The URL can be used to link to this page

BRIDGE DESIGN QUALIFICATIONS I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Recent H DR Bridge Design Grades from FDOT (For the Past Five Years) ::fF ~ 8 7.18.1~ FDOT Bridge Peer Review Consultant C 1114492 Thomas Edison Bridge Design 86 88 2140067 1-75 from SR 222 to Columbia C/L 2 88 92 91 2140065 1-75 Bridges Design (8 Bridges) 2 94 94 3117418 PD&E on SR 85 3 98 90 3111930 PD&E Study Phase I & II Davis Hwy. 3 95 92 3118066 PD&E/Bridge Study on SR 77 3 89 90 3110297 PD&E Study (Bailey Bridge to SR 20) 3 98 98 3110290 Bailey Bridge Replacement on SR 77 3 97 96 3110295 Hathaway Bridge Dolphin & Demolition 3 98 98 511 91 86 SR 44 at New Smyrna Beach 5 90 70 7143197 1-4 Design Contract II - 14 Bridges 7 90 84 Howard Frankland Bridge/4th St. Bridge Legend: Q = S = M = C = Quality Grade Schedule Grade Management Grade Central Office Project M:\M096A055.WP6 Pensacol Jill I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Bridge Design Awards HDR Engineering, Inc. Bear River Bridge - N ova Scotia, Canada * 1973 Prestressed Concrete . Institute A ward Sugar Creek Bridge - Parke County, Indiana* 1977 Prestressed Concrete Institute Award 84th Street Railroad Overpass - Omaha, Nebraska 1979 American Consulting Engineers Council Award 1976 Nebraska Society of Professional Engineers A ward Turkey Run Bridge - Indiana* 1979 Prestressed Concrete Institute Award Kentucky River Bridge - Frankfort, Kentucky* 1980 Prestressed Concrete Institute Award 1982 Post Tensioning Institute Award Kishwaukee River Bridge - Rockford, Illinois* 1981 American Consulting Engineers Council National Award 1981 Prestressed Concrete Institute Award 1981 National Award for Design Excellence Sewickley Bridge - Sewickley, Pennsylvania 1981 Association for Bridge Construction and Design A ward Outstanding New Bridge . Concrete Precast V"\ Segmental g; C'l Hauser Lake Bridge - Montana 1983 American Consulting Engineers Council Honor Award 1983 Portland Cement Association A ward 1983 Prestressed Concrete Institute Special Recognition Award Charleroi-Monessen Bridge - Monessen, Pennsylvania 1986 Association for Bridge Construction and Design A ward Outstanding Rehabilitated Bridge Veterans Memorial Bridge - Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 1989 Association for Bridge Construction and Design Award for Outstanding New Bridge - Major Structure 1988 Pennsylvania Department of Transportation Excellence in Highway Design - Bridges over 200 Feet-Urban 1989 Consulting Engineers Council of Pennsylvania - Engineering Excellence Award Bridge Street Bridge - Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 1988 Association for Bridge Construction and Design Award for Outstanding New Bridge - Single Span Saucon Park Viaduct - Northampton County, Pennsylvania 1989 Excellence in Highway Design - Bridges over 200 Feet-Urban FAP 412/1-39 Overhead Bridges - LaSalle County, Illinois 1989 American Society of Civil Engineers, Illinois Section Award of Special Merit Severn River Bridge - Annapolis, Maryland 1990 Design Competition Governor's Citation Harrison Street Bridge Over Papio Creek and UPRR - Omaha, Nebraska 1991 American Concrete Institute, Nebraska Chapter, A ward of Excellence Honorable Mention Capitol Boulevard Bridge - #420 - Boise, Idaho 1992 American Concrete Institute, Intermountain Chapter Award of Excellence RestorationlHistorical Category Edison Bridge Over Caloosahatchee River - Ft. Myers, Florida 1993 Precast/Prestressed Concrete Institute Honorable Mention 1-80/480/Kennedy Interchange - Omaha, Nebraska 1994 American Concrete Institute, Nebraska Chapter, Award of Excellence 1994 American Consulting Engineers Council of Nebraska Engineering Excellence Honor Award Foot Bridge Redesign - Tonto National Forest, Arizona 1995 Arizona Consulting Engineers Association Technical Excellence Award I HDR ENGINEERING, INC. - RECENT FLORIDA EXPERIENCE RECENT ROADWA Y DESIGN FOR FOOT I. 1-4 RECONSTRUCTION, HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY I. 1-75 WIDENING, ALACHUA COUNTY · 1-275 RECONSTRUCTION, I HILLSBOROUGH AND PINELLAS COUNTIES . POLK COUNTY PARKWAY I' SR 776 WIDENING, CHARLOTTE COUNTY · US 41 WIDENING, LEE COUNTY I. SR 77 WIDENING, BAY COUNTY I. WATERS AVENUE, HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY . . SR 501US98, HERNANDO COUNTY 'I. SR 583 RESURFACING, HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY OVER 100 MILES IN PAST 5 YEARS I. FDOT MAJOR BRIDGE PEER REVIEW CONSULTANT I. 14 BRIDGE REPLACEMENTS ON 1-4 . EIGHT BRIDGE WIDENINGS ON 1-75 I' HOWARD FRANKLAND BRIDGE . FIVE OVERPASS BRIDGES ON US 19 I APALACHICOLA RIVER & BAY BRIDGES I. EDISON BRIDGE OVER CALOOSAHA TCHEE RIVER SR 77 BRIDGE OVER NORTH BAY I OCHLOCKONEE BAY BRIDGE STUDY & DESIGN . DAVIS ISLAND & SPRING LAKE BAYOU BRIDGES 115 BRIDGES IN NORTHEAST FLORIDA OVER 40 FOOT BRIDGES IN PAST 5 YEARS I ~{ I"""A""~"" HDR Engineering, Inc. 5100 W. Kennedy Blvd., #300 Tampa, FL 33609-1806 813/287-1960 Fax: 813/282-2449 HDR Engineering, Inc. 700 S. Palafox St., #310 Pensacola FL 32501 904/432-6800 Fax: 904/432-8010 P.....~ndo Tampo , .- RECENT PD&E PROJECTS FOR FOOT . A TLANTIC BOULEVARD, DUVAL COUNTY · DAVIS HIGHWAY, ESCAMBIA COUNTY . SR 44, VOLUSIA COUNTY . SR 39, HILLS BOROUGH COUNTY . SR 77, BAY COUNTY . SR 30, FRANKLIN COUNTY . SR 85, OKALOOSA COUNTY · BI-COUNTY EXPRESSWAY, PASCO COUNTY · 1-10 TO 1-65 CORRIDOR, ESCAMBWSANTA ROSA COUNTIES · N. SUNCOAST CORRIDOR, PINELLASIPASCOI HILLSBOROUGH COUNTIES · CROSSTOWN EXPRESSWAY, HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY . POLK COUNTY PARKWAY REEVALUATION OVER 150 MILES IN PAST 5 YEARS QUALITY CONTROL PLAN · FORMALIZED PLAN & PROCEDURES · TECHNICALLY STRONG TASK LEADERS . CONTINUOUS TEAM INTERACTION . MONITORING AT THE TASK LEVEL . WRITTEN DOCUMENTATION & RESULTS . INDEPENDENT PEER REVIEWS . CONSTRUCTIBILITY REVIEWS . TOP MANAGEMENT ATTENTION HDR Engineering, Inc. 201 S. Orange Ave., #1290 Orlando, FL 32801 407/872-7801 Fax: 407/872-0603 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I, I HDR Engineering, Inc. Recognized for their experience in meeting the nations's transportation needs for today and tomorrow, our professionals offer a broad range of proven seNices, HDR has completed a wide variety of assignments for clients throughout the country, including 34 state Departments of Transportation, HDR has actively contributed to the development and improvements of the Interstate system since its inception and has applied our skills on assignments completed for cities, counties, transportation authorities and private clients, Our firm's skills and experience encompass all modes of transportation - from rural and urban roadways and freeways, to airports, railroads, and transit systems. SeNices include planning, conceptual studies, desi.gn, program management, value engineering and construction administration, HDR also fulfills the role of general engineering consultant on complex transportation projects, HDR's areas of specialization include the following: Traffic Roadways Planning Transit Railroads Airports Environmental Impact Studies Support SeNices Bridges HDR provides state-of-the-art expertise and tech- nologies in the development and design of short, medium and long span steel and concrete bridges, Our experience includes railroad, transit. highway and pedestrian bridges, Winners of over 31 national design awards from several prestigious organizations, we provide total design seNices necessary for projects of varying magnitude and complexity, Capabilities include geotechnical engineering and foundation design, concept development with architectural treatment. development of construction plans and specifications, and construction engineer- ing. Extensive experience also covers bridge inspec- tion, rating and rehabilitation, including increasing the load-carrying capacity of structures. This range of talent. combined with diverse experience, allows us to analyze both concrete or steel alternatives-without prejudice to special designs and materials. . I Concrete Segmental Bridges I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I hrough "technology transfers" which allow HDR engineers to study and participate in the design of European concrete segmental proj- ects and through experience gained on projects throughout the U.S., our technical staff offers unparalleled expertise in this specialized technol- ogy. An early example of a trapezoidal precast segmental structure is the Kishwaukee Bridge near Rockford, Illinois. This structure utilized inter- nal bonded tendons and was erected with the balanced cantilever method. The Missouri River Bridge at Nebraska City, Nebraska, is a cast-in- place segmental structure erected in the balanced cantilever method with a main channel span of 416'. The Kentucky River Bridge at Clockwise from top left: Missouri River Bridge; Kishwaukee Bridge; Glacit!ues Viaduct, France; Kentucky River Bridge; Parke County Bridge, Indiana Frankfort, Kentucky, is one of the few North American examples of a precast segmental structure cast with the long form method. The viaduct of Sylans, France, is composed of precast triangulated truss segments constructed on a horizontal curve. Unlike the Bubiyan Bridge, which was built with span-by- span technique, the viaduct of Sylans utilized a balanced cantilever erection method. On the 1-5/Route 55 viaduct in Orange County, California, HDR addressed a seismic loading of 0.4g by integrating a span-by-span precast segmental construction with cast-in-place integral pier caps. The completed structure utilizes frame action to resist longitudinal seismic loading. 14th Street Bridge over 1-275 Pinellas County, Florida I I I I I I I I I HD R provided the design for the cast-in-place, post-tensioned concrete box girder structure for the 4th Street overpass above 1-275. The two-span bridge is supported by a single column flanked by 20S-foot spans. The overall deck width of the single-cell box girder I is 30 feet. During the conceptual phase of the project, both a curved steel plate girder and a cast-in-place, post-tensioned I concrete box girder were reviewed. The VeJY sharp skew of the crossing was a concem for the concrete box girder. To avoid sharply-skewed bridge ends, an option with one center pier and radial abutments was chosen. This resulted in slightly longer spans when comparing I. it with the skewed steel structure. The extra cost for the slightly longer "radial" structure was more than offset by simplicity of the structural solution. I I I I During the first phase of construction, two cantilevers were constructed on either side of the pier. After removal of the falsework, traffic was rerouted under the completed cantilevers and the two spans completed. The original design required only minor changes in the post- tensioning scheme in order to be able to use the construction procedure. For the State of Florida, where a moderate number of precast concrete boxes have been constructed, this construction method was relatively new. There are only two or three other examples in Florida of cast-in-place concrete box girder construction, with this structure being the first overpass over an interstate. It is anticipated that this technique will be used more often in the future by the State of Florida. The retaining walls featured in this project add to the visual effects of the structure. Standard practice in Florida has been to use retained earth walls with metal straps around abutments. With this structure located in both the lOa-year flood plain and in a very corrosive salt environment, the durability of these metal straps was a concern. For this project, precast concrete counterfOlt panels on cast-in-place foundation strips were llsed to fonn the walls without back ties. fill I I I I I I I I I I I .1 I I: I I: I I co "" I 1-275. Howard Frankland Bridge and Causeway Improvements Hillsborough and Pinellas Counties, Florida he 1-275 Howard Frankland Bridge in Tampa carries more than 78,000 vehi- cles per day across Old Tampa Bay between Hillsborough and Pinellas Counties. This bridge-the most heavily used crossing of Tampa Bay-has presented enormous traffic jams. In a feature story on transportation congestion, Time magazine called this well known facility the "Howard Frankenstein" bridge. Built in 1959 and due to be replaced around 2010, the existing structure is more than 3 miles long. It has a substandard 56-foot cross section consisting of two 12-foot travel lanes in each direction sepa- rated by a 6-foot-wide median. Peak hour volumes range from 1,700 to 1,800 vehicles per lane. Existing span lengths typically are 48 feet. At the main ship channel crossing, a vertical clearance of 43.5 feet and a hori- zontal clearance of 75 feet is provided. To develop plans for a new crossing of Tampa Bay and refurbish the existing bridge, Florida's DOT hired HOR as prime consultant responsible for all preliminary and final bridge and roadway plans for a new crossing north of the existing facility. Key technical issues included complex geotechnical engineering; foundation load test program design and implementation; completion of three alternative designs (two by HOR and one by a subconsultant); maintenance of traffic during construction; rehabilitating the old bridge; fast-tracking environmental assessments and permitting; and adherence to an exceptionally tight project schedule. The entire effort for this $60 million construction project was completed in 22 months under special "F.A.ST procedures" authorized by FOOT and FHWA. This included all activities from project develop- ment through the acceptance of construc- tion bids. Normally, such an effort would take two or three times as long. Alternate designs developed for the new bridge included concrete segmental super- structures, pretensioned and post-tensioned Florida bulb-tee girders, and a steel plate girder design used in combination with the two concrete alternatives for the high-level crossing of the ship channel. When com- pleted, the new bridge will carry three lanes of southbound traffic, plus full inside and outside shoulders. The existing bridge will then be upgraded to modern geometric standards for northbound traffic. ./ ~./~tI ./~W'" ~W"'. H D R I I I I 1:': I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I u c Cl C ';: 41 41 C Cl C w a: c x: ~~~ a: w ~ a: w w J: U I- W ~ 0 J: ~ C (f) a: 0 co 0 ...J Z ~ 0 U CJ) w C J: I- lJJ a: w > 0 Ol (0) .... a: (f) I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Severn River Bridge Design Competition Under a unique selection process, HDR Engineering, Inc., was one of six finalists, out of more than 170 interested firms, in an inter- national bridge design competition co-sponsored by the Maryland Department of Transportation and the Maryland Governor's Office of Art and Culture. The competition required that the new bridge, over the Severn River near Annapolis, Maryland, be approx- imately 2700 feet in length and provide a minimum 300 foot clear span over a 140 foot wide by 75 foot high navigational channel. Also. staged construction would be required to maintain traffic during construction since the alignment of the new bridge partially overlaps with the alignment of the