×
INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS

Log In

Come Join Us!

Are you an
Engineering professional?
Join Eng-Tips Forums!
  • Talk With Other Members
  • Be Notified Of Responses
    To Your Posts
  • Keyword Search
  • One-Click Access To Your
    Favorite Forums
  • Automated Signatures
    On Your Posts
  • Best Of All, It's Free!
  • Students Click Here

*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail.

Posting Guidelines

Promoting, selling, recruiting, coursework and thesis posting is forbidden.

Students Click Here

Jobs

New Highway 520 Pontoon Bridge

New Highway 520 Pontoon Bridge

New Highway 520 Pontoon Bridge

(OP)
I have been trying to follow the recent controversy here with the leaking concrete pontoons and I am in a quandry.

For those who are unfamiliar with the situation, this bridge, a concrete "floating" bridge, is the sixth in the state of Washington of its kind, two on Hood Canal, and the fourth for Lake Washington, considering additions and replacements.

The pontoons are being fabricated in Aberdeen on the coast of Washigton, and being floated to the site on Lake Washington between Seattle and Bellevue. Apparently, the pontoons have developed cracks and leaking, both in the casting yard, and on site. The bridge is now delayed 6 months in it's completion until the summer of 2015. Lawsuits have been filed at this point to discover how the rep[airs are to be paid for and by whom.

What I cannot understand, is with the four previous bridges over the last 50 to 60 years of history with the original floating bridge for I-90 over Lake Washington, why is this a problem now? If details that worked were changed, why re-invent the wheel?

I have heard allegations regarding the contractor, state inspectors, and ths like, but I don't know what to believe here. Any additional insight Bridgebuilder?

Mike McCann
MMC Engineering
http://mmcengineering.tripod.com

RE: New Highway 520 Pontoon Bridge

Bad concrete, not enough rebar, cured too quickly, not sealead??? And it goes on and on...

RE: New Highway 520 Pontoon Bridge

(OP)
Yes, BB, it is.

My question still stands. After all that experience with success with the other bridges, why so many problems with this one? Something is fishy.

Mike McCann
MMC Engineering
http://mmcengineering.tripod.com

RE: New Highway 520 Pontoon Bridge

Hard to say Mike. I tend to agree with your thinking. On the one hand "if it ain't broke, don't fix it"; on the other hand, a lot of engineers believe in N-I-H. Or maybe it comes down to good old fashioned corruption.

RE: New Highway 520 Pontoon Bridge

(OP)
This was due to the demolition of the old portion of the bridge, not service conditions.

A large portion of the Hood Canal bridge sank back in the 80's too during a storm, but not because of cracks in the concrete structure. Instead, it sank because a maintenance worker did not properly re-install the accessway cover plates in the bridge deck, and the compartments flooded leading to the sinking.

I am only referring to the inherent cracking of the sidewalls, intersections and bottom of the pontoons. That should not happen in my opinion, pumps provided or otherwise.

Mike McCann
MMC Engineering
http://mmcengineering.tripod.com

RE: New Highway 520 Pontoon Bridge

(OP)
Well, it turns oiut that Kewitt apparently did not use the same mix design as the test original design, plus used Chinese cement in the mix.

I will not comment any further.

Mike McCann
MMC Engineering
http://mmcengineering.tripod.com

Red Flag This Post

Please let us know here why this post is inappropriate. Reasons such as off-topic, duplicates, flames, illegal, vulgar, or students posting their homework.

Red Flag Submitted

Thank you for helping keep Eng-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts.
The Eng-Tips staff will check this out and take appropriate action.

Reply To This Thread

Posting in the Eng-Tips forums is a member-only feature.

Click Here to join Eng-Tips and talk with other members!


Resources