Armed Polite Society

Main Forums => The Roundtable => Topic started by: never_retreat on January 21, 2017, 08:55:19 PM

Title: For the structural engineer types.
Post by: never_retreat on January 21, 2017, 08:55:19 PM
How does this happen?
http://nj1015.com/nj-turnpike-connector-bridge-now-closed-indefinitely-because-of-broken-beam/#photogallery-1=4 (http://nj1015.com/nj-turnpike-connector-bridge-now-closed-indefinitely-because-of-broken-beam/#photogallery-1=4)

(https://armedpolitesociety.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwac.450f.edgecastcdn.net%2F80450F%2Fnj1015.com%2Ffiles%2F2017%2F01%2Ffracture.jpg%3Fw%3D630%26amp%3Bh%3D420%26amp%3Bzc%3D1%26amp%3Bcc%3D000000%26amp%3Ba%3Dt&hash=6871549723b6456219cc4147710cb7658014b5a8)
Title: Re: For the structural engineer types.
Post by: just Warren on January 21, 2017, 09:20:02 PM
It done busted.
Title: Re: For the structural engineer types.
Post by: bedlamite on January 21, 2017, 09:35:32 PM
Tough to tell from just a pic, but it's probably fatigue from carrying way more traffic than it was built for 50 years ago.
Title: Re: For the structural engineer types.
Post by: Brad Johnson on January 21, 2017, 09:41:24 PM
Microscopic crack, salt-laden air, 1950's metallurgical technology, and half a century of vibration and thermal cycling.

Brad
Title: Re: For the structural engineer types.
Post by: MechAg94 on January 21, 2017, 10:11:02 PM
Microscopic crack, salt-laden air, 1950's metallurgical technology, and half a century of vibration and thermal cycling.

Brad
A flaw or some sort of corrosion is the only thing I can think of.  Otherwise, I would have expected it to fail closer to all those bolts. 

Nice paint job.  Is that recent?
Title: Re: For the structural engineer types.
Post by: Hawkmoon on January 21, 2017, 10:11:59 PM
That's not a shear crack. A shear crack wouldn't be perfectly vertical. Given that it's near an end, and the end was plated to add resistance to shear but the failure is just beyond the reinforced zone, I sort of suspect (without enough information to go on) that it might be the result of excessive longitudinal movement at the ends. (In other words, it just pulled apart.)

The article says it's part of a truss. In a truss, there's very little bending stress because all loads are redirected to be axial to the truss members. The top chord (which the broken member appears to be) does take some bending, but a fracture due to bending wouldn't be that vertical. I think it was caused by either the bridge supports shifting, or else the design was faulty from Day One. They need to do a lot more than just fire up the welder and stick the two pieces back together.
Title: Re: For the structural engineer types.
Post by: zahc on January 22, 2017, 08:20:07 AM
60 years? How long do we expect bridges to last?
Title: Re: For the structural engineer types.
Post by: lupinus on January 22, 2017, 08:25:53 AM
Just put a few wraps of duct tape, it'll be fine
Title: Re: For the structural engineer types.
Post by: Tuco on January 22, 2017, 09:35:47 AM
60 years? How long do we expect bridges to last?
Fifty years.
Title: Re: For the structural engineer types.
Post by: dogmush on January 22, 2017, 09:48:23 AM
When was the last time the NJ Gov crossed that bridge?
Title: Re: For the structural engineer types.
Post by: RoadKingLarry on January 22, 2017, 12:33:20 PM
60 years? How long do we expect bridges to last?
k

Let's ask the Romans.
Title: Re: For the structural engineer types.
Post by: charby on January 22, 2017, 02:10:22 PM
Tough to tell from just a pic, but it's probably fatigue from carrying way more traffic than it was built for 50 years ago.

I agree, weakest point decided to quit.
Title: Re: For the structural engineer types.
Post by: never_retreat on January 22, 2017, 08:41:30 PM
A flaw or some sort of corrosion is the only thing I can think of.  Otherwise, I would have expected it to fail closer to all those bolts. 

Nice paint job.  Is that recent?
Somewhere I read the painters found the crack.
That paint looks new, but the break area is not painted. So who knows.

NJ usually does not maintain bridges, they wait for them to fall apart the way someone can get there pockets lined on a over priced contractor to replace it.
Title: Re: For the structural engineer types.
Post by: 230RN on January 22, 2017, 09:21:50 PM
Judging by the aerial pic in the article's slide show it kind of looks like they should have put another expansion joint right about there.

There's what looks like a bigger expansion joint right where the bridge starts to cross the river.

Looks like a tension break in hardened steel.  No "draw down" in dimensions right around the fracture.  Just a "pop" where it let go.

It's hard to tell in the dark photo from underneath, but it looks like two of the members broke.

I'll bet it was a pretty cold night when it happened, but no way to know for sure.