existing bridge. HDR's design made use of two 450 foot main spans of concrete/steel hybrid cable-stayed construction which were uniquely designed to allow for the replacement of the deck slab while maintaining traffic. The central tower was to rise 325 feet above the Severn River. The approach spans were designed using trape- zoidal steel box girders with a cast-in- place concrete deck. The design also provided for the future addition of light rail loading on the bridge. Other features included were retaining walls, a bridge structure lighting system, a fishing pier, and land- scaping and handicapped access in the park areas located in the approaches to the bridge. HDR's design was ultimately ranked second in a blind competition by the selection committee of noted engineers. architects, public officials, and citizen leaders. fi)~ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Q) I Missouri River Bridge Nebraska City, Nebraska he Nebraska City Bridge on State Highway 2 carries four lanes of traffic across the Missouri River between Nebraska and Iowa. The 1,893-foot structure was a joint proj- ect between the Nebraska Department of Roads (NDOR) and the Iowa Department of Transportation (lOOT). NDOR and lOOT required studies of both a concrete and a steel alternative during the preliminary phase with detailed plans, designs and investiga- tions conducted for each. These alter- natives were evaluated on the basis of their functional design, first cost, life-cycle cost and aesthetics. lilt I I I I I I I I I I lu I' I I I I I I n D - I Hauser Lake Bridge York, Montana nusual application of a common bridge design helped solve traffic safety problems by substituting a longer curvilinear structure for a shorter existing one. The need for an economical founda- tion and pier supports located in water over 50 feet deep, with a seismic fault at the bridge site, resulted in a study of numerous alternate structure types. HDR Engineering, Inc. completed two sets of contract plans: a precast concrete girder alternate and a steel girder alternate. The concrete structure consisted of prestressed concrete 1- beams aligned as chords in a horizon- tal curve with nine spans, each 120 feet long. The steel girder option was a plate girder structure supported on a multi-pile pier. Competitive bidding resulted in the construction of the con- crete option. This award-winning bridge received the American Consulting Engineers Council Honor Award and the Portland Cement Association Award. Iil~ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1-579 Crosstown Boulevard Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania inal design for the 1-579 inner loop freeway in downtown Pittsburgh from 7th Avenue across the Allegheny River to the North Shore and East Street Valley expressways was prepared by HDR. The $30 million interchange, includ- ing ramps and an independent reversi- ble HOV ramp, connects the Allegheny River Bridge by elevated approaches. The approaches span a new busway, the light rail transit system, ConRail- AMTRAK tracks, passenger platforms at Penn Railroad Station, an existing commercial building and a large parking lot. This closing freeway link requires directional ramps to minimize right-of-way takes and avoid the Civic Arena, Boy Scout Center, Post Office and ConRail. This $16 million river bridge is 1,050 feet long with 305'-440'-305' spans. The 142-foot wide structure carries three northbound and three south- bound lanes and a high occupancy vehicle lane in the center. The design was completed on a fast-track sched- ule in 1984, and the approach ramps and bridge opened to traffic in 1988. lilt I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I George Westinghouse Memorial Bridge Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania hen opened to traffic in 1932, the George Westinghouse Memorial Bridge included the nation's longest concrete arch span-460 feet. Fifty years later, HDR conducted an in-depth inspection, analysis and rating of the 1,524-foot structure and prepared rehabilitation plans for the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation. Rehabilitation required replacement of the entire deck, sidewalks and drainage system. In addition, the total deck and sidewalk width was expand- ed eight feet. The arch ribs, columns, floorbeams, piers, abutments and py- lons also needed extensive concrete restoration. The final design included plans for right-of-way, approach widening, traffic maintenance, lighting and electrical systems. lilt I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1-470 Bridge Wheeling, West Virginia he 1-470 Bridge over the Ohio River carries bypass Interstate Route 470 south of Wheeling, West Virginia. To provide for roadway widening for inter- changes on each side of the river, a 780-foot single-span, tied arch bridge proved most economical. For improved economy and aesthet- ics, HDR chose a diamond-type, rib- bracing system. Designers tapered the bracing in depth and curved it in the same plane as the arches to add to the appearance of lightness near the arch crown and strengthen it near the tie girder. The use of welding and careful attention to details and connections helped create a clean, attractive steel structure. The 1-470 Bridge received the 1984 AISC Prize Bridge Award in the long- span category. ./ ./tf~tI ./~W'" ~W'". H D R I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ~ .\J i:: ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ::: ~ ~ ~ ~~~ \J ~ U L.... ::: ~ .S: ~ ~ -.-. ~ ~&~ ~ ~ \J ~ ~ L.... ~ ..... .~ .... ~ \J .... == ~ ~ -.-. ~ -..J Vj ~ I I I ~[2~~ ~ .~ ~ ~ ~ .: ~ f :I: ~ ::: a ~ ) :E ~ ~ .~ = ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .~ I ,..= ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ {i 0 ..... ~ ~ = o .~ ...... ~ ...... = ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ = .~ o 0\ ~ ~ > ..... 0 ~ ~ ~ < ~ ~ ~ < ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ = o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ = C-' ~ ~ u = ~ .~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~ b~ ~ ~...... ~ ~= II) ~ ~ ~ .~ eIJ ~ ~ = ~ =.~ ~ ~ t: ,..= ...... . ~ ...... ~ E .5 ,..= ~ ~ :.= ~ 't ~ ~ .~ = ~ 0 ~:> ~ ...... ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ u 0 0 .>~ ~ ~ ~ ~ rJJ. ~ -~ ~~ ~ ~.~ ~ = ~ ~ ~~ == . . ~ .~ ,..= ~ ...... < ~ ~ < ~ ~ o ~ ...... u ~ .~ o ~ ~ ~ .~ ,..= ~ ~ o ~ = o .~ ...... ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ ,..= ~ ~ ~ ~ .~ ~ = o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ . . ::: ~ ~ -.-. ::: ~ ~ ~ -c ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ -.-. ~ ~ ,.."". .~ t: .\J ~ ..::: ~ ~ ~ == ~ .~ ~ ~ == ~ ~ q I I .:s~ iMr~ ~ ::: ~ ~ ,.."". ~ .::: .... .~ c ~ ~ ~ .~ .... ~ ~ ~ I ~ ,..= ...... o ~ ~ ~ .~ ...... .~ ~ .~ ~ ~ ~. ~ u ~ ~ :: o == I = ~ . ~.. <<~,; _1.....--'::' ~ fJ.. ) , ~ ~~ ~ -.-. ~ ~ ~ -c ~ ~ ~ .\J ..::: ~ == ~ I ~ ~ . .... ~ ~ ~ ~ I ~ eIJ ~ ~ ~ > < ~ :: o . rr~'. ~ I 11 II I I' I I I I I I I I II I I I I I I I ~ l'I:J l'I:J Q) e.J e.J -< Q) ;..c = ~ e.J = ;..c ~ rJ1 ~ ~ = ~ ~ Q I ~ ~ ef.) ~ ~ ~ Q ....-l ~ e.J ~ ~ ~ ;..c ~ ~ l'I:J e.J .~ ~ Q) ~ ~ l'I:J Q) -< ~ l'I:J Q) .~ ~ .~ ....-l .~ ~ ~ ~ l'I:J l'I:J Q) = Q) > .~ ~ e.J ~ ~ ~ ~ l'I:J Q U ~ ~i I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I <b~ '~~c1 I ~ . .... ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ""'- ""'- ~ t: ~ -S ~ ::: ~ :::::: .t:: ~ ~~ ~ .5 ~~~ .. .5 ~ .~ ~ ~ ~ t: ~ ~ ~ ~ = ""'- ~ r_ O~~~ ~ ~ ~ ; ~ I I ~ ~ ~ . . ~ t: ::: ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .t: .... ~ ~ ::: ""'- ~ I ~ ~ ~ ~ :: :::: ~ a ~ ~ .~ ~ :: ~ :: r~ ~\ '-i ~ I I ~ ~ :: ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .~ {f ~ ~ . .... :::: ~ ~ ..... "(Ij ~ ~ .5 ~ ~ ~ ~ ;.... ~ . .... ~ < ~ ~ :: ~~.~ 1"'0. ~ [~ r~ := ~ QJ'-I ,.Q I I .~ I = 0 ~ z . . ~i ~ . .... ""'- ~ '5 ~ ~ . ~ .. :: = ~ QJ · .... 8 u = ~ :: ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~]~ ~ = u ~ QJ ~ ~ 8 ~ ~ g ~ ~ .= ~ I > I = ~ . I _I I I I ~j = I ~ ~ ::: Q) .~ C'.J :I: I rI:J. -::: = ~ 0 ...... ~ ::: ~ ~ ~ .~ u ~ .~ .~ ~~ I C'.J -::: ~ -::: Q) u ~ .~ ....... .s .~ :--- ~ ~ ~ .s ~ ~ ::: Q) ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ 8 ~ I ~ ~ C'.J ~ ~ rI:J. ~ = ~ rI:J. ~ C'.J Q) ~ C'.J ~ .~ ~ Q) ~ .~ .~ .~ 00 ...... Q) ,..= .s ...... ~ I ,.Q ...::: ~ ,.Q ....... ~ .~ ~ ~ ~ .~ ::: ::s ....... :::: ~ ~ .== ~ ~ .~ ~ ~ 0 Q) ~ 8 ~ c;j I ~ .~ ,..= ef) ,..= 8 I I C-' ~ 00 ::: "'Q ~ ....... I ~ Q) u .~ 0 ~ ....... ...... ::: I ~ u Q) rI:J. ~ ~ ,..= ::s u ~ ~ ....... ~ ::: 0 ~ rI:J. ~ .~ ~ I ef) ~ rI:J. 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ = 0 ~ :::: I ~ .~ rI:J. ~ ....... "'Q ...... ~ ~ ....... .~ ...... ~ = ....... ~ "'Q I Q) > ~ ~ ~ ::: .~ ~ = ~ Q) "'Q Q) ~ ....... u ~ < > ~ rI:J. == = ~ ~ ~ ~ := I 0 .s ~ Q) Q) "'Q ef) ~ rI:J. .~ ::: = rI:J. ::: ~ ~ rI:J. ~ Q) a 0 = ~ ~ ::: ~ ::: ~ ;::.. N Q) 8 ~ ~ .~ .~ ~ == a ~ I ....... N ~ rI:J. = ~ ~ .~ ::: ~ ~ ~ ~ ....... <. .~ ::: = .~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ::: ef) I .~ u u .~ ~ Q) ~ ~ .~ "'Q ~ .s ~ -- ~ ;::.. ~ ....... .~ ~ 0 ~ ~ 0 ~ ::s ~ ...... ~ ~ 0 ~ .~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ,.Q ~ ....... I 0 ~ Q) I 8 .~ ~ = c U ~ rI:J. I I "'Q ~ Q) ~ ~ 0 Q) I rI:J. I . u ~ Q) I . . u ~ . ~ . I . I I I ~i I I I rIJ. I ....... ~~ ~ 1\, : rIJ. = ~ ~ ~ rIJ. I rIJ. Q) Q) ~ Q) "C = ~ ~ ~ ~ = Q) 0 Q) "C ~ I > "C ~ -I"'11I'II = :: ....... Q) Q) u ~ ~. ~ ~ u ~ ~ I 0 rIJ. ~ ~ = Q) ~ ~ Q) 0 -I"'11I'II rIJ. > ~ ~ ....... ~ -I"'11I'II = ....... Q) I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ....... = = e Q) = ~ I 0 ~ ..= Q) Q) ~ ~ ....... e Q) ~ ....... Q) ....... ~ ~ 00 ~ ~ = I ~ "C ~ rIJ. U ....... ~ ~%l ~ 0 = ~" I" Q) = ;.. ~~~G~ ~ = ~ Q) k~ -~ ~ 0 -I"'11I'II "C ~ I ~ u = ~ = = V1 ~ -I"'11I'II = 0 ~~ e = ....... Q) Q) ~ \.$ ..= -I"'11I'II -I"'11I'II ....... ~ I ....... = ....... ........ ~ u = -I"'11I'II Q) ::: 0 Q) 0 0 ~ "C I ~ ~ U ~ ~ = ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ~I :I: ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ......... ~ ::::: ~ ~ ~~ ~ .~ ~~ ~::::: ~ ~ ~~ =q~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ . ~J ~~ is ~~ ~.o rt- ~ ~~ 6~ ~ ~~ iS~ ~~ :::::~'t ~ --- r~ ;r..... ~~ ~.5 ~ ~5iS ~.""'" !It ~ ,..". ""'" ~ ~~ u=q~ I = ~ . ....c rI1 Q) Q . ~ ;r..... ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .~ -::: ~ ~ ~ ~ ~--- 0 .~ .~ -::: ,..". . ...... ;r..... ~~ &~ ~~ ~ ~-S \oJ ~ ~ ~ ~~ =q~ r.k'f#\ ili. ..... -#..1 ~ ~ .~ ,..". ~~ ~ ;r..... ~ ~ .~ ~ ,..". ~~ ~~ ~.~ ~~ ~~ ;r.....~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ a ~ = ~ f'!... ') ~~ ~f ~ ~X\t <:> "\ ~ ~ .~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 4lI~ ~ ~ ~ I ' ~ ~ ClJ ~ "J--...; ~ ~ .~ -::: \oJ ~ ~ s ~ o ~ . I ~ ~ ~ = Q) = =.s =~ o ~ ~ ~ .....c ~ > Q) =~ ~~ . = o . ....c ~ ~ o ~ o ~ ~ . I ~ Q) '"C ~ o . Iii, I liiii I I I I I. I' I I I I I I I I I I eJJ := FL~ li ~ o 0 :=v ~ B =O~ ;JII ~.AA4 ~'~'~ ~ o O~ UQ; _L-) N ~ .- e~j~ ~ r"i.)" ~ ~J1 ~ ~~ :e~ etJ "t ~ ~ ~ ~ .~ ~ .~ ~ ~ ~ E '-J E ~ == ==~~ ~~~ ~... ~ .~ '-J ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~(a I I I ~ '-J == ~ ~== == ~ .~ t""\ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~U( ~~~ ~~~ t'-~~ '-J ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~r55 I I I i:: ~ ~ C ~~ ~ .~ -t:: = == ~ ~ .s .~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .~ = ~ ~ ~ CJ ~ ~ ~ .~ ~ ~ ~ = ~ ~ ~ ::s ~ ~~ S r~ ~ .~ ~'-J~~ ~ I I I U ~ ~ .~ ~ ~ E ~ ~ E = E ~ == o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ =~~~ ~'-J~~ ~ .~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ;~~~ ~ I I I ~ ~ ~i I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ~ P '\ ~) ~r=~ ~ QJ l\!<~ Y ~ ;l1!, , ~~ ",.. ~ r~ o U .~ r.7~ ~ 14 J~~ ;~ . I ' ~,,~~ ::: ~ . ..... :::::: ::: ...... .~ ~ :::::: . ..... ~ ~'r) ~~ 0\. c:I:.l ~ C" QJ~~ ell.C~ ~~r".~ .~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~ '5 ~ · ~~~;> ~ ~ ~ ~ ~.E S ~~-::~ = ~ t ~ \...:.. --~~~ Ie'-t ::: ::: ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ QJ E...... > ~... ~ :S ~ ~:::: :::: ~-f::~ ~~l;j~ ~~:::~ o ~ ~ L..... .~ ti u :? .: ::: ~ '-Ii ~ ~ ~ ~ ,Su~~ ~ I I I ~ -< ~ ::: ~ . ..... :::::: . ..... ~~ ~~ ~'r) ~~ ~~ ~R ~C~ r".~ ~~~ >~~ O~. QJ~~ ellEr". ~ ...... ~~ .~ ~ ~~\...:.. :::~ ~ ~...... = .-:: ~ ~ \oJ ::: ~ :::: ~ ~ :..... ..... = ~ ~ = l;j \oJ ~ ::: :::: ~a~ ~ ~ ::: ~ ~ r~ ~~'-I ~ I I o == ~ ::: ~ . ..... :::::: ~ ~ \Q ~ ~ ~ . ..... :::::: . . ..... R~ ~C~ QJ~\o ~h-' ~ ~~~ ~ . ,~~ I .-:: S ~~~ :e:::~ c ~...... ~ .-:: ~ = ~ ~ o :.......... c:I:.l~~ .~ ~ \oJ ~ ""'" :::: ~a~ c:I:.l · ::: = ~ ~ e=tu o I I .: ~ ~ ~i I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I " ..: I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I: I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Contents Aesthetic Evaluation of Bridges, 1 AC. Liebenberg (South Africa) Aesthetic Considerations for Bridge Overpass Design, 10 Roger A Dorton (Canada) Aesthetics and Concrete Segmental Bridges, 18 Jean M. Muller (France) Developing Guidelines for Aesthetic Design, 32 Fritz Leonhardt (Germany) Aesthetics for Short- and Medium-Span Bridges, 58 Edward P. Wassennan (United States) Bridges and the New Art of Structural Engineering, 67 David P. Billington (United States) Aesthetics and Engineers: Providing for Aesthetic Quality in Bridge Design, 80 Frederick GottemoeLler (United States) The Three Mentalities of Successful Bridge Design, 89 Fabrizio de Miranda (Italy) Aesthetic Aspects of Contemporary Bridge Design, 95 Jozef Glomb (Poland) Architecture in Bridge Design, 105 Paul C. Harbeson (United States) Historical Transition of Suspension Bridge Tower Forms in Japan, 122 Jiro Tajima and Kazuo Sugiyama (Japan) Spiral Bridges, 133 Manabu Ito (Japan) P~destrian Bridges in the City, 137 Yoshio Nakamura and Yoichi Kubota (Japan) Form, Modeling, and Composition in Bridge Aesthetics, 147 Carlos King Revelo (Mexico) Visual Aspects of Short- and Medium-Span Bridges, 155 J. Murray (United Kingdom) Philosophical Basis for Chinese Bridge Aesthetics, 167 Huan Cheng Tang (People's Republic of China) It I I I I I I I Author Biographical Information Jose A. Fernandez Ordonez is Professor of Civil Engi- neering History and Aesthetics at the Polytechnical Uni- versity of Madrid, Spain, and a practicing consulting structural engineer. He received a doctorate in civil en- gineering from the Polytechnical University of Madrid in 1959. In 1988 he became a member of the Royal Academy of Fine Arts. In his private practice he has designed many major bridges, specializing in the res- toration and strengthening of historic structures for modern highway traffic. He has authored numerous papers, articles, and books on structural design and aesthetics, including a biography of Eugene Freyssinet, and has received many honors for his accomplish- ments. He is the designer of La Esfera Armilar, which will reach a height of 92 m and will commemorate the fifth centenary of the discovery of America. I I Soli K. Ghaswala is a consulting engineer in Bombay, India. He received a bachelor's degree in civil and structural engineering from the University of Bombay. He was Senior Engineer with C!TEe, an Indo-French joint venture for designing and constructing India's