|
|
| Re: The Manhattan Bridge (814358) | |||
 |
|||
| Home > SubChat | |||
|
[ Read Responses | Post a New Response | Return to the Index ] |
|
||
|
Re: The Manhattan Bridge |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Tue Jul 28 22:42:44 2009, in response to Re: The Manhattan Bridge, posted by arnine on Tue Jul 28 22:09:44 2009. Believe me, the new one is nice to both drive on and walk on. It is four lanes instead of two.Wanna know what did it in? IT COULDN'T FLEX CORRECTLY. Well not the bridge itself but those hinge like saddles where the bridge meets the piers. Apparently through years, ice, snow and salt they froze and so instead of removing the torsion from the piers, they passed it down into the piers. Inspections showed that those concrete piers were turning to gravel on the inside. A temporary patch was effected by putting a metal sleeve around the pier, and then pouring new concrete into the pier to fill the voids. But doing that also voided the warranty. Well the bridge was built at the same time as the Manhattan Bridge, and while it crosses a much LONGER waterway, the bridge itself is not all that long. The Manhattan bridge was the much bigger bridge in all dimensions. Just north of this bridge site the BNSF (nee NP) runs across a three arched bridge with mile long coal drags. Not much faster than a (D) train but easily 10x longer. (Heavier too, I'd say). BNSF reports no problems with its bridge and has no plans to replace it. Of course nobody has ever poured salt on that bridge. ROAR |
|
|
|