Title: Re: For the structural engineer types.
Post by: never_retreat on January 22, 2017, 10:25:31 PM
Judging by the aerial pic in the article's slide show it kind of looks like they should have put another expansion joint right about there.

There's what looks like a bigger expansion joint right where the bridge starts to cross the river.

Looks like a tension break in hardened steel.  No "draw down" in dimensions right around the fracture.  Just a "pop" where it let go.

It's hard to tell in the dark photo from underneath, but it looks like two of the members broke.

I'll bet it was a pretty cold night when it happened, but no way to know for sure.


Yep 2 broke.
(https://armedpolitesociety.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwac.450f.edgecastcdn.net%2F80450F%2Fnj1015.com%2Ffiles%2F2017%2F01%2FIMG_0540.jpg%3Fw%3D630%26amp%3Bh%3D420%26amp%3Bzc%3D2%26amp%3Bcc%3D000000%26amp%3Ba%3Dt&hash=d80bfb07b564fad2f9c01c6fc0ee79edb7082051)
Title: Re: For the structural engineer types.
Post by: RoadKingLarry on January 22, 2017, 10:39:21 PM
Duct tape.
Title: Re: For the structural engineer types.
Post by: Hawkmoon on January 22, 2017, 11:46:11 PM
Duct tape.


Detcord
Title: Re: For the structural engineer types.
Post by: dogmush on January 23, 2017, 12:10:49 AM
Yep 2 broke.
(https://armedpolitesociety.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwac.450f.edgecastcdn.net%2F80450F%2Fnj1015.com%2Ffiles%2F2017%2F01%2FIMG_0540.jpg%3Fw%3D630%26amp%3Bh%3D420%26amp%3Bzc%3D2%26amp%3Bcc%3D000000%26amp%3Ba%3Dt&hash=d80bfb07b564fad2f9c01c6fc0ee79edb7082051)

Pretty sure that's a single "I" beam.
Title: Re: For the structural engineer types.
Post by: never_retreat on January 23, 2017, 12:29:43 AM
Pretty sure that's a single "I" beam.
Its 2 pieces of flat stock.
Title: Re: For the structural engineer types.
Post by: dogmush on January 23, 2017, 01:50:39 AM
Its 2 pieces of flat stock.

You sure?  In addition to it being labeled an "I" beam in that article, I can pretty clearly see the web in the picture I quoted.  The web is oriented horizontally.

It would be pretty strange to build a bridge truss out of flat stock.
Title: Re: For the structural engineer types.
Post by: Hawkmoon on January 23, 2017, 02:17:45 AM
You sure?  In addition to it being labeled an "I" beam in that article, I can pretty clearly see the web in the picture I quoted.  The web is oriented horizontally.

It would be pretty strange to build a bridge truss out of flat stock.

The article doesn't say what it is, it refers to the "steel member." The headline for the article refers to it as a "beam," but it doesn't say what kind of beam, and the article wasn't written by a structural engineer nor was the headline. I looked at the photos again, and I don'y see any web section there. If you can see one, you have better eyes than I do. That said, if it is a beam rather than a pair of parallel flat sections (which would make sense), it isn't an I-beam. From the close up of the fracture from the outside you can see that the fractured plate has squared corners and parallel faces, so it definitely isn't an I-beam. It might be a wide-flange, or H-beam, but definitely not an I-beam.
Title: Re: For the structural engineer types.
Post by: K Frame on January 23, 2017, 06:33:32 AM
Pretty sure that's a single "I" beam.

No, it appears to be two pieces of flat stock.

Not every steel beam used in construction is an I beam.

Take a look at the original picture in the first post.

You don't laminate I beams like that.

I can't be sure, but I don't think it's an H beam, either. Might be, but the pictures aren't clear enough.
Title: Re: For the structural engineer types.
Post by: dogmush on January 23, 2017, 07:03:18 AM
Clearly someone from APS needs to go to Jersey and settle this.  =D

So I'm bored today, and had some time to Google.  I'm saying again that's not flat stock.  it my bean H-beam (I confess, I had forgotten the differences between H and I) but there is definitely a web there.