largest dry dock and other ancillary works for the In- dian navy, and engineer for the Public Works Depart- ment, Northern Circle, responsible for the design and supervision of construction of roads, bridges, and buildings in Bombay and GujaratHe was awarded a Canadian International DevelopmentAgency Fellowship and was a member of the panel of judges for concrete structures of the Indian Concrete Institute. He is on the editorial boards of Indian and foreign journals. I I I I I I I I Jozef Glomb is Professor of Civil Engineering at the Silesian Technical University, Gliwice, Poland, where he earned a master's degree in 1950. He earned a docto- rate at Warsaw Technical University, which he com- pleted in 1962. He has had vast experience in the design and construction of civil engineering structures, mostly bridges and industrial buildings, in Poland and abroad. He has authored more than 150 technical pa- pers and several technical books and manuals. Dr. Glomb is a member of the Polish Academy of Sci- ences and has served as member, chairman, and di- rector of numerous other professional organizations. I I K 265 Frederick Gottemoeller is an architect and an engineer and is currently advising several bridge-building agen- cies on improving the appearance of their structures. He received a bachelor's degree with honors in archi- tecture in 1963 and a bachelor's degree in civil engi- neering and a master's degree in urban design, both in 1965, all from Carnegie-,'w\ellon University. Before entering the private sector. he held a series of profes- sional and policy-making positions with the Maryland Department of Transportation, the most recent of which was as Deputy Administrator of the State High- way Administration. Before that he was project archi- tect/engineer for the 28-mi Baltimore Interstate highway system, which includes numerous bridges and viaducts, several of which have been recognized in na- tional award programs. In addition to his consulting work, Mr. Gottemoeller is active in real estate develop- ment in the Baltimore-Washington, D.C., area. Paul C. Harbeson is Emeritus Partner of the firm H2L2, ArchitectslPlanners. He graduated with honors from the University of Pennsylvania, where he received a bachelor's degree in architecture. He entered profes- sional practice with H2L2 in 1946 and became a part- ner in 1961. From 1963 to 1984, he was in charge of the firm's continuing practice of architectural consulta- tion with engineering firms and other agencies in the design of major bridges and transportation structures. He was commissioned by the Federal Highway Admin- istration to develop the publication Highway Bridge Aesthetics, which is in preparation. He is a member of numerous professional and technical organizations and is consulting architect to the American Battle Monu- ments Commission, in which capacity he advises on the development and maintenance of U.S. war memo- rials and cemeteries in the United States and abroad. Manabu Ito is Professor of Civil Engineering at Saitama University as well as Professor Emeritus at the University of Tokyo, Japan. He received a doctorate in engineering from the University of Tokyo in 1959. He has been engaged in teaching and research on bridges and structural dynamics, and is also involved in many bridge projects, particularly cable-SUPported bridges, both in Japan and other countries. I I Aesthetics and Engineers: Providing for Aesthetic Quality in Bridge Design I I I I I I I FREDERICK GOTTEMOELLER, United States Making bridges that are attractive is a legitimate goal of public policy. Why then is the appearance of bridges so seldom a major influence in their design? There are occasional exceptions, often major bridges at spec- tacular sites. The appearance of a bridge across the Ohio River or Tampa Bay will usually (but not always) be given a great deal of thought But the appearance of the many thousands of more commonplace bridges seldom gets much attention. It is not for lack of good intentions. Typically, im- proved appearance is discussed at the beginning of a project But as work on the design continues, other matters get more attention. Why does the attractive- ness of a bridge have so little impact when the major decisions are finally made? I I I I I I I I · Many engineers believe that improved appearance will increase the costs of bridges; they do not think that the public will spend money on this consideration. · Because people's reactions to appearance are so individual, engineers are concerned that there is insuf- ficient common ground on which to base criteria con- cerning what is beautiful and what is not Public works decision making requires agreed-upon criteria If there are no commonly held criteria, then there can be no basis for including appearance in public works deci- sion making. · Engineers build bridges. and engineers are not comfortable with questions of appearance. Their edu- cation does not include study of what makes a bridge look good; their standards and research studies give no guidelines in this area. The following discussion attempts to show (a) that aesthetic quality in bridges is a legitimate goal of pub- lic policy, in fact as well as in theory; (b) that engineers individually, and the engineering profession collectively, must provide that quality; and (c) how such quality can be achieved. I I LEGITIMATE GOAL OF POBUe POUCy Pride of Place People want to be proud of the places where they live-not only their homes and offices but also their neighborhoods and cities. First, people want to be able to enjoy their surroundings; second, they want visitors to be favorably impressed; third, they want their self- worth and self-image to be reflected by the appear- ance of the places where they live; and finally, they want the places where they live to be attractive and well planned because this is usually accompanied by increased property values. It makes no difference whether the place involved is privately or publicly owned. For the same reason that they take an interest in the appearance of property that they own individually, people take an interest in the ap- pearance of property that they own collectively. Public works are things that all citizens accomplish together. Everyone has a stake in them, and everyone wants to be proud of them. Impact of Bridges Bridges form an important part of any city's public environment, and because they are seen by many thousands of people every day, they tend to have an enormous impact on the impressions created about that city. Those who follow professional football on television may remember an advertisement for United Airlines that played continuously during the 1986 sea- son that encouraged "flying the friendly skies" from coast to coast Television being what it is, the adver- tisers needed some visible symbols of the journey. They chose the Brooklyn Bridge for the East Coast and the Golden Gate Bridge for the West Coast Build- ings or landscapes would not do; only those bridges would have the desired effect (Figure 1 and Plate 17). 80 I II I i II I I I I I I I I I I i I' II I 11 I Ii , : I~ GottemoelIer FIGURE 1 East Coast symbol: Roebling's Brooklyn Bridge. New York City. Why these particular bridges? There must be a dozen bridges of comparable size and importance. The Manhattan Bridge is just upstream of the Brooklyn Bridge, and it is attractive in its own right The answer is that these two bridges, above all others, have produced an aesthetic reaction that has engraved them upon the collective memories of Amer- icans. They are now instant symbols of their cities. Think of the civic pride, the emotional lift created in the lives of those who see them daily. Everyday Bridges It is easy to see the importance of the appearance of major bridges like the Golden Gate and the Brooklyn bridges, which have captured the imagina- tions of generations of residents and visitors to their cities. But the hundreds of thousands of less spectacu- lar bridges also produce aesthetic reactions. Highway users are exposed to these ~eryday bridges on a daily basis. On a moderately busy ex- 81 pressway, this can add up to hundreds of thousands of "person hours" of e.xposure in a single day. To take an extreme example, the bridges on the Dan Ryan Ex- pressway in Chicago are seen by hundreds of thou- sands of people ~ery day. They are a much larger part of the daily environment of their users than any public building in Chicago. A list of the architects who have been involved with Chicago's public buildings would read like a Who's Who of American architec- ture. Yet it would be surprising if anywhere near that type of talent had been put into the appearance of the bridges on Chicago's expressway system. Designers tend to underestimate the effect of every- day bridges because their impression is so fleeting. Anyone who has seen a well-made movie, how~er, un- derstands that fleeting impressions can have an enor- mous effect. On a freeway containing dozens of similar bridges, the effect is repeated many times in a single trip. And for the commuter, this trip is repeated hun- dreds of times a year. Evidence of Public Support The appearance of a public facility is an important part of the public's feelings about it; ask any public works director who has fallen behind on cutting grass or picking up litter. More seriously, why else do cities bring in famous architects for their public buildings and set aside hundreds of thousands of dollars for art in public places? Why else is the appearance of public buildings so hotly debated in editorial columns? In- deed, it is not unusual for the appearance of a bridge to become a public issue. Unfortunately, it is usually after the fact, when nothing can be done about it In one case in Maryland several years ago, a new pedestrian bridge across the New York-Washington mainline of the National Railroad Passenger Corpora- tion (Amtrak) railroad was completed in a location near the center of a small town. At the dedication, how~er. most of the remarks focused not on all of the lives that the bridge would save, nor on how much it would simplify traffic patterns. but on the fact that the bridge was so ugly (Figure 2). Speaker after speaker raised the question, "Why had the highway agency in- flicted this scar upon their downtown?" Feelings were so strong that the community refused the construe-Jon of a similar bridge nearby, mostly because of its pro- spective appearance. Citizens might be grateful for a new bridge if it cuts five minutes off their commuting time or relieves traffic congestion. but they will be proud of it only if it creates I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 82 FIGURE 2 Pedestrian bridge over Amtrak mainline. Aberdeen. Maryland. a new symbol of their city or town, or is an ornament to its environment This seems to have been better understood 50 years ago than it is today. One has only to look at bridges of that period, with their stone facings, parapets, balustrades, and moldings, to realize the level of public support that can exist for appearance. Public Consensus All of this indicates that not only is there public sup- port for high-quality appearance in bridges, but also that some degree of consensus can be found on what "high quality" means. The recognition of the Brooklyn and Golden Gate bridges, the debate on the Maryland pedestrian bridge, public programs for art in public buildings--all rest on a consensus of aesthetic quality. However, that consensus will not be found in standard books and research studies (with a few exceptions). It will be found instead in newspaper accounts of public debate, in journal articles by informed professionals, and in personal observation of successful projects. Aesthetics and Cost In the public debates about bridges, cost is rarely the issue; appearance, or lack thereof, often is. Clearly, the public is willing to pay a reasonable additional cost for high-quality appearance in bridges. Stating the is- sue in those terms, however, is misleading. Such a statement rests on a hidden premise-that good ap- pearance always costs more-which is simply not true. In order to prove that it is not true, consider how an aesthetic impact is created. There is a tendency among engineers to view aesthetic impact as the im- pression created by a bridge's surface features, such BRIDGE AESTHETICS AROUND THE WORLD as color, materials, ornament, and so forth. In fact, the aesthetic impact is the effect made on the viewer by every aspect of the bridge, in its totality and in its indi- vidual parts. The impact is made as the bridge is seen (and in some respects, heard and felt) by the viewer as he passes through, over, or under the structure or as he views it from a distance. In other words, people re- act to what they see-all of what they see-and the se- quence in which they see it It follows that every decision made about the visible parts of a structure has an aesthetic impact It does not matter whether the designer considers a decision's aesthetic impact; the decision has an aesthetic impact nonetheless. Fur- thermore, it does not matter whether a given feature is subject to the designer's control; the feature has an aesthetic impact nonetheless. Once this is realized, it becomes dear that good ap- pearance is just like any of the other criteria that gov- ern bridge designs, such as structural integrity, maintainability, or safety. A decision about anyone fea- ture will typically involve several or all of these criteria. Sometimes an improvement in one area will increase the cost, and sometimes it will not The challenge is always, through creativity and ingenuity, to find ways of improving one of these qualities without increasing the cost The same challenge applies to appearance. In the design of the Brooklyn Bridge, for example, John Roebling chose a pointed arch for his masonry :.. c::: o ... ~ 5 i:: "' ~ FIGURE 3 Roebling's bridge over the Ohio River at Cincinnati. I I I ! Ii I ! II I' i I. II I' j' I .. :'-.,- Gottemoeller towers. He could have as easily chosen a rounded arch: the choice would have had no significant cost implications, and very minor structural implications. In fact, for his Cincinnati Bridge (Figure 3), the precursor of the Brooklyn Bridge, he chose the rounded arch. However, the pointed arch of the Brooklyn Bridge was one of the major reasons for the aesthetic success of that structure. In other words, he obtained better ap- pearance at no additional cost. When one looks at the major bridges of the most successfully creative engineers, such .as Roebling, Gustav Eiffel, or Robert Maillart, one finds that this is often the case. They designed structures that achieved new structural capability and outstanding appearance at a cost lower than or equal to the cost of competing solutions. The key was their willingness to consider ap- pearance a criterion equal in value to all the others. Their success proves that it is not necessary to pay more for good appearance. ROLE OF ENGINEERS Responsibility of Engineers Whether appearance was a major concern or not considered at all by the designer, any bridge creates an aesthetic impression. It creates an impression be- cause it is seen. The designer controls that impression. and the public has the right to hold him responsible for its quality. Who designs bridges? In this society, engineers de- sign bridges. and usually not a single engineer, but groups of engineers, or more likely several groups of engineers. One group of engineers may do the prelim- inary design. and the second the final design. A third group may review it. All will make some changes dur- ing this creative process. A fourth group of engineers may develop some of the details, such as parapets or piers, which may be used years later for bridges that had not even been conceived at the time standards were developed. As a result. it is difficult for any engineer, as an indi- vidual. to control the appearance of a bridge, which also places that control squarely on engineers as a group. Engineers as a group must take responsibility for the appearance of bridges. This means that they must also take responsibility for improving their aes- thetic abilities. 