historic stone arch bridge rehabilitation · 2019-10-31 · historic stone arch bridge...
TRANSCRIPT
Brian J. Carlson, P.E. - Greenman Pedersen, Inc. and Michael J. Mann, P.E. - McMahon & Mann Consulting
Engineering and Geology, P.C.
HISTORIC STONE ARCH BRIDGE REHABILITATION SOUTH MAIN STREET BRIDGE
JAMESTOWN, NEW YORK
NYSDOT Local Bridge Conference Syracuse, NY
October 2019
Presentation Outline
1. Background and History2. Subsurface Explorations/Testing3. Design Approach4. Construction
Brooklyn Square Circa 1866
1872 -Bridge Built
Jamestown Journal, Friday, January 3, 1873
“Built under the superintendence of Messrs. M. W. Hutton, R. J. Barrows, and Ira Young, road commissioners of the town, by A. Reed, of Pennsylvania, contractor. The bridge was designed and plans drawn by Engineer Scott of Fredonia, .. It is of solid masonry and spans the creek with two thirty-foot arches, the road bed being sixty six feet wide. In the piers, abutments and arches are 1,000 yards of masonry, resting on piles that are capped with oak and hemlock planking…. The total expense of the work was $12,000, the contract price for the stone work being $9,750, the balance of the work being done by the commissioners.”
South Main St. From Brooklyn Square Circa 1925
1974 –Brooklyn Square Urban
Renewal
As buildings along Main St. were torn down, some of which spanned the Chadakoin River, the original arch bridge was exposed.
Profile Showing New Wingwalls
2000 Rehab Plan
2000 Rehab Section
Steel sheeting cofferdam
4
Project Timeline and Cost
Timeline • June 2014 Biennial Inspection – 3 Red Flags, 1 PIA, 1
Safety Flag, 1 Yellow Flag;• July 2014 Upstream Sidewalk Closed and roadway width
reduced to 1 lane each direction centered on bridge;• February 2015 GPI awarded Design Contract;• January 2016 Design Approval; • April 2016 – PS&E;
Project Timeline and Cost
Timeline (Continued)• April 2016 – PS&E;• August 2016 - Approval to advertise:• September 8, 2016 – Bids Opened;• February 2017 – Project Awarded to Union Concrete• April 2017 – Preconstruction Meeting • May – December 2017 – Pier Rehabilitation• April 2018 –May 2019 – Superstructure Rehabilitation
• Road reopened to Traffic November 2018• Final stone coping and site landscaping – May 2019
Project Timeline and Cost
Costs• Engineer’s Estimate - $2,223,823.58 • Low Bid (UCC) - $3,466,419.50
• ~1/2 the increase was in the masonry work items• Final Cost - $3,269,465.99
Quiz Time
What were two probable causes of the arch damage?
Quiz TimeAnswers 1. The timber piles and or cribbing were disturbed from
driving sheetpiles.
2. The arch was sealed up with injection grouting during rehabilitation without benefit of weeps preventing drainage, resulting in freeze/thaw damage.
3. The underdrain pipe allowed drainage into the fill which migrated through the cracks and imperfections of the sandstone.
Presentation Outline
1. Background and History2. Subsurface Explorations/Testing3. Design Approach4. Construction
Subsurface Exploration Plan FH-B-2
BH4-15
BH1-15
BH3-15
BH2-15
DA-B-1
Subsurface Conditions
Till N= 25 - 89
Sand and Gravel N= 21 – 57
Sand and Clay with Gravel N= 30-76
Presentation Outline
1. Background and History2. Subsurface Explorations/Testing3. Design Approach4. Construction
Design Approach
• Rehabilitate Bridge – Repair arches, spandrel walls, replace parapets, etc.
• Abutments appeared to be in good condition
• Work had been done in the 70’s to enhance foundation conditions at the abutments
• Center pier was in poor condition – needs foundation improvement
Lightweight fill
Bridge Rehab Plan
Structural slab
Reinforced concrete arch saddlePier collar
Foundation Improvement Considerations
• No access to drill or drive new deep foundations around the perimeter of the pier.
• Considered drilling new piles through the center pier to support it.
• Rejected that due to narrowness of center pier and poor condition.
REINFORCED CONCRETE PIER COLLAR
CENTER PIER FOUNDATION PLAN VIEW
TB-2 TB-1
MICROPILES DOWELSCRACK IN PIER
Foundation Improvement Approach
Center Pier – Foundation Improvement
• Micropiles at Pier Ends
• Reinforced Concrete Pier Collar
• Permanent Pipes in Pier
• Grouting Beneath Pier
Plan of Pier
Profile
Quiz Time
Name 2 reasons that micropiles were selected for this project.
Quiz Time
- Answers -1. Can be installed with small equipment
without a crane.2. Design can be varied to suit
subsurface conditions.
Presentation Outline
1. Background and History2. Subsurface Explorations/Testing3. Design Options4. Construction
Subsurface Explorations
• Results are consistent with borings completed at the abutments
Micropile Installation
Micropile Testing
Load Test Results - Graph
Quiz Time
Why do the micropiles have a cased section and a bonded section?
Quiz Time
Answers
1. The cased section provides moment resistance.
2. The bond zone provides axial capacity.
Upstream – West Pier End
Gap in Sheet Piling
at end of Wood Bow
Upstream- West Pier End
Subsurface Exploration Plan
Concrete Placement
Lightweight fill
Bridge Rehabilitation Plan
Structural slab
Reinforced concrete arch saddlePier collar
QUESTIONS ??
Acknowledgements• Chautauqua County Department of Public
Facilities• Fenton History Center• Union Concrete Construction Corp.• Hayward Baker, Inc.• Earth Dimensions, Inc.• Stimm Associates, Inc. • Jamestown Bureau of Public Utilities.
Grouting Profile
Permanent Vertical Pipes
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
70.0
80.0
Volu
me
of G
rout
(ft3 )
S. Main St. Permanent Vertical Pipe Grouting Quantity
4/10/2018 4/11/2018
Grout Hole Take
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Volu
me
of G
rout
(ft3 )
S. Main St. Subsurface Grouting Net Take
PrimarySecondary
Grouting Summary