I present my evidence for my last try: 

1. Linked article labels it an "I beam".  Not the most compelling I know, what with journalistic standards being what they are, but hey, they might be right.
(https://armedpolitesociety.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi11.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fa199%2Fdogmush%2Fnj%2520bridge%2520overhead_zpseuknafqj.jpg&hash=ea63724ce5c6074c2ac0c9524bf4fa121cef854b) (http://s11.photobucket.com/user/dogmush/media/nj%20bridge%20overhead_zpseuknafqj.jpg.html)

2. Look at the diagonal beam coming up to the lamination.  On the outside you can clearly see four rows of bolts with a gap in the center.  This pattern is copied on the horizontal beam.  Now look at the inside of the diagonal truss.  You can only see the heads of two rows of bolts.  That's because the other two rows are on the other side of the web, and hidden from view.  The beam's web lies in that gap between the rows of bolts.
(https://armedpolitesociety.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi11.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fa199%2Fdogmush%2Fnj%2520bridge%2520wide_zpsii8jnraa.jpg&hash=137816bcf7f82970f5ffa4f523768317175abb29) (http://s11.photobucket.com/user/dogmush/media/nj%20bridge%20wide_zpsii8jnraa.jpg.html)

3. I took a screen shot of the pic quoted above and yelled "Enhance" at my computer in an attempt to correct for curmudgeon eyes.  Compare the depth of the beam on the inside of the bridge (full depth) vs the depth on the outside.  You can (i can anyway) pretty clearly see that there is a horzontal chunk of metal about half way up.  Also you can just pick out the rows of bolts again.  The "outside" face has 4 rows, and the inside only has two, because the top two rows are hidden by the web.
(https://armedpolitesociety.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi11.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fa199%2Fdogmush%2Fnj%2520bridge%2520i-beam_zps711htgnq.jpg&hash=83317bdcf1872392c2cd8e15af09b74fbe5d4213) (http://s11.photobucket.com/user/dogmush/media/nj%20bridge%20i-beam_zps711htgnq.jpg.html)

We can know return to our regularly scheduled kvetching about cornbread and plotting things to wrap with bacon.
Title: Re: For the structural engineer types.
Post by: lupinus on January 23, 2017, 07:37:17 AM
Rub some dirt on it, it'll be fine
Title: Re: For the structural engineer types.
Post by: K Frame on January 23, 2017, 07:54:04 AM
OK, your enhanced picture does show what appears to be an H beam.

That said, it's not uncommon for the top chord of the truss to be multi-part flat stock connected by supports for bearing members for the deck above.
Title: Re: For the structural engineer types.
Post by: HankB on January 23, 2017, 10:38:20 AM
Given the gap, it looks like the two sides were pulled apart, suggesting they were under tension. (Unless some sort of deformation took place after the break to create the gap?)
Title: Re: For the structural engineer types.
Post by: KD5NRH on January 23, 2017, 11:00:43 AM
They need to do a lot more than just fire up the welder and stick the two pieces back together.

Meh; it's New Jersey.  A couple dozen tubes of JB Steelstik putty to fill the gap and call it good enough for another 50 years.
Title: Re: For the structural engineer types.
Post by: bedlamite on January 23, 2017, 11:15:14 AM
Rub some dirt bacon on it, it'll be fine

FTFY.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wSReSGe200A
Title: Re: For the structural engineer types.
Post by: Hawkmoon on January 23, 2017, 11:56:39 AM
OK, your enhanced picture does show what appears to be an H beam.

That said, it's not uncommon for the top chord of the truss to be multi-part flat stock connected by supports for bearing members for the deck above.

I'm convinced -- I'll accept that it's probably a wide-flange. But Mike, in fact it would be VERY uncommon for a heavy truss like this to be made up of flat stock. I say that as a licensed architect who had graduate-level courses in structural design and who works for an engineering firm that designs and inspects ... bridges.
Title: Re: For the structural engineer types.
Post by: Brad Johnson on January 23, 2017, 11:58:50 AM
Quote
I'm convinced -- I'll accept that it's probably a wide-flange. But Mike, in fact it would be VERY uncommon for a heavy truss like this to be made up of flat stock. I say that as a licensed architect who had graduate-level courses in structural design and who works for an engineering firm that designs and inspects ... bridges.

... and now we know who to blame.  =D

Brad
Title: Re: For the structural engineer types.
Post by: K Frame on January 23, 2017, 12:13:52 PM
I'm convinced -- I'll accept that it's probably a wide-flange. But Mike, in fact it would be VERY uncommon for a heavy truss like this to be made up of flat stock. I say that as a licensed architect who had graduate-level courses in structural design and who works for an engineering firm that designs and inspects ... bridges.

I didn't realize that this was on the approachways to the bridge proper, and is thus significantly larger than what I've seen.

What I described was apparently an older style construction technique for short span bridges (think across a culvert or stream, not across a major river). I saw it in a number of 1930s-era bridges in Central Pennsylvania.

Saw them when I was doing structure photography for my Father, who was a civil engineer and was inspecting bridges.

That bridge in New Jersey is actually mild compared to some of the things I saw... Or in the case of badly degraded bridges, didn't see...  :O
Title: Re: For the structural engineer types.
Post by: KD5NRH on January 23, 2017, 12:17:51 PM
I'm convinced -- I'll accept that it's probably a wide-flange. But Mike, in fact it would be VERY uncommon for a heavy truss like this to be made up of flat stock. I say that as a licensed architect who had graduate-level courses in structural design and who works for an engineering firm that designs and inspects ... bridges.