83 Not Delegating to Architects There is a tendency, particularly among architects, to suggest that engineers ought to delegate respon- sibility for the appearance of bridges to architects and that this would result in better-looking structures. There have certainly been a number of cases in which such collaborations have been successful. However, there have also been many cases in which they have resulted in overly elaborate and overly costly structures, without a great improvement in appearance. It is not hard to understand why this is so: architects are trained to design buildings, but bridges are not buildings. How are bridges different from buildings? For one thing, appearance is a matter of perception, and the perceptions of people in buildings, with which archi- tects are accustomed to dealing, are different from those of people on bridges. People in buildings are walking, standing, sitting, or even lying down. Most people on or under bridges are moving through space at 30 to 70 miles (48 to 112 km) per hour inside an automobile. Their perceptions are significantly altered in ways that are not immediately obvious. Another dif- ference is that bridge loads are usually much greater than the loads encountered in the average building. Yet another distinction, the thermal environmental and weather exposure of a bridge's structure is much more rigorous than a building's, which has a skin to protect it. If these issues are not well understood by the archi- tect, the engineer and the architect will be constantly at odds with each other. One or the other gives way, or a compromise is reached, often based more on their interpersonal relationship than anything else. In each case, the design suffers. Even if the engineer gives way to the architect. the delegation of responsibility can never be complete. In the United States, engineers have the professional and legal responsibility for bridges. The organizations that commission. finance, and build bridges are usually run by engineers. None of these people is willing or able to delegate complete responsibility for a bridge to an ar- chitect. This inevitably means that the "important" as- pects of the structure are reserved for the engineers, leaving the "window dressing" to the architects. Al- though the details are an important part of a struc- ture's aesthetic impact, it is the structure itself-its spans, proportions. and major elements--that has the largest role in creating its effect. If the engineer does a poor job with the appearance of these major elements, no amount of architectural add-ons will compensate. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 84 Engineers Can Cope If engineers cannot escape their responsibility for the aesthetic impact of structures, then they must develop their abilities to cope with this responsibility. The pro- fession has many examples of engineers who have risen to this challenge, who have considered aesthetics an integral part of their responsibility to meet the pub- Iic's needs. The list begins with Thomas Telford, in eighteenth century England. who practically invented the civil engineering profession and helped establish the first systematic use of iron in bridges. The nine- teenth century saw the likes of John Roebling, Gustav Eiffe!, and many others. More recent examples are Othmar Amman, Robert Maillart, and Christian Menn. There are many others still active today: Jean Muller, Arvid Grant, and the entire bridge division. of the Cali- fornia Department of Transportation. There are many engineers who make bridge appearance a matter of serious study, and whose bridges show a certain grace and dignity as a result It can be done. DESIGNING FOR GOOD APPEARANCE What Is Good Appearance? How many people have been moved by the har- mony of a church choir? Who can explain what hap- pens? What is it about a certain combination of notes that creates a wonderful emotional reaction? And what is it about another combination of notes that sets one's teeth on edge? Philosophers have argued for centuries about what constitutes beauty, why people react the way they do to certain sounds or sights. Perhaps, beginning at birth, it is something that is absorbed from observations of the world; perhaps it is something that is genetically pro- grammed. The problem has fascinated philosopl)ers for centuries. It is a problem that is even difficult to de- bate because it goes beyond language itself. Perhaps no one will ever know the reasons for these reactions. The reactions are, nevertheless, important parts of our lives, both individually and collectively. They can be identified and analyzed. Learning How To Evaluate Aesthetic Quality Engineers are trained to express things mathe- matically, with some degree of certainty. Appearance cannot be readily described with mathematics. How, then, do engineers learn to evaluate appearance? BRIDGE AESTHETICS AROOND. THE WORLD · Observation.-Engineers have to start where ev- eryone else does. They have to look at things around them, see things in detail, and become aware of the appearance of a bridge and of their own aesthetic re- actions to it, as well as those of others who see the same thing. Sometimes it is helpful to ask questions. Is the building or bridge appropriate to its use? Does it fit into its surroundings, or contrast with them in a meaningful way? Is it light and graceful, or heavy and ponderous? Which of the two is appropriate to its use and place? · Appredation.- The second step is to become aware of the basics of aesthetic perception. This usu- ally involves learning some of the language that goes along with it "scale," which means the size of the structure compared with a person and with the other things around it; "proportion," which means the sizes of the different parts relative to each other; "color" and "texture," which are concepts that are more generally familiar. There are also things to be learned about the physiology and psychology of perception, particularly about the perceptions of people in motion. A great deal can be learned about these matters from intro- ductory texts on architecture and on the history of engineering. · Cultural Involvement.- The third thing that an engineer can do is to understand the current thinking about aesthetics in the profession, and in the culture as a whole. This takes us into the realms of architec- ture and the other visual arts. The basic thrust of mod- ern architecture grew out of the reactions of artists and architects to the engineering structures of the late nineteenth century. In particular, the great railroad bridges of the era, the Eiffel Tower, and the Brooklyn Bridge had immense effects on the thinking of early twentieth century artists and architects. The result was, and still is, emphasis on the form's being appropriate to the function of the structure, an appreciation of the aesthetic qualities of structure itself, and a general lack of ornamentation and other forms of embellishment In other words, the kind of criteria that engineers em- brace naturally are in fact the current ruling architec- tural style. · Debate and Criticism.- The fourth way for engi- neers to learn is through discussions with their peers. In other areas of aesthetic endeavor, such as painting or literature or architecture, this often takes the form of peer group criticism. In fact, there is usually an exten- sive literature of criticism, and a whole body of special- ist critics who have contributed to the understanding and improvement of their arts. Unfortunately, the engi- I~ II I f I: I I! t If . I: , . ! I: i c If t I~ Ii II ! E If , i II II I' I I I I Gottemoeller nee ring profession to date lacks such a cohesive body of thought Even though there have been many indi- vidual contributors over the years, theirthoughts have not been widely published. [The bibliography that con- stitutes the last contribution to this book will help fill that gap and make it easier for individuals to become familiar with what has been written.] · Opinion.-Finally, each engineer needs to develop a point of view about what he or she considers to be attractive, and why, and then compare that with the views of others. This process has been presented as a linear se- quence of steps, but in fact it does not happen that way. Improved aesthetic sensibility is something that happens over the course of a career. Each step is repeated over and over again as deeper and more pro- found insights are accumulated. As aesthetic aware- ness is cultivated, it becomes an integral part of design and evaluation. An Example of Developing Aesthetic Sensibility An example helps show how aesthetic sensibility can be developed by following some of the general ideas outlined above. Consider some basic ideas and how they might be developed into a set of rules about high- way interchange structures. Begin with "form follows function." What is the function of a highway inter- change bridge? The function is to carry vehides mov- ing at moderate to high rates of speed through a complicated pattern of crossings and merges. This en- tails people in vehides that are moving, usually along curved lines. The drivers are faced with a lot of infor- mation and decisions. Common sense dictates that the information they receive should focus on their safe passage through the interchange, and that all other in- formation should be minimized. According to the physiology of perception, moving people have a nar- rowed cone of vision and are not able to understand detail. Both of these factors tend to support the use of simple form and materials, and forms that are congru- ent with the lines of motion. A practical example of these ideas is provided by an interchange in the Nashville, Tennessee, area (Plate 18). These structures present an appearance in which every feature is parallel with the major lines of flow, ex- cept for the columns, which are few and far apart. This design results in structures that can be understood at a glance, and it creates an environment in which every aspect is subordinate to the movement of vehicles 85 through the interchange. One is not distracted by for- ests of columns (which one also worries about running into) or by zigs and zags in the parapets and guardrails. As often happens, these aesthetically satisfying structures also pioneered a structural concept using stay-In-place steel column forms to minimize column diameter, combined with shallow steel box girders to reduce required roadway-to-roadway heights, ramp lengths. and right-of-way allowances. The result is a least-cost solution to the problem of a congested ur- ban interchange. Learning Responsibility as a Profession Because many different engineers and organizations have an impact on the design of any given bridge, the profession itself must take responsibility for improving aesthetic abilities. Four different institutions are in- volved in making the changes required to improve aesthetic abilities: schools. professional societies. indus- try, and. most important of all, client agencies. Engineering Schools School is the natural place to lay the foundation for aesthetic skill. Aesthetics may not seem as serious, compared with strength of materials and partial differ- ential equations, in the competition for a place in the curriculum. On the other hand, the public holds the engineering profession responsible for the decisions it makes that affect them-all of the decisions. When measured by the number of lives affected, aesthetic decisions can be very serious indeed. How shall this responsibility be discharged if no basis for this disci- pline is developed in schools? Engineering Societies The major engineering societies and journals are well suited for organizing and promoting a literature of aesthetic criticism. This may sound negative and threatening, but criticism can and should be construc- tive and positive. The word "commentary" might have been used here, e.xcept that "criticism" already has a well-understood meaning in other aesthetic fields. In those fields. it is the major force in creating dialogue and measuring progress. It could have the same effect on the appearance of bridges. