6 ms·

1 in every 13 bridges in America is in 'poor' condition

29 points by LinuxBender 3y ago

szundi 3y ago
It should be like 1 in 50 probably according to my gut feeling of bridges should stand 50 years before refurbished.
zitterbewegung 3y ago
There is no bridge design that can be practically created and stop a multi ton shipping vessel. If you want to design something that can't then the solution would be to create a underground tunnel instead and this is much more expensive such as the channel tunnel https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Channel_Tunnel#:~:text=The%20Channel%20Tunnel%20(French%3A%20Tunnel,at%20the%20Strait%20of%20Dover https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Channel_Tunnel#:~:text=The%20C....
- barney54 3y ago
  There are already two tunnels underneath Baltimore Harbor. When they built the Key Bridge, they didn’t have the money to build another tunnel.
- willcipriano 3y ago
  Yeah the condition is irrelevant there, bad photo/timing for this article. Just trying to drum up fear.
  - II2II 3y ago
    I would describe that article as more of a call-to-action than drumming up fear. The article is quite clear that the problem in this particular case was due to design. On top of that, there was no suggestion that it was a faulty design. Rather, it's design does not reflect the realities of today. I am not suggesting the article is perfect. There are lingering questions about which types of bridges fit in that 7.5%. Not all bridges have to deal with shipping traffic, heavier vehicles, or even more traffic. There are also questions as to why such large ships were permitted to pass under the bridge if it did not fit the design parameters of the bridge. But that is more indicative of an incomplete analysis rather than of fear mongering.
    - willcipriano 3y ago
      That bridge brand new, same result. People see the headline and the image and walk away misinformed. These ships have the mass of a skyscraper. Building a bridge you can throw a apartment building at doesn't make sense even if it was possible. If we can't find crews who can manage this, we may need to pay them more and have higher standards for them. This is a ship problem not a bridge problem.
- sdwr 3y ago
  Situations like this might be the best time to make meaningful change. The "outcome to avoid" is front and center in everyone's mind, but no decision makers were at fault. If this was a bridge collapse that could have been prevented with proper maintenance, there would be a lot more panic-induced buck passing. EDIT: nevermind the article is terrible
- llm_trw 3y ago
  The above post is somewhere between flat out wrong and malicious misinformation. One can easily reinforce the pries of the bridge to ensure that any ship is deflected. The Francis Scott Key Bridge didn't implement these because it was deemed too expensive.
  - Tuna-Fish 3y ago
    You have a funny definition of easily. The impact force has been estimated as between 120MN and 230MN. I doubt there exist many bridges that can take that hit. The kind of ship impact protection that bridges usually have are not built to take a 150000t ship at 8kn.
    - tzs 3y ago
      Bridges can be designed to handle that kind of collision. This article discusses some of the ways it can be done [1]. [1] https://www.cbsnews.com/news/how-to-protect-bridges-from-ships-baltimore-key-bridge-collapse/ https://www.cbsnews.com/news/how-to-protect-bridges-from-shi...
      - zitterbewegung 3y ago
        From the article : Theoretically, you could build a structure that would never fail, but you'd have to put infinite money into it. For a critical bridge of this type, we would consider an acceptable chance for failure to be 1 in 10,000 years. And at that point why not do a cost benefit analysis of a tunnel?
- confoundcofound 3y ago
  I’m neither an engineer nor an architect, so this may come off as incredibly naive, but why wouldn’t layers of reinforcement — eg a retaining wall or guardrail — some distance out and around the main pillars help mitigate this kind of risk?
  - pandaman 3y ago
    It would. Places, where rivers freeze, manage to build bridges that do not get crushed by the moving ice using this technology.
    - Tuna-Fish 3y ago
      The amount of force involved is much greater than involved with moving ice.
barney54 3y ago
I wish there was a good way to evaluate this claim. It comes from the American Society of Civil Engineers. I have nothing against them, but they are self-interested in this being a large number. The Key Bridge was structurally fine, but needed better protection so today’s ships couldn’t hit the bridge.
- throwaway5752 3y ago
  Just reading the article, the Key bridge was graded in Fair condition. There is no claim the bridge condition contributed to it collapsing when hit by a large cargo vessel. The ASCE report referenced (and linked to) in the article is 3 years old https://infrastructurereportcard.org/cat-item/bridges-infrastructure/ https://infrastructurereportcard.org/cat-item/bridges-infras... (2021 Report Card for America's Infrastructure). Their data comes from the US Department of Transportation. So there is no self-interest here, really.
- Retric 3y ago
  Poor doesn't mean there's a significant risk of collapse, but replacements can take years and the bridge is approaching its end of life without corrective action. Even bridges in critical condition can be used safely with proper monitoring, just not for very long. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Bridge_Inventory https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Bridge_Inventory POOR CONDITION - advanced section loss, deterioration, spalling or scour. 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 the bridge is closely monitored, it may be necessary to close the bridge until corrective action is taken. "IMMINENT" FAILURE CONDITION - major deterioration or section loss present in critical structural components or obvious vertical or horizontal movement affecting structure stability. Bridge is closed to traffic but corrective action may put back in light service.
- llm_trw 3y ago
  You must be a software engineer to not understand that other engineering professions are actually professional. Which means that they have actual ethical standards which they must adhere to or have their credentials revoked.
karaterobot 3y ago
I found the report card from the structural engineers much more interesting than the article itself, but I'm glad the article was posted because I wouldn't have know about it otherwise. https://infrastructurereportcard.org/cat-item/bridges-infrastructure/ https://infrastructurereportcard.org/cat-item/bridges-infras... If I have a thought about this, it's that so much depends on what it means to be labeled "poor". My first assumption is that that means "about to fall down", but that's not necessarily the case. The report also has this paragraph: > Encouragingly, as of 2019, just one in 13, or 7.5%2 of highway bridges were designated structurally deficient, or poor, representing a significant improvement from 12.1% recorded a decade ago. Also encouraging is that the total percentage of bridge deck area that is classified as structurally deficient, or poor, has decreased over the past several years, totaling just 5.5% in 2019, compared to 6.3% in 2016. ... which is much less troubling than the headline. My takeaway is that things have actually improved quite rapidly, given the type of work and the speed of government. As one might cynically presuppose from an organization of professional engineers releasing a report card on bridges, the recommendation turns out to be "we sure do need to spend a lot more money on bridge engineering". That doesn't mean it's not the case, I'm sure it is, but I wonder what it would take for them to release a report concluding that everything is great, and you could actually give us less money if it would help balance the ol' checkbook.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
Ajay-p 3y ago
When the American congress was debating their infrastructure legislation, a reason was that bridges and dams needed a lot of investment and improvements. That legislation became law, but how long until the money flows to the improvement projects?
ck2 3y ago
The USA no longer does anything without a series of catastrophes in a row. aka crisis-driven Because politicians there is no reward for wanting to invest and preempt failures, whether it is bridges or healthcare or pandemics. Now if it was preparing for a future imaginary war, spend the entire GNP and then some with half the public's blessing. So politicians maybe need to sell everything as a war and have the military do it.

