridge at 55 MPH or more after it had dropped?

[Anonymous]

Unless this collapse turns out to be an act of God, the cause will be negligence.  The I35W bridge was rated structurally deficient; and it did fall down.  However it is not true that all bridges rated structurally deficient have achieved that status through negligence and are in danger of collapse. Yet that was the blatantly dishonest theme of the "Aging Infrastructure" pieces last night on ABC, CBS, and NBC.  That was complete and utter political propaganda put forth by those who want to expand the role of government and their willing accomplices in the media.  They even broke down the price tag so we would know how much it would cost us individually.

In order to drive home their lie that structurally deficient bridges are dangerous, they presented an old concrete bridge with holes through the deck and rebar hanging out of crumbling concrete.  The bridge was closed, blocked, and obviously out of service.  But all that mattered was that it was in the group of bridges rated structurally deficient, and it could therefore serve as an example to reinforce the bald face lie that all bridges rated structurally deficient are dangerous.   

I'm confused here.  I know that a very few public highways, toll roads actually, and their bridges have been sold to private parties.  The Chicago Sky Way and the Indiana Toll Road come to mind.  However, hasn't it always been role of government to build and maintain highway bridges along with the rest of the public highway system?  Where on earth did you get the idea that there is some sort of conspiracy on the part of the media and the government to "expand" their roll?  How would that even be possible, given the fact that that is their roll.

"Negligence" means not paying attention.  In fact, the Minnesota Highway Department and the Federal Highway Administration have been paying attention to the I-35W Bridge and every other bridge in Minnesota.  The same is true in every other state.  The reason that bridges are deficient is a shortage of funds.  Unless you have another idea for getting the money to do the repairs or replacements, I am afraid it is going to come from taxes.

I agree with you that not every bridge that is considered deficient is dangerous, but the simple truth is that we are not keeping up with repairs, rebuilds or replacement of either our bridges or highways-let alone building more to meet growing demand.  One doesn't need to read government studies to get that.  Just go for a drive.  If we don't start to catch up, eventually deficient bridges will become dangerous.  I guess if we don't want to spend the money we could just close them down.  Yeaah!  That's the ticket!

You are correct in that the government owns the bridges and must collect taxes to pay for them.  I am not opposed to that.  The government does have a roll as you say. However, I disagree that the government has no ability or motive to expand its roll beyond what it legitimately needs to be.  In fact I believe it is highly motivated to expand, and if there were no resistance by the electorate, the public sector would simply expand until there was no more private sector.  It is not a conspiracy.  It is not a secret plan that was hatched out in the dead of the night in a secret room.  It just naturally flows through the veins of the public sector.

I agree that there is a shortage of funds for bridges and roads, but what government function is not short of funds?  In my opinion, government is always short of funds because of its inherent motivation to expand its power, which it does by collecting taxes and spending money.  The primary objective is to spend money and come up with reasons to spend more.  So they over-spend.  And unlike the private sector, government spends without any financial risk, and without much accountability.  And when they collect taxes that are justified by a targeted application such as roads and bridges, they spend the money on a lot of unrelated things.  Then they come back to the taxpayers and tell them they are not paying enough to cover the target application.  I think it is a serious mistake to believe that government simply spends money as legitimately needed, like a responsible head of household seeking a return of value for the money spent. 

But back to the bridges.  It is true that bridges will fall down if not maintained, and that maintenance costs money.  It is also true that many bridges are rated structurally deficient due to a shortage of funds.  However it is not true that bridges fall down because of a lack of funds.  That would be impossible because we have a federal bridge inspection program that monitors the condition of all bridges in great enough detail to know how close they are to the point where they would fall down, and prescribes the most cost effective maintenance necessary to get the most life out of them.  If there are not enough funds to perform the maintenance, then the bridge needs to be closed.  If there are not enough funds to inspect the bridge, then the bridge needs to be closed.  These are not just my suggestions.  They are the rules of the game.

The job of the inspectors is to go over the bridge with a fine-tooth comb to the extent that they know exactly how strong the structure is.  There is no guesswork.  A component of this inspection is to monitor the traffic load and keep it within the safe limit.  So if a bridge falls down because of corrosion, broken members, stress cracks, missing bolts, etc., it has to be due to negligence of this inspection routine.  There is no option to compromise that inspection routine because of a lack of funds.  So a lack of funds cannot possibly be the cause of the I35W bridge collapse even though many Minnesota politicians and all Minnesota media are saying it is so. 