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 86 Industry Industrial. organizations provide a significant service by recognizing outstanding bridges through awards programs. The only thing lacking is more extensive and informal "criticism" of the entries and a wider publication of the results. Client Agencies In the end, it is the public agencies in charge of building bridges that have the most influence on their aesthetics. It is they who set the standards, select the designers, and pay for the results, both positive and negative. Some agencies have had enviable records in this regard. The California and Tennessee departments of transportation and the Ontario Ministry of Transpor- tation are three that come to mind, but there are many more. Every agency has an aesthetic policy, whether the agency realizes it or not Just as every bridge produces an aesthetic reaction, every agency's bridges, taken to- gether, enunciate that agency's aesthetic policy. It may be a policy of apathy or ignorance, but it has its results nonetheless. The relevant issue about aesthetic policy is not whether it exists, but the quality of the bridges it produces. OrganIzing Aesthetic Policy Reviews A review of aesthetic policy begins with a critical re- view in the field of the agency's structures by knowl- edgeable individuals. A second useful source for developing aesthetic policy is the public comment that the bridges have received. When reviewing their aesthetic policies, agencies may find it helpful to divide the world of bridges into four major groups. The first group is individual bridges of significant magnitude. These bridges cross a major gorge or water body; are visible for a significant dis- tance or by many people, or both; and have a major impact on a whole area or town (Plate 19). Bridges of this type usually receive a significant amount of struc- tural design attention because of spans, foundation problems, and other technical issues. The problem is to ensure that appearance receives an equal amount of attention and that the design is guided by an overall aesthetic philosophy and approach. Multiple bridges seen in succession form a second major bridge group. When a series of similar bridges is seen one after the other in a short time, their cu- BRIDGE AESTHETICS AROUND THE WORLD mulative aesthetic impact should be considered (Figure 4). Here there is more reason for uniformity. Noticeable differences should have an obvious reason. Often a specific theme is appropriate for a particular route. A third major bridge group consists of routine bridges that are widely separated. Standard highway overpasses and minor stream crossings fit this cate- gory (Figure 5). Here production requirements, eco- nomics, and structural similarities all point toward a certain uniformity. So do aesthetic criteria--after all, similar solutions to similar problems should have simi- lar appearance. Standard details are often the most important factor. The problem is to provide a sufficient range of details to allow designers to react to specific conditions. The last major bridge group to consider is made up of invisible bridges. Some bridges are rarely seen by anyone. Small stream crossings or isolated crossings over railroads are obvious examples. Here attention to visible elements, such as parapets and railings, should be sufficient Uniformity is not desirable or even possible. Bridges vary too much in size, purpose, and setting for any uniform set of standard designs to apply. However, guidelines and methods of approach can be developed and applied. Establishing a New Aesthetic Policy Once the results of the current policy are under- stood, steps can be taken to make improvements. This usually means the articulation of some design guide- lines and procedures. AG{JRE 4 Example of multiple bridges designed with a similar theme: autobahn near Stuttgart. Germany (modified photograph). I I I II I I I' II II t I' II II II II I' I' II I' II Ii II ! I Gottemoeller 87 Q G ~ i::: "l ~ <.; ~ "l "- o S .... ;::: "l ~ ~ ~ - ~ One very important area for review is the institutional and administrative organizations that affect the physical structures. As discussed earlier. bridge design is a col- lective activity. done by groups of people, often operat- ing in different time periods, in different places. and with different sets of constraints. Institutional arrange- ments often represent the largest barrier to improving appearance. In these cases. it is the institutional ar- rangements that must be focused on first. For example. cost is not a neces~ary trade-off for better appearance in the finished structure. However, applying the time and ingenuity necessary to make improvements in appearance (or safety, or main- tainability, or anything else, for that matter) costs money. Most public agencies approach design on a least-cost basis, separate from construction. All too. or- ten this means that they get structures that are a re- hash of previous structures, incorporating a maximum number of standard details. regardless of the aesthetic implications for the problem at hand. The solution is to make appearance coequal with other criteria in the de- sign and to allow sufficient time and money in the design work for the necessary creativity to be applied. Or course, money and time are not sufficient by them- selves. The people involved must be equal to the chal- lenge and be required to produce accordingly. It is therefore necessary to make the appearance of pre- vious projects a coequal criterion in selecting the de- sign team and to insist on good appearance in their final product. The use of standard details is another common in- stitutional barrier. Agencies should take a critical look at their standard details in the field to catalog their ef- FIGURE 5 Example of routine highway overpass. fect on appearance. While doing this, they should look at the appearance or all of the ancillary attachments: light poles, signs, guardrail transitions, and utility lines. Once these have been reviewed, then adjustments can be made within the context or the agency's overall aes- thetic policy. It is not enough to have good policies and standards or to apply the requisite time, money. and talent Agen- cies must review the results to make sure that the time, money, and talent are properly applied. They must also protect the results from unreasonable criti- cism by outside reviewers. In other words, the final in- stitutional barriers that must be reviewed are the review procedures themselves. Appearance should be a co- equal part of every review. beginning with the first de- scription of the scope or work. Agencies should look at their internal review procedures to make sure that this occurs. The key is the participation or knowledgeable individuals, supported by the authority or the agency. Similarly. the agency must be prepared to articulate its aesthetic policies and the reasons behind them and to defend them strongly when controversy results. Lo- cal environmental agencies or the Federal Highway Ad- ministration or the U.S. Department or Transportation are often used as handy scapegoats for poor appear- ance, which is hardly fair. Federal agencies have been on both sides of this issue, but as often as not they are in the leadership position. Controversy is an inte- gral part or our public works process, and agencies should plan to defend their aesthetic views. just as they defend their views on sarety. maintainability, or any other matter. Often, it comes down to patient interac- tion among the individuals involved. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 88 BRIDGE AESTHETICS ARCXlND THE WORLD SUMMARY People want to be proud of the places where they live. Bridges are important features of most areas, and their appearance has a major impact on the image of a place. People support and, in fact, require a high quality of appearance in their public works, including bridges. Therefore. making bridges attractive is a legiti- mate goal of public policy. Engineers design bridges. and only engineers can make bridges attractive. Indeed, the public holds them responsible for doing so. Engineers can respond to this challenge individually by developing their aesthetic sensibilities through observation, evaluation, apprecia- tion, and criticism of bridges and other structures. Col- lectively, schools and professional organizations can support and enlarge the engineer's aesthetic abilities. Most important, the bridge-building agencies can make it possible for attractive structures to be built and insist that it be done. It is up to each engineer to ask two questions: Am I as knowledgeable as I should be in how to make bridges attractive? Are the organizations I am affiliated with doing all that they should to make bridges attrac- tive? Many individuals and agencies have led the way- why not follow their e.xamples? '-. - :-0-=-- I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Similar Project Descriptions 4th Street Bridge over 1-275- Pinellas County, Florida HDR provided the design for the cast-in-place, post-tensioned concrete box girder structure for the 4th Street overpass above 1-275. The two-span bridge is supported by a single column flanked by 205- . foot spans. The overall deck width of the single-cell box girder is 30 feet. During the conceptual phase of the project, both a curved steel plate girder and a cast-in-place, post- tensioned concrete box girder were reviewed. The very sharp skew of the crossing was a concern for the concrete box girder. To avoid sharply-skewed bridge ends, an option with one center pier and radial abutments was chosen. This resulted in slightly longer spans when comparing it with the skewed steel structure. The extra cost for the slightly longer "radial" structure was more than offset by simplicity of the structural solution. The original concrete box girder design had anticipated constructing the structure on falsework without any longitudinal joints, requiring construction over traffic. The contractor elected to introduce two construction joints to avoid construction over traffic. During the first phase of construction, two cantilevers were constructed on either side of the pier. After removal of the falsework, traffic was rerouted under the completed cantilevers and the two spans completed. The original design required only minor changes in the post-tensioning scheme in order to be able to use this construction procedure. For the State of Florida, where a moderate number of precast concrete boxes have been constructed, this construction method was relatively new. There are only two or three other examples in Florida of cast-in-place concrete box girder construction, with this structure being the first overpass over an interstate. It is anticipated that this technique will be used more often in the future by the State of Florida. It will be competing with both curved steel plate girders and steel box girders, which in the past have been the selected for these types of structures. The retaining walls featured in this pr~iect add to the visual effects of the structure. Standard practice in Florida has been to use retained ealth walls with metal straps around abutments. With this structure located in both the lOO-year flood plain and in a very corrosive salt environment, the durability of these metal straps was a concern. For this project, precast concrete counterfort panels on cast-in-place foundation strips were used to form the walls without back ties. American River Bridge Crossing - Folsom, California HDR will design a four-lane roadway and bridge crossing the American River for the city of Folsom, California. The roadway section and the bridge will have provisions to add light rail transit in the .\1:'~'! 1,ARWA rJ'I((lll:Cl'S. '4-1'" I-il\ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I future. It is the largest single bridge project currently under design in Northern California and is officially known as the "American River Bridge Over Lake Natoma". The project is located in a moderate seismic zone with a maximum credible base rock acceleration of 0.3 g. The design criteria follows current recommendations by the A TC-32 and requires a two-tier earthquake analysis. In addition to the maximum credible event specified by Caltrans, the structure is also analyzed for a lower event with a 250-year return period. The intent of the design is that the substructure would not be damaged due to this lower seismic event. The project is approximately 1.6 km (1 mi) in length and consists of a depressed roadway section through a historical district, a landscaped lid-type crossing over the depressed section, a 690-m (2,263- ft) bridge over the river and through a state park, and several major intersections. The bridge accounts for $31 million of the total construction cost. Traffic currently crosses the river on the Rainbow Bridge 3 km (2 mi) upstream from the new bridge. Built in 1917, the vintage bridge carries 33,000 vehicles per day (vpd), although its two lanes have a capacity of only 12,000 vpd. The main river frame crosses the lake with three 100-m (328-ft) concrete box girder main spans and 55-m (180-ft) backs pans of dual single cell. Two parallel lines of decorative arches will be constructed under the girders in the three main spans to add visual resemblance to the historic Rainbow Bridge. The arches are of post-tensioned concrete segmental construction and are supported by reinforced concrete cross beams located between each set of columns at the drilled shaft/column interface and by inclined shafts at the ends of the dual three arch series. Seismic loads are a major design consideration for the river crossing structure. Lightweight concrete will be used in all of the bridge components to reduce the mass. In addition, seismic isolation bearings are being designed to the structure to dampen the magnitude of earthquake motions in the structure. The substructure consists of four columns per pier supported by 2.0-m (6.6-ft) diameter drilled shafts. The shafts extend down approximately 30 m (90 ft) through an alluvial layer and weathered granite. The design can accommodate up to 16 m (53 ft) of scour. The approach frame crosses the park with six spans between 53 m and 58 m (174 ft and 190 ft) in length. This frame is a more conventional multi-cell post-tensioned concrete box girder. However, it does maintain similar architecture to that of the main river frame with 4-m (13-ft) overhangs which also requires transverse deck post-tensioning. The substructure is also similar with four columns per pier supported by 2.0-m (6.6-ft) diameter drilled shafts. The road approaching the southern end of the river crossing passes through the old historic district of Folsom. This roadway will be depressed below street level and a 100-m (328-ft) long lid will be built over it to provide vehicular, pedestrian and bicycle access over the roadway. 11.1.'''"1 !:.\R. WAT\i'ROmCTS.IN1'li 2 ID~ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I During the preliminary design phase, HDR developed the project concepts to a level sufficient to establish realistic preliminary costs. Two river crossing alternatives were studied: a three-span concrete deck arch with 100-m (328-ft) spans and a three-span segmental concrete box with 100-m (328-ft) spans. The design of the lid area is still under study, but possibilities are for either a light rail station or an open plaza that could be used for public events. To assist the city in its decisions, HDR constructed a scale model of the lid that features removable pieces modeling alternative uses. Initially, HDR provided technical support to the Folsom Bridge Design Citizens Advisory Committee . for the preparation of the EIS/EIR, which included traffic analyses, alignment studies, bridge type studies and mitigation studies. The EIR identified 87 mitigation items and the Environmental Mitigation Citizens Advisory Committee has identified other mitigation concerns. HDR worked closely with the city on a mitigation action plan that will function as a guide during the design construction phases of the project. 