29 points by LinuxBender 3y ago

It should be like 1 in 50 probably according to my gut feeling of bridges should stand 50 years before refurbished.

There is no bridge design that can be practically created and stop a multi ton shipping vessel. If you want to design something that can't then the solution would be to create a underground tunnel instead and this is much more expensive such as the channel tunnel https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Channel_Tunnel#:~:text=The%20Channel%20Tunnel%20(French%3A%20Tunnel,at%20the%20Strait%20of%20Dover https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Channel_Tunnel#:~:text=The%20C....

barney54 3y ago
There are already two tunnels underneath Baltimore Harbor. When they built the Key Bridge, they didn’t have the money to build another tunnel.
willcipriano 3y ago
Yeah the condition is irrelevant there, bad photo/timing for this article. Just trying to drum up fear.
- II2II 3y ago
  I would describe that article as more of a call-to-action than drumming up fear. The article is quite clear that the problem in this particular case was due to design. On top of that, there was no suggestion that it was a faulty design. Rather, it's design does not reflect the realities of today. I am not suggesting the article is perfect. There are lingering questions about which types of bridges fit in that 7.5%. Not all bridges have to deal with shipping traffic, heavier vehicles, or even more traffic. There are also questions as to why such large ships were permitted to pass under the bridge if it did not fit the design parameters of the bridge. But that is more indicative of an incomplete analysis rather than of fear mongering.
  - willcipriano 3y ago
    That bridge brand new, same result. People see the headline and the image and walk away misinformed. These ships have the mass of a skyscraper. Building a bridge you can throw a apartment building at doesn't make sense even if it was possible. If we can't find crews who can manage this, we may need to pay them more and have higher standards for them. This is a ship problem not a bridge problem.
sdwr 3y ago
Situations like this might be the best time to make meaningful change. The "outcome to avoid" is front and center in everyone's mind, but no decision makers were at fault. If this was a bridge collapse that could have been prevented with proper maintenance, there would be a lot more panic-induced buck passing. EDIT: nevermind the article is terrible
llm_trw 3y ago
The above post is somewhere between flat out wrong and malicious misinformation. One can easily reinforce the pries of the bridge to ensure that any ship is deflected. The Francis Scott Key Bridge didn't implement these because it was deemed too expensive.
- Tuna-Fish 3y ago
  You have a funny definition of easily. The impact force has been estimated as between 120MN and 230MN. I doubt there exist many bridges that can take that hit. The kind of ship impact protection that bridges usually have are not built to take a 150000t ship at 8kn.
  - tzs 3y ago
    Bridges can be designed to handle that kind of collision. This article discusses some of the ways it can be done [1]. [1] https://www.cbsnews.com/news/how-to-protect-bridges-from-ships-baltimore-key-bridge-collapse/ https://www.cbsnews.com/news/how-to-protect-bridges-from-shi...
    - zitterbewegung 3y ago
      From the article : Theoretically, you could build a structure that would never fail, but you'd have to put infinite money into it. For a critical bridge of this type, we would consider an acceptable chance for failure to be 1 in 10,000 years. And at that point why not do a cost benefit analysis of a tunnel?
confoundcofound 3y ago
I’m neither an engineer nor an architect, so this may come off as incredibly naive, but why wouldn’t layers of reinforcement — eg a retaining wall or guardrail — some distance out and around the main pillars help mitigate this kind of risk?
- pandaman 3y ago
  It would. Places, where rivers freeze, manage to build bridges that do not get crushed by the moving ice using this technology.
  - Tuna-Fish 3y ago
    The amount of force involved is much greater than involved with moving ice.