Meh; engineers are pathetically inefficient.  Even the newest tech can take apart something designed by an engineer and put it back together with parts left over.  It was probably the weight of extra parts that broke the bridge.
Title: Re: For the structural engineer types.
Post by: Scout26 on January 23, 2017, 12:21:48 PM
... and now we know who to blame.  =D

Brad

Fistful !!!!
Title: Re: For the structural engineer types.
Post by: 230RN on January 23, 2017, 04:38:43 PM
Thanks for the enhanced photos.  I wondered why they might be using a flat plate, so that clears up that mystery.  Like others, I could see no webbing in that original underneath photo.  H-beam it is, possibly for side-to-side stresses from wind or whatever.  I still think it was the whole bridge shrinking in cold weather and they should have put an expansion (contraction) joint there.  Either that or land settling toward the river putting the thing under tension.  Or both.

Must have made a hell of a racket when it finally popped.
Title: Re: For the structural engineer types.
Post by: AmbulanceDriver on January 23, 2017, 08:20:01 PM
I was just thinking the same thing Terry.  Musta been one helluva loud bang when that thing snapped.
Title: Re: For the structural engineer types.
Post by: never_retreat on January 23, 2017, 09:04:12 PM
Ok I'll agree H beam. We have not had any stupid cold weather.
Maybe 2 weeks ago we hit 10.
Title: Re: For the structural engineer types.
Post by: Hawkmoon on January 23, 2017, 09:07:17 PM
... and now we know who to blame.  =D


We didn't do that bridge. And in 1956 I was still in grammar school.
Title: Re: For the structural engineer types.
Post by: Fly320s on January 24, 2017, 06:44:24 AM
We didn't do that bridge. And in 1956 I was still in grammar school.

Which is why the bridge broke.  Children shouldn't build bridges.
Title: Re: For the structural engineer types.
Post by: K Frame on January 24, 2017, 07:00:56 AM
We didn't do that bridge. And in 1956 I was still in grammar school.

See if you can get your tuition back.

Your grammar stinks.  :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
Title: Re: For the structural engineer types.
Post by: Hawkmoon on January 24, 2017, 12:32:40 PM
Your grammar stinks.  :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

Oh, yeah? Yer mudder wears combat boots!

(I never knew just what that was supposed to mean, but back in the 50s that was a HIGH insult.)
Title: Re: For the structural engineer types.
Post by: K Frame on January 24, 2017, 12:58:37 PM
Oh, yeah? Yer mudder wears combat boots!

(I never knew just what that was supposed to mean, but back in the 50s that was a HIGH insult.)

My guess is that, given that combat boots were VERY cheap on the surplus market, it's a double dig that she has no fashion sense and she's too poor to afford anything else (having missed out on the WWII kicked the Great Depression outa here thing).
Title: Re: For the structural engineer types.
Post by: makattak on January 24, 2017, 01:48:51 PM
Oh, yeah? Yer mudder wears combat boots!

(I never knew just what that was supposed to mean, but back in the 50s that was a HIGH insult.)

I have heard (and I checked to see that the origin is at least in dispute) that the... err... "comfort women" of the armies in WWI and WWII would follow the camps and trade "favors" for clothing, among other things.
Title: Re:
Post by: K Frame on January 24, 2017, 08:42:46 PM
Hum... interesting.

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk
Title: Re: For the structural engineer types.
Post by: MechAg94 on January 25, 2017, 09:56:31 AM
Given the gap, it looks like the two sides were pulled apart, suggesting they were under tension. (Unless some sort of deformation took place after the break to create the gap?)
So I am assuming elevated stress and likely a lot of day/night movement and load variations due to traffic meaning some combination of increased stress and fatigue? 

Most of the failures I have seen are almost all fatigue/corrosion, but most of our stuff either rotates or reciprocates. 
Title: Re: For the structural engineer types.
Post by: Tuco on January 25, 2017, 03:02:48 PM
Bridge collapse pron:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=CsKKDLKYsVU

Title: Re: For the structural engineer types.
Post by: Hawkmoon on January 25, 2017, 07:49:14 PM
Bridge collapse pron:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=CsKKDLKYsVU


I've seen that one many times. However, the reporter is in error -- the Whitestone Bridge in NY was not a twin.

Trivia question: What band did they get to serenade the death throes of the bridge? I'm sure the accompanying music made the collapse much more drmatic.
Title: Re: For the structural engineer types.
Post by: 230RN on January 25, 2017, 08:29:00 PM
So I am assuming elevated stress and likely a lot of day/night movement and load variations due to traffic meaning some combination of increased stress and fatigue?  

Most of the failures I have seen are almost all fatigue/corrosion, but most of our stuff either rotates or reciprocates.  

Well, in this case, part of the bridge reciped one way and the other part rocated the other way.