1-5/55 HaV Connector Viaduct - Sacramento, California The Orange County Transit District in Orange County, California, has an ambitious program to provide a system of transit and high occupancy vehicle (HOY) lanes throughout this major population center in Southern California. The program typically consists of the construction of additional lanes in the medians of existing freeways which, although efficient on any single freeway, poses operational difficulties if transit or HOY traffic wishes to change freeways. In certain high-volume areas, the Transit District is, therefore, constructing direct connector ramps to allow traffic to move from the median of one freeway to that of another without having to maneuver across the mixed flow lanes. HDR was responsible for the final design of 2,012 m (6,600 ft) of precast segmental structure for use as a two-lane HOY viaduct. The new viaduct, located within the cities of Santa Ana and Tustin, California, will be constructed over the median of existing Route 5 and Route 55 freeways. Construction will be completed without closure of traffic on either of these freeways. The design utilizes precast segments erected and temporarily supported from an overhead truss, and cast-in-place pier segments. The structure was analyzed using the BRUCO and SEISAB structural design programs. Design, plans, specifications, and estimates were completed within a six-month time frame. Concrete Segmental Construction and Inspection Manual - Florida HDR was contracted to write a detailed and highly complex manual for the Florida Department of Transportation for construction and inspection of Concrete Segmental Bridges. This manual is to be utilized by FDOT personnel for training and inspection during construction. M ,'( -:J'.ARWAT\l.'IotOJECTS. ;101'1'; 3 ID'1 I I I I I I I I I I, I I I I I I I I I Among the subjects discussed in detail in the manual are pouring sequences; span-by-span erection; construction of segments using the short line method and the long line method; cantilever erection; incremental erection; closure pours; survey setup; use of trusses; casting curve utilization; use of launching girders; use of epoxies; and other numerous subjects. Edison Bridge over Caloosahatchee River - Ft. Myers, Florida For this project, HDR was responsible for the design of two alternates: a segmental alternate, utilizing the span-by-span erection method, and the Florida Bulb Tee alternate, a post-tensioned precast girder structure. The project consists of two structures which cross the Caloosahatchee River, which is about 0.8 km (0.5 mi) wide. One, a southbound structure approximately 1,402 m (4,600 ft) long, is located on the existing bridge alignment and is on tangent; the northbound structure, on a curved alignment, is approximately 1,615.4 m (5,300 ft) long. The southbound structure is approximately 19.8 m (65 ft) wide, providing room for two traffic lanes with shoulders and a sidewalk. The northbound struc- ture, without a sidewalk, is 18 m (59 ft) wide. The two bridges are next to each other at the north abut- ment and approximately two blocks apart at the southern terminus. The substructures for the project had to be designed to withstand considerable ship impact forces. This resulted in relatively high costs for the foundation, which determined the span length on both structures, of 43.6 m (143 ft). Precasting was utilized for the superstructure and the substructure components. The precast pier segments and pier cap segments were connected using a sleeve. After placing the substructure units, the pace between the dowels and the sleeves were grouted, completing the connection. This project also includes 6.4 km (4 mi) of urban roadway, geotechnical investigations including a load test program, surveying, lighting, and signalization. HDR performed a detailed bridge conceptual study to evaluate various alternates, both concrete and steel. Design considerations involved cost, aesthetics, channel realignment:, relocation and dredging, ease of construction, and compatibility with the historical significance of the area, particularly the Ft. Meyers historic district. US 19 Bridges - Pinel/as County, Florida HDR was responsible for the design of five structures located where US 19 crosses major streets: Ulmerton, East Bay Drive, Countryside Blvd., SR 580 (Main Street), and Tarpon A venue. All bridge designs were twin structures consisting of multi-cell post-tensioned concrete box girders. All but one are three-span structures, with a main span in the 61 m (200 ft) range. Overall length is approximately 134 m (440 ft). The Countryside Boulevard structure has five spans, one more lane than the other structures, and is approximately 218 m (715 ft) in length. M;'ClJ'..-\KWi\T\I'ROII;CTS. WI'6 4 ID'1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1-275, Howard Frankland Bridge and Causeway Improvements - Pinellas Be Hillsborough Counties, Florida HDR was responsible for preparation of preliminary and final design plans for a new 4,846 m (15,900 ft) structure to the north of the present bridge and all roadway plans to accomplish its transition into existing causeway facilities. This included: geotechnical engineering, load test program design and monitoring, preliminary and final roadway design, preliminary and final alternate bridge plans, . rehabilitation plans for the existing bridge, environmental assessments and permit coordination, surveying and conceptual alignment and bridge studies. The entire effort was scheduled for completion within 20 months under special F.A.S.T. procedures of FHW A. Approximately 6.4 km (4 mi) of roadway improvements on the two causeways are included to upgrade and transition the current four lanes to eight lanes. Alternate designs for the new bridge include concrete segmental and precast, Florida Bulb Tee girders, as well as a steel superstructure for the high-level crossing. The project received the 1996 National Quality Initiative (NQI) Achievement Award. HDR was selected as one of five finalists for the first NQI Achievement Award. The NQI is a collaboration of transportation professionals committed to the improvement of the quality of our highway system. 1-675 Bridges - Atlanta, Georgia Under a contract with the Georgia Department of Transportation, HDR was retained to review preliminary plans, develop final designs, prepare construction plans and check the shop drawings for ten highway bridges on the South Atlanta Freeway (1-675) connecting 1-75 and 1-285. The majority of the structures contain curved alignments with skewed piers. Two bridges are simple spans and the remaining eight are two-span continuous structures with spans ranging from 40.8 m to 57.3 m (134 ft to 188 ft). Seven bridges are 14.4 m (47 ft 3 in) wide while the other three are 26 m (85 ft 3 in). The superstructures on the narrow bridges are single-cell, post-tensioned concrete box girders, while the wider ones contain two single-cell boxes connected by a pour strip. Center piers on the continuous structures are comprised of a single wall-type concrete column under each box and are integral with the superstructure. The abutments are stub abutments supported by steel piles and faced with reinforced earth walls. M.~ 'll',AJ(WAT\I'l<()Jl:C'rs. \101"6 5 lil\ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Central Artery Project, 1-93/1-90 (D012A), 1-90 Mass Allenue Interchange - Boston, Massachusetts As a subconsultant, HDR is responsible for the final design for the viaduct section at the north end of the I-93/Mass Avenue Interchange in Boston. HDR is providing the design for the concrete segmental alternative. The project is approximately 315 m (1,050 ft) long and consists of four separate structures, basically running parallel to one another. HDR is responsible for design of southbound 1- 93, high occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes X and XX, northbound 1-93, and ramps K and L. Ramp K extends south 270 m (900 ft). Ramp L bifurcates in the second span from the north abutment. Spans are in the 46.5 m (155 ft) range. Menauhant Road oller Green Pond - Falmouth, Massachusetts HDR was retained by the Massachusetts Highway Department to prepare contract plans for replacement of the Menauhant Bridge over Green Pond. The project scope included structural engineering, bridge type studies, sketch plans, hydraulic and geotechnical reports, bridge plans and roadway plans for this new, 84 m (280 ft) structure. The new bridge is a five-span, continuous structure with integral abutments. The superstructure, which consists of precast, prestressed concrete deck beams, is supported by four intermediary pile beds. Sf. Joseph Riller Bridge - Niles, Michigan This bridge carries the proposed US Highway 31 over the St. Joseph River west of Niles, Michigan. The river banks are high and wooded and it was a requirement of the Department of Natural Resources to minimize fills. This requirement resulted in a design of two precast, segmental bridges carrying the north and southbound roadways, respectively. Both bridges carry three traffic lanes and have an 2.4 m (8 ft) shoulder, for a total width of 13.4 m (44 ft). The single-voided box girders required for this have a width of 14.6 m (48 ft) each. The southbound bridge is 394 m (1,293 ft) long and has three main spans of 90.5 m (297 ft) and two end spans of 61.3 m (201 ft). The northbound bridge is 428.9 m (1,407 ft) long and has six spans of 56 m (185 ft), 74.7 m (245 ft), 83.8 m (275 ft), 90.5 m (297 ft), 90.2 m (296 ft), and 63.4 m (208 ft). The bridge is designed with integral flexible piers. This pier type eliminates bearings and provides stability to the unbalanced cantilever during construction. River piers have a 30 degree, 9.1 m (30 ft) skew. \.i:'," 'Il'_'\II.W"'T\I'~(IJECTS.""'1'\'l 6 lil'1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Stillwater Bridge over the Sf. Croix River - Stillwater, Minnesota HDR has been retained to provide the construction plans for the concrete alternative for the new bridge over the St. Croix River near Stillwater, Minnesota. The bridge, over l.6 km (l mi) in length, will carry four lanes of State Trunk Highway 36 over the St. Croix into Wisconsin. The St. Croix River is designated as a component of the National Scenic Riverway System. The concrete alternative bridge will feature two, post-tensioned concrete box girders, erected using the balanced cantilever method. Missouri River Bridge - Nebraska City, Nebraska HDR prepared preliminary and final engineering plans for a major structure to carry Nebraska State Highway 2 across the Missouri River. The project was a joint effort between the states of Iowa and Nebraska, with the lead agency being the Nebraska Department of Roads. The Consultant Team investigated a series of concrete and steel alternatives during the preliminary phase. The alternatives were evaluated on the basis of their functional design, first cost and life-cycle cost, and aesthetics. The preliminary design phase culminated in a Design Study Report. The recommended steel design involved a four-span deck girder cross section for the river crossing and a multi-girder cross section for the Iowa approach. The concrete alternate consists of a four-span east- in-place segmental structure for the river crossing and a precast multi-girder cross section for the Iowa approach. Final plans were prepared for each concept for the construction contract letting, and the contractor selected the total concrete alternate, designed by HDR. The completed structure is 577 m (l,893 ft) in length, with a main river span of approximately l26.8 m (416 ft) and a vertical navigational clearance of 15.8 m (52 ft), with a four-lane divided roadway with a median. Foundations range from footing on rock on the Nebraska bank to six foot drilled shafts on the deep water pier, to driven steel "H" piling on the Iowa approach. The Nebraska Department of Roads retained HDR to provided construction engineering services for this project. HDR provided shop drawing review, developed casting curves for superstructure erection, and provided a full-time field engineer to supply technical back-up to the NDOR inspection staff during superstructure erection. ~l:'n J'ARWA T\I'Iol.OJFCTS. "'1'1'\ 7 ID'1 I I I I I I I I I I- I I I I I I, I I I Flamingo Road - Las Vegas, Nevada HDR completed alternate concrete box multi-span designs for the north and southbound main line on US 95 spanning Flamingo Road in Las Vegas. This section of US 95 consists of four lanes of traffic in each direction with merging ramp connections on the structures. Flamingo Road is a major arterial with three lanes in each direction and a 22.4 m (14 ft) center median. HDR prepared the economic and structural analysis design report which established the design criteria satisfying Nevada DOT's . concerns of simplicity, continuity, slenderness and economy. HDR also completed the final super- structure designs and overall quality control assignments. The analysis report compared both steel and concrete designs, with the concrete designs proving most cost effective. [The steel alternates included 54.9 m (180 ft) clear span steel box structures.] The two final concrete alternates are 423.7 m (l ,390 ft) in length and have a varying roadway (bridge deck) for the northbound structure [21.3 m to 22.2 m (69 ft 9 in to 72 ft 9 in)] to accommodate merging ramps. The southbound structure is a 22.2 m (72 ft 9 in) wide roadway width. Both structures follow a spiral/tangent/horizontal curve geometry. Alternate 1, the precast, prestressed concrete box structure, consists of 13 spans varying in length from 27.4 m to 42.7 m (90 ft to 140 ft). Twelve trapezoidal box girders are utilized on 1.2 m (4 ft) square columns with 61 em (24 in) diameter drilled shaft reinforced concrete pile foundation. Alternate 2, the post-tensioned concrete box girder structure, consists of 10 spans varying in length from 26 m to 47.8 m (85 feet to 157 feet). A six-cell concrete box is utilized on 1.2 m (4 ft) diameter round columns with 61 cm (24 in) diameter drilled shaft reinforced concrete pile foundation. 1-515 Las Vegas Downtown Viaduct - Las Vegas, Nevada Under a very constrained schedule, HDR completed a major structural design assignment for the Nevada Department of Transportation. HDR designed the final 243.8 m (800 ft) section of this six- lane elevated roadway which completed this major roadway. To accommodate a new on-ramp, it was necessary to widen a section of the existing structure for 548.6 m (1,800 ft). The partial removal and renovation of the existing cast-in-place concrete box girder bridge required extensive analysis to insure the compatibility of the new add-on structure to the existing structure and to insure that the integrity of the existing structure was not threatened. The removal and widening required the use of falsework spanning over a main line railroad with uninterrupted service. Both the final section and the widening required precast, prestressed concrete box girder spans over roadways with un interruptible service, in addition to cast-in-place, continuous span box girders. HDR's ability to respond was critical to the project's success; nine days elapsed from initial contact by the Nevada Department of Transportation to contract signing and a 72-day design period was underway. Mobilization was immediate and two experienced design teams were formed to permit the maximum utilization of the manpower resources which had been assigned to the project. To avoid any 1.i:'.:ll'ARWA T\J'1l0JECl'S.....,.... 8 ID'1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I non-productive time, a responsive system was initiated to assist in the decision making process. Meetings were held with the client on two-week intervals to review the progress, exchange information and reach mutual agreement on design decisions. During the interval between meetings, frequent telephone conference calls were used to coordinate the design effort. Plans, specifications and cost estimates were completed and provided to the client within the 72-day limit, permitting the client to meet the deadline for the bid advertising deadline. Linn Cove Segmental Bridge - Linville, North Carolina HDR provided consulting services to the contractor who built this precast segmental bridge for the National Park Service. Services have included advice in production plant layout, foundation design, form detailing and review of form design. HDR assisted in the geometry control, drying, casting, and erection of the segments. This 396.3 m (1,300 ft) bridge project is unusual in several respects. The bridge is built around a mountain to preserve its scenic appeal. The structure was erected from one end to the other and the piers and foundations built from the cantilevered superstructure above. 