[Los Angeles Rams Guy]

In something of a twist of irony I was on my home back to Iowa Wednesday afternoon/evening after I got off work and took my normal route down the River from St. Paul down to Marquette to parallel the CP and ICE.  The last time I took that I35W bridge was probably this last winter (I crossed the River on I-94 and again at Hastings).  I was just south of Lansing when I just happened to tune into WMT (AM600) of Cedar Rapids and they were getting the feed from KFAN (AM1130) here in the Cities which I thought was strange - and then got the jist of what had happened.  As soon as I got to Harpers Ferry I pulled over and started making some rather frantic calls to some people I know.  Turns out some relatives of mine had been doing the same; trying to get a hold of me but were unable to because the circuits were jammed.  Just an eerie feeling when I found out.  Really sad.         

[blhanel]

Made it up to the Twin Cities this weekend- while the ladies held a bridal shower for my daughter, I, my father, and my future son-in-law made a trek downtown to check out progress on the clean-up.  Here's one of the shots I got- looks like those poor covered hoppers are finally about to be freed.

Pushing over a concrete support...

A couple of large sections left to remove yet...

 

[spokyone]

Thanks for the pics Brian(IA). What are the locals saying about the cause of the failure?

[blhanel]

I didn't really see or hear any speculation while I was up there, other than from my Dad (former MnDOT bridge inspector until he retired 20 years ago).  He doesn't talk much about it, but when asked by one of my siblings, he said he felt it was heat stress.

Perhaps some of the members here who live in the area have heard or read more about it?

[Modelcar]

....Brian:  Those are good photos.  Appears lots of demolition and clean up work all ready accomplished.   I wonder if it has been decided what type of bridge will replace the destroyed one.  And if the authorities are ready to start right in to construct the "new" one.  That is pretty harsh climate up there that we're going into now a few months hence.

In looking over the scene, I see the falling bridge was close to some of the river lock structures.  If it had broken some of that, that certainly would have added to the woes....Don't have any idea what kind of river traffic moves thru those locks that far north.

[blhanel]

Thanks, Quentin- yeah, things are progressing quickly on the clean-up, but the construction of a new bridge promises to be a different matter altogether.  There was alot of concern in the news that other state highway projects might have to be postponed in order to get this one done, because the federal money hasn't been officially approved yet (it's part of the latest bill that President Bush is threatening to veto).  Not only that, but bids have already been accepted and a contractor chosen, but the one chosen was one of the higher bids, and I guess the lower-bid contractors are considering suing over the deal...

That lock I believe is the last lock going north on the river, and as such doesn't get alot of use- it only handles one or two barges at a time by the looks of it.

[Modelcar]

....From all of that, it seems we'll be hearing more about that bridge situation.  Might even become a campaign issue if it delays the start of rebuild....And....also saps money from other projects.

I thought emergency money was going to be made available for that rebuild....

[EJE818]

Yikes, due to the bridge collapse in Minneapolis they started looking at all the bridges in Illinois, and so far Will County, which is where I am, has one of the highest amount of bridges that need repair in the state. Another thing is that the state of Illinois is looking to start closing bridges when they are under construction.

[Anonymous]

Yes the collapse was just the opening act of this fiasco.  Multiple investigations of the cause are underway.  I would be surprised if they all reached the same conclusion, considering the complexity of the collapse event.  My prediction is that the cause will be unsettled in the minds of a majority of observers indefinitely.  The cause of the collapse poses a potential threat to some of the organizations that are investigating it.  A sure refuge for them is to keep the investigation going a long, long time under the excuse of diligence.

And if there were not already enough controversy surrounding the probable government negligence that caused the collapse, a new heap has been added by the act of MNDOT awarding the rebuild contract to the highest bidder with the longest delivery time.  There are many elements to this latest chapter of the bid that are just beginning to emerge.  The news coverage of the winning bid has been very uneven and difficult to absorb.  More will be learned as soon as all the contestants assume their positions for this battle.   

[erikem]

From what I've read, there are likely three factors that lead to the collapse. My speculation is based on the UofM report done a few years ago and reading Henry Petroski's commentaries on previous structural collapses.

First was lack of redundancy (a Design failing). There were many structural elements whose failure could lead to failure of the whole structure - sound engineering practice is to never design a structure where failure of a single element could lead to total structural failure (possible exception - a large margin of safety in the design of that element). Note that the bridge was completed about the same time as the Silver bridge collapsed in Ohio - which became a textbook example of why you design structures with redundancy - and note that the I-35 bridge design was never repeated.

Second was inadequate inspection. My understanding was that inspection did not go beyond a visual look-over, no ultrasound or other NDE was performed.

Third was a lack of appreciation of how much the concrete deck aided the structural rigidity of the bridge. The UofM report discussed developing a model of the bridge that agreed with measurements of controlled truck traffic - the model was only close when the stiffening action of the concrete deck was taken into account.

As for comments about the relative impact (pun somewhat intended) of car versus truck traffic - consider that 80,000 pounds of cars will be generating a lot less impact than one 80,000 pound truck - a couple of reasons: the impact of the cars will be relatively incoherent while the impact of the truck will be coherent; the springs on cars are typically a lot softer than springs on a truck.