barney54 3y ago

I wish there was a good way to evaluate this claim. It comes from the American Society of Civil Engineers. I have nothing against them, but they are self-interested in this being a large number. The Key Bridge was structurally fine, but needed better protection so today’s ships couldn’t hit the bridge.

throwaway5752 3y ago
Just reading the article, the Key bridge was graded in Fair condition. There is no claim the bridge condition contributed to it collapsing when hit by a large cargo vessel. The ASCE report referenced (and linked to) in the article is 3 years old https://infrastructurereportcard.org/cat-item/bridges-infrastructure/ https://infrastructurereportcard.org/cat-item/bridges-infras... (2021 Report Card for America's Infrastructure). Their data comes from the US Department of Transportation. So there is no self-interest here, really.
Retric 3y ago
Poor doesn't mean there's a significant risk of collapse, but replacements can take years and the bridge is approaching its end of life without corrective action. Even bridges in critical condition can be used safely with proper monitoring, just not for very long. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Bridge_Inventory https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Bridge_Inventory POOR CONDITION - advanced section loss, deterioration, spalling or scour. 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 the bridge is closely monitored, it may be necessary to close the bridge until corrective action is taken. "IMMINENT" FAILURE CONDITION - major deterioration or section loss present in critical structural components or obvious vertical or horizontal movement affecting structure stability. Bridge is closed to traffic but corrective action may put back in light service.
llm_trw 3y ago
You must be a software engineer to not understand that other engineering professions are actually professional. Which means that they have actual ethical standards which they must adhere to or have their credentials revoked.

karaterobot 3y ago

I found the report card from the structural engineers much more interesting than the article itself, but I'm glad the article was posted because I wouldn't have know about it otherwise. https://infrastructurereportcard.org/cat-item/bridges-infrastructure/ https://infrastructurereportcard.org/cat-item/bridges-infras... If I have a thought about this, it's that so much depends on what it means to be labeled "poor". My first assumption is that that means "about to fall down", but that's not necessarily the case. The report also has this paragraph: > Encouragingly, as of 2019, just one in 13, or 7.5%2 of highway bridges were designated structurally deficient, or poor, representing a significant improvement from 12.1% recorded a decade ago. Also encouraging is that the total percentage of bridge deck area that is classified as structurally deficient, or poor, has decreased over the past several years, totaling just 5.5% in 2019, compared to 6.3% in 2016. ... which is much less troubling than the headline. My takeaway is that things have actually improved quite rapidly, given the type of work and the speed of government. As one might cynically presuppose from an organization of professional engineers releasing a report card on bridges, the recommendation turns out to be "we sure do need to spend a lot more money on bridge engineering". That doesn't mean it's not the case, I'm sure it is, but I wonder what it would take for them to release a report concluding that everything is great, and you could actually give us less money if it would help balance the ol' checkbook.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

Ajay-p 3y ago

When the American congress was debating their infrastructure legislation, a reason was that bridges and dams needed a lot of investment and improvements. That legislation became law, but how long until the money flows to the improvement projects?

ck2 3y ago

The USA no longer does anything without a series of catastrophes in a row. aka crisis-driven Because politicians there is no reward for wanting to invest and preempt failures, whether it is bridges or healthcare or pandemics. Now if it was preparing for a future imaginary war, spend the entire GNP and then some with half the public's blessing. So politicians maybe need to sell everything as a war and have the military do it.