1-580, Reno-Cannon International Airport Interchange - Reno, Nevada HDR completed design plans and specifications for four bridges on two ramps connecting 1-580 directly with Reno-Cannon International Airport. All bridges are single lane and 9 m (29 ft 6 in wide). Bridge 1772 is a nine-span, 336.8 m (1,105 ft) long concrete box girder bridge in a 106.7 m (350 ft) radius with a maximum span length of 40.2 m (132 ft). It crosses two frontage roads and a main line off-ramp. Bridge 1773 is a three-span, 93 m (305ft) long steel plate girder bridge over a main line on-ramp with the first span on a 152.4 m (500 ft) radius and the remainder in tangent. Because of an extreme skew with the on-ramp, a straddle bent founded behind an existing retaining wall on one side is utilized for an intermediate pier. Bridge 1774 is a four-span, 163 m (535 ft) long steel plate girder bridge with a 45.7 m (150 ft) maximum span on a 182.9 m (600 ft) radius. This bridge spans seven lanes of 1-580, two access ramps and a frontage road. Bridge 1250 is a widening of an existing combination post-tensioned and regularly reinforced concrete box girder structure. Matching the existing pier locations, this 176 m (578 ft) long structure tapers from 6.7 m (22ft) wide to 2.4 m (8 ft) wide over six spans. It is on a 1,219.2 m (4,000 ft) radius curve tapering into the main line. Plans were also prepared for approximately 1,250 m (4,100 ft) of connecting at-grade roadway, including paving, grading, drainage, retaining walls, illumination and traffic control, plus all quantities, estimates and specifications. I,.l "~'!J'Ai(W^.I'I'RI)JECTS. ....,"6 9 ID"1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Prior to beginning final design plans preparation, HDR prepared approximately 20 structural concepts schemes for the four structures, investigating such items as structure type, span lengths, fill slopes for connecting roadways and constructibility. The structures were analyzed for earthquake loads using SEISAB and designed in compliance with AASHTO Seismic Guide Specifications. HDR also provided on call/plans review services during the construction phase. Kuebler Boulevard Structures - Salem, Oregon HDR completed, for the city of Salem, design plans and construction documents for a new 7.4 km (4.6 mi), two-lane arterial, linking Salem with Interstate 5 and the North Santiam Highway. Structural features include two new interchanges serving 1-5 and the North Santiam Highway, an overcrossing of the southern Pacific Railroad, an overcrossing of an environmentally sensitive waterway, and noise walls. The two-span continuous structure over the existing traffic on 1-5 was cast-in-place, using haunch ed, post-tensioned box girders. The North Santiam overcrossing structure featured three-span, continuous, post-tensioned concrete box girders. Slanted columns were employed to reduce the length of the middle span without encroaching on the roadway clearance enveloped. Precast prestressed hollow core (voided) slab units were utilized for the five span structure crossing Mill Creek. HDR performed a comprehensive hydraulic analysis for Mill Creek, whose main channel is 86.8 m (285 ft) from the dike to dike. A superstructure of precast, prestressed, bulb-tee girders with a cast-in-place concrete slab was designed for the three-span railroad crossing. The slab and the precast girders were designed compositely with continuity over the piers. A design report, summarizing the evaluation and cost comparison of various structure alternatives was prepared for each structure during the preliminary design phase. McKnight Road Interchange - Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania HDR was responsible for the final design of the superstructure for the concrete segmental box girder alternate on this project. Complete contract plans were prepared for each of six fly-over ramp structures that are associated with this proposed three-level interchange where McKnight Road and L.R. 1021 intersect. The project was complicated by generally difficult geometrics including extreme curvature and skews. A single cell, precast concrete box girder section was utilized throughout. While it was possible to maintain a uniform girder depth of 2.3 m (7 ft 6 in), variable roadway widths were accommodated by altering the length of the cantilever overhands and by using a double box section as necessary. Maximum span lengths of 54.9 ill (180 ft) were required. ."'1:1( 'll:J\JtW AT'PROJEcr",. WI'" 10 ID'1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Schedule constraints of the client and the FHW A required that the project be designed within an extremely tight time frame. HDR successfully completed the design of the concrete segmental alternate in four months. 1-90 to 1-5 Interchange, Bridges 6, 13 and 19 - Seattle, Washington . As a result of a value engineering study, the Washington Department of Transportation directed HDR to incorporate major design revisions into a previously designed interchange to provide substantial construction cost savings. This redesign required tying to existing structures, widening structures, and the partial removal of large diameter [3 m (10 ft)] cylinder pile walls used as retaining walls and slope stabilization structures. All structures were designed as reinforced concrete box girder structures with continuous spans. Bridge 6 is supported by outrigger square columns on spread footings and on cylinder piles. Bridge 13 and 19 have single round columns on spread footings. Bridge 6 has an overall length of 339 m (1,112 ft) with maximum spans of 30.5 m (100 ft). The nominal roadway width is 24.9 m (8] ft 7 in) for three traffic lanes. Two ramps converge and diverge on the structure. The location of the westbound traffic lanes under this structure required the placement of the supporting columns on the outside of the structure on outriggers. Bridge 13 is a 134.4 m (44] ft) long structure with a 7.9 m (26 ft) roadway for two lanes of traffic. Maximum spans for this structure are 36.6 m (120 ft). The structure is located on a 134.7 m (442 ft) radius requiring analysis for the curvature of the alignment. An additional 129.2 m (424 ft) of existing structure required widening of the existing concrete box girder to accommodate the 7.9 m (26 ft) roadway. Bridge 19 has a length of 72.5 m (238 ft) and a 9.1 m (30 ft) roadway for two lanes of traffic. The maximum span is 38.1 m (125 ft). M:'..( "1);.,\ RWAI\PROJECrs. IIr.l"!'i 11 ID\ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Theunis A. van der Veen, P.E. Structures Mr. van del' Veen hw; been involved in the design and construction engineering of over 20 major concrete bridges in the United States. Most of those constructed have received at least one design award. Award winners include the Kishwaukee Bridge, Rockford, Ulinois; Kentucky River Bridge, Frankfort, Kentucky; Sugar Creek, Parke County, Indiana; U.S. 50 Muscatatuck River Bridge, North Vernon, Indiana. Basis For Team Selection 1'011.5./1 975/Civil Eng ineering B. 5./1 966/Civil Eng ineering Mr. van del' Veen's specialty is the design of pre-tensioned and post-tensioned concrete bridges including precast and cast-in-place segmental construction and long span balanced cantilever segmental bridges. He serves as a senior project manager for bridge construction in the southeast portion of the United States as well as providing design support and quality control reviews for concrete structures. . 30 Years Experience · 20 Major Bridges · Segmental Design Experience · Project Manager for Statewide Major Structure Review Contract A significant accomplishment of his was the development of the first major BDR for FDOT on the Edison Bridge. During the course of his experience, Mr. van del' Veen has completed, certified, and reviewed numerous NBIS reports for bridges on which he has worked. He has personally inspected and evaluated all bridges on which he performed design modifications or rehabilitation designs. Mr. van der Veen's most recent selected project experience includes: · 4th Street Ulmerton and 9th Street Bridges over 1-275, Pinellas County, Florida. Project Manager for the design of the post-tensioned concrete box girder bridges over 1-275. The two-span overpasses have main spans of up to 240 feet. The cast-in-place structure for the 4th Street overpass was just recently completed. · Five structures for overpasses on US 19 in Pinellas County, Florida. All structures were designed as cast-in-place, post-tensioned concrete box girders. Four of the structures were about 500 ft. long with the fifth structure in the 1,000 ft. range. Two of these overpasses were constructed recently in Clearwater - the 1 ,OOO-foot structure over Countryside Boulevard and a 500-foot structure over SR 580. · Major Structures Plans Review for Florida Department of Transportation. Under the Major Structures Plans Review for Florida Department of Transportation, Mr. van del' Veen has reviewed the plans and made independent design calculations for segmental alternates of the Mac Arthur Causeway Bridge, Roosevelt Boulevard Bridge Replacement, and the Seabreeze Bridge. All of these were major bridges across water with extensive ship impact analysis and pier protection design. Under the same contract an independent ship impact study was performed for the Meril Barber Bridge. · 1-275/Howard Frankland Bridge and Approaches, Tampa, Florida. Project Engineer for the design of this three- mile-long bridge involving alternate designs of concrete segmental. prestressed concrete I-beams, and a steel alternate mainspan. This was one of the first projects in Florida with major consideration given to ship impact and pier protection systems. Project included complex load test program for foundation designs and rehabilitation of existing bridge. This $60 million project was performed on a 22-month fast-track schedule under special procedures authorized by FHW A. · Edison Bridge over the Caloosahatchee River in Fort Myers, Florida. Project Engineer for the design of this twin structure with a total length of approximately two miles. Designs for a Florida Bulb Tee and concrete segmental alternate were developed. Ship impact and pier protection design were major considerations. ID'1 Theunis A. van der Veen, P.E. Page 2 . Apalachicola River and Bay Bridges in Franklin County, Florida. Project Manager for preliminary and final design of a 3,700-foot crossing of the Apalachicola River and a 12,600 foot crossing of the Apalachicola Bay. Design included bulb- T girder design, as well as a steel alternate for the mainspan of the river structure. . St. Croix River Bridge, Minnesota. Mr. van der Veen is in charge of the super structure design for this major river crossing. The overall length of this twin structure is 1,200m with river spans of 102m. The segments will be erected with the cantilever erection method. Significant flowing on the east end of the bridge required a cast-in-place multi-cell post-tensioned concrete box girder for the 76m end span. . A four-month stay in the Bouygues office in Paris, France, as one of the participants in the technology exchange between Bouygues and HDR. Most of his time was spent on the design of the Nornlandie bridge, a cable stayed bridge with a main span of 2,800 ft. across the Seine River near Le Havre, France. . Segmental Manual-A guide to the construction of Segmental Bridges. Mr. van der Veen was instrumental in developing the manual for the Florida Department of Transportation and helped present one-day seminars in all of Florida's seven districts. . Central Artery (1-93)rrunnel (1-90) Project, Section D012A. Mr. van der Veen is the senior design engineer in charge of the segmental alternate for the viaducts at the Massachusetts Avenue intersection. This work involves four major structures. The structures for 1-93 southbound, Ramps X and XX, and 1-93 northbound are approximately 1,000 feet long with span lengths in the range of 150 feet. The Ramp K structure is approximately 2,000 feet long and also has spans in the ISO-foot range. Ramp L splits off of Ramp K at the north end of the project and is approximately 600 feet long. A complete segmental alternate design was developed with some interesting design aspects in the superstructure where Ramp L separates from Ramp K. The use of saddle bents is required for the \-93 northbound structure, and the Ramp K structure is straddling a major sewer line. . Bridge over Colorado River at Hoover Dam. Lead Engineer for the feasibility study of a concrete arch bridge at two different alignments crossing the Colorado River. . Bridge over S1. Joseph River in U.S. 31 at Niles, Michigan. Twin structures with 250-foot spans, precast segmental superstructure with integral piers, sub- and superstructure design. Project cost: $12 million. . 1-75 over the Saginaw River, Michigan. Mr. van der Veen worked on this project for two years as a design engineer and four years as an engineer on-site during construction. The project consists of two parallel precast concrete segmental structures. Each is 1 Y2 miles long with three driving lanes, one truck climbing lane, and two 11' shoulders. Each was designed and constructed as a balanced cantilever with 26 spans northbound and 25 spans southbound. Span lengths ranged from 131' to 392' with a total of 1,592 segments averaging 140 tons each. Construction of this comp] icated project was done by an erection truss. Project cost: $100 million. . Main Street Viaduct, Akron, Ohio. Precast segmental twin structures of 3,500 feet in length, having maximum spans of 290 feet. . Plymouth Avenue Bridge, Minneapolis, Minnesota. Five span precast segmental bridge, maximum span 260 feet, total project length 934 feet. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Wayman Bolly, P.E. Project Manager I Mr. Bolly has 21 years extensive experience in the areas of steel and prestressed concrete bridge design, including over 10 years as project engineer/project manager. His experience also includes design of retaining walls, major culverts and other miscellaneous structures. I I · Bailey Bridge over North Bay, Panama City, Florida. Project Manager for the design of this 3600 ft. structure to replace an existing bridge. I · Edison Bridge, Fort Myers, Florida. Project Engineer for the post- tensioned Florida Bulb Tee alternate of two 5000' long bridges designed for current ship impact criteria and pier protection. I · US 41 Bridges Over the Gordon River, Collier County, Florida. Project Manager for the design of two eight-lane flat slab replacement bridges. The bridges were to be stage constructed by maintaining four lanes of traffic on the existing six-lane bridges. Concrete sheet pile walls were designed to provide a pedestrian walkway beneath the bridge. I Basis For Team Selection B.S./1975/Civil Engineering · Previous District One Bridge Design Experience . 4 Bridge Widening/ Replacement Projects Over Past 5 Years · 21 Years of Bridge Design Experience · 1-275 Over Roosevelt Boulevard Bridge Widening, Pinellas County, Florida. Project Engineer for the widening of two bridges to include an additional lane, full shoulders, repairs, and safety improvements. I · 1-4, Hillsborough County, Florida. Project Engineer for the design and reconstruction of 10 bridges between 50th Street and 1-75. The project includes a number of prestressed concrete bridges, two curved steel plate girder bridges and a curved steel box girder bridge with a maximum span of over 300'. Three bridges cross 1-4 and maintenance of traffic during construction is a significant concern. I I · Polk County Parkway, Polk County, Florida. Project Manager for two prestressed concrete bridges. Maximum span length of 138' occurs at the crossing of 1-4. I · 1-75 Bridge Widenings, Gainesville, Florida. Project Manager for widening 8 bridges to include an additional lane, along with safety improvements. · 1-85/1-285 Interchange, DeKalb County, Georgia. Project Engineer for the design of curved continuous steel box girder bridges and various retaining walls for this complex interchange. Spans routinely exceeded 200'. I · 1-75/1-85 Reconstruction, Atlanta, Georgia. Project Engineer for retaining walls, two prestressed concrete bridges and the Pryor Street overpass - a curved continuous steel plate girder bridge with spans of 210' - 240'. I · 1-26/1-326 Interchange near Columbia, South Carolina. Project Engineer for two curved, continuous steel plate girder bridges with lengths of 380' and 1260'. I · State Route 74 near Atlanta, Georgia. Project Manager of two new prestressed concrete bridges and a widening of a steel bridge. I · Access Road Bridges at Birmingham Turf Club. Project Engineer for three continuous steel bridges. Span lengths reached up to 200 feet. I I ID\ Wayman Bolly, P.E. Page 2 . Southwest Florida Regional Airport, Fort Myers, Florida. Design of miscellaneous drainage structures. . Wateree River Replacement Bridge, South Carolina. Project Engineer for 2500' long structure consisting of tlat slab concrete approaches, steel transition spans and a continuous steel plate girder main unit with spans of over 200 feet. . 1-595, Port Everglades Expressway, Florida. Project Engineer for the prestressed concrete alternate for a 5900' viaduct which was part of this new 12-mile interstate. . South Line, MARTA, Atlanta, Georgia. Design of aerial structure for section near Hartsfield Airport. . Kensington Station, MARTA, Atlanta, Georgia. Design of various structural aspects of this station. Professional Activities American Concrete Institute I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Gautom Dey, P.E. Structures I I Mr. Dey has 15 years of experience in the design of civil and architectural structures, including over 9 years of extensive design experience in the areas of steel and prestressed concrete bridges, retaining walls and other miscellaneous structures. He has specialized experience in the design of integral bridges and . seismic design. He has also supervised construction projects as the consultant's project engineer. Specific project experience includes: I I · 118th Ave. (CR 296 Extension) 1-275 Connector, Ramp D & E, Pinellas County, Florida - Project involves analysis and design of two separate ramp bridges 450 meter and 350 meter long. These ramps are parts of an interchange and involve prestressed concrete girders and continuous curved plate girders with a maximum span of 65 meter. Post- tensioned integral caps are required for a number of piers. Maintenance of traffic is a significant concern since one of the ramps cross over 1-275. I I Basis For Team Selection iv!.S./199/ /Civil Engineering (Structures) B. S./ 1982/Civil Engineering · 15 Years Experience . Segmental Design Experience I · 1-95 and Okeechobee Blvd. Interchange, West-bound & South-bound Flyover, West Palm Beach, Florida - A curved twin box girder continuous steel bridge on a 12-degree curve with a maximum span of 65 meter. Since the bridge crosses over 1-95 and Okeechobee Blvd. maintenance of traffic during construction is a significant concern. I · SC 61 over Edisto River, Colleton & Dorchester County, South Carolina - A 400' integral bridge with prestressed girders. Seismic analysis and design was required for this project. · Bridge over CSX Railroad, Charleston County, South Carolina - A 300' integral bridge with 3-span continuous plate girders. The bridge is located in a zone of seismic activity. I · Berlin Myers Parkway over Southern Railway and S-65, Dorchester County, South Carolina - A 825' long bridge with prestressed girders supporting a 86' wide roadway. Seismic analysis was required for this project. I · Raising Underpass under US-21, Lexington, South Carolina - This project involved raising existing bridge using rolled beam stubs over busy 1-26 traffic. I · Widening of Overpass SC-290 over 1-85, Spartanburg, South Carolina - Involved widening for extra lanes for bridge over busy 1-85 traffic, along with safety improvements. I · Yamuna River Bridge, New Delhi, India - Design involved multiple 190' post-tensioned box girders. Stability analysis and design of well foundations for tilt and shift were required for large water depths encountered. I · Commercial Complex for Urban Development Authority, Gujarat, India - Structural analysis and design of a 12 storey complex including auditoriums, lounges and conferencing facilities - modeling, analysis and design of frames, shear walls, foundations, etc. I · Extension of The Royal Gulf Hotel, Muscat, Oman - Project engineering and construction supervision for extension of 6 story hotel - refurbishment included demolition and reconstruction. I I I @\ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I . 1-90 Seattle Access Bridges (B2), Seattle, Washington. Lead structural engineer providing overall coordination, design guidance, and client liaison for development of 2,400 linear-feet, twin six-span cast-in-place segmental superstructure with maximum span of 246 feet. Nine-span ca~t-in-place post- tensioned double deck structure with 125-foot spans, with integral straddle beam piers. Four-span and two-span cast-in- place post-tensioned ramp structure with integral piers. Double deck and ramp structures subcontracted to four structural subconsultants. I I Gary L. Krupicka, P.E. Structures I Mr. Krupicka, a Senior Associate with HDR, has experience in the design and analysis of prestressed/ post-tensioned concrete bridges and curved steel plate girder bridges. Mr. Krupicka has revised existing bridge programs to meet current and future needs, has been involved in the acquisition and implementation of new structural programs, and has adapted computer-aided design systems for use by engineers in design. The following projects represent Mr. Krupicka's experience: I I . Route 5/55 High Occupancy Vehicle Connector, Orange County, California. Final design of 54-span precast segmental concrete alternate with maximum span of 240 feet. I I I I Basis For Team Selection M. 5./1 979/5tructural Eng ineering B.5./1977/Civil Engineering . 19 Years Experience . Extensive Experience in Structural Design Analysis . Segmental Design Ex perience . Nebraska City Missouri River Bridge and Approaches, Nebraska City, Nebraska. Design engineer for four-span cast-in-place segmental river crossing structure with maximum span of 416 feet and an eight-span continuous prestressed girder approach structure with spans of 90 feet. . Miami River Crossing Bridge, Dade County Rapid Transit, Miami, Florida. Design engineer for shop drawing review and on-call services during construction for twin three-span structures with 200-foot center spans. Cast-in-place variable depth pier segments with precast drop-in girders in center and end spans, erected with three stages of post- tensioning. I I I . Cypress Freeway Reconstruction, Section F, Oakland, California. Technical advisor for final design of curved steel plate girders for 3,300 feet of 1-880 main line and ramp structure with maximum spans of 236 feet. Includes fixed bearings at all bents to distribute earthquake forces and discontinuous girders to accommodate deck tapers. I . N.B. & S.B. bridges over Percival Road, SC-77 (Southeastern Beltway), Columbia, South Carolina. Final design of two two-span curved steel plate girder structures with maximum spans of 170 feet and bent skews varying from 52 degrees to 64 degrees. Includes elimination of intermediate crossframes at selected bays and extensive deck staging analysis. . 1-80/1-480/Kennedy Freeway Interchange Construction, Omaha, Nebraska. Lead design engineer for preliminary and final design of curved steel plate girder structures. Project involyes replacement of II main line and directional ramp bridges within an existing interchange. Structures are on horizontally curved alignments, with maximum spans of 250 feet. Includes integral steel pier caps and discontinuous girders to accommodate deck tapers. I I I · 1-10 (27th Avenue to 19th Avenue), Phoenix, Arizona. Technical design coordinator for predesign and final design efforts utilizing personnel from four offices across the country in developing 4,200 linear-feet, twin 29-span structures with maximum span of 200 feet, with tlared girders at ramp gores, integral steel pier caps at six locations and tlared columns. I I li}'1 I Gary L. Krupicka, P.E. Page 2 I · Apalachicola River Bridge, Apalachicola, Florida. Four-span curved girder structure with maximum spans of 200 feet, superstructure design. I · Ramp 9000 Bridges, North Expressway, Omaha, Nebraska. Two three-span curved girder structures with maximum spans of 83 feet, with maximum pier skews of 50 degrees. I · "H" A venue Viaduct, Kearney, Nebraska. Five-span curved girder structure with maximum spans of 135 feet, with pier skews of 17 degrees. I · US 81 Missouri River Bridge at Yankton, South Dakota. Scope of project includes in-depth bridge inspection, load rating, determination of rehabilitation alternatives, hydraulic and scour analysis, and development of replacement alternatives and alignment. I · Wyoming Bridge Inspection, Sheridan and Johnson counties, Wyoming. Inspection and rating of 110 off-system bridges. Provided office analysis/rating, coordinated field work and packaging of submittals. I · Boston Marine Industrial Park Central Arteryrrunnel (D004A), Boston, Massachusetts. Seismic design of underground structure for Ventilation Building No.6. I · Des Moines General Hospital, Des Moines, Iowa. Final design of five-story addition to an existing hospital with 15,000 square-feet per floor. Cast-in-place pan joist construction with caisson foundations. I · Three-dimensional (3D) Modeling: Developed numerous 3D models of bridge structures for use as visual representation of design concepts. Assisted in development of programs to streamline generation of 3D bridge elements. I · Fortran: Continuous Steel Plate Girder Bridge Analysis (BRAN!). In-house Fortran program enhanced to include self- weight, Cooper E80 and generalliveload analysis, stresses, output at intermediate points, shim and camber detlections, and load factor results. Developed flow chart logic and performed coding and debugging in early stages of development. Provided direction and guidance between engineers and programmers in later stages of development. I · Computer-aided design (CAD): CD2000, AutoCAD. Initially adapted for horizontal curved girder bridges with skewed pier to establish precise control geometry for edges of deck, abutment, piers, girders and key topographical information. Allows layout of diaphragms, splices, piers and abutments concurrent with analysis and design. State plane coordinate system maintained. Geometric data compatible with field surveys. Utilized as design tool on projects since 1983. I I Professional Activities American Society of Civil Engineers I I I I I I I As director of bridges and structures for Texas Department of Transportation, his responsibilities included directing and coordinating design, construction and programming activities of the bridge division; coordinating design and preparation of both standard and special details for all types of structures in use on the highway system: providing technical assistance to the districts and other engineering divisions in the preliminary planning process for projects involving bridges and bridge-related items; providing technical assistance to the districts in the resolution of cont1icts and any problems arising during the course of construction operations on bridge and related projects; establishing uniform criteria for the design of drainage structures and review all designs to assure campi iance with state law and departmental policy; reviewing plans, specifications and estimates for all projects prior to letting to eliminate errors and assuring appropriateness of design; inventory and evaluate the state's bridges and administer both the on-system and off-system bridge replacement and rehabilitation programs; administer the department's railroad signal and planking programs and negotiate agreements with railroad companies for construction and maintenance of grade separations, common ditches and related facilities; negotiate agreements with federal, state and local entities for construction activities in which the department has a common interest; coordinate and review consulting engineering contracts and supplemental agreements through final execution on a statewide basis; initiate and oversee structural research activities to discover innovative and cost-effective procedures in structural design, maintenance and rehabilitation. The following projects represent Mr. Ybanez experience: . San Antonio "Y" (San Antonio, Texas) and US 183 (Austin, Texas)-Segmental Bridge Projects. Two distinct and separate projects in different cities in Texas with similar design concepts-to build a continuous structure with a highly-complicated geometry within narrow, confined urban R.O.W. under traffic. Mr. Ybanez was the State Bridge Engineer in charge of directing and coordinating the design. I I Luis Ybanez, P.E. Structures I Mr. Ybanez has more than 37 years of experience in civil engineering. Prior to joining HDR in 1994, he was the director of bridges and structures for the Texas Department of Transportation. His graduate work consisted of business . management from the University of Mississippi; completion of the Governor's Executive Development Program from the University of Texas Graduate School of Business in Austin; and has had continued training in all aspects of highway design and management throughout his career. During approximately four decades, he has worked with numerous civil engineering projects. I I I I I I I I Specific project experience includes: I I Basis For Team Selection I'v1.S./1969/Civil Engineering B.S./1956/Civil Engineering . 37 Years of Experience in Civil Engineering . Former Director of Bridges & Structures for Texas Department of Transportation . Segmental Design Experience · New Bridge of the Americas, El Paso, Texas. Principal engineer to negotiate with Mexico and design. I . El Paso District, Texas. Design engineer responsible for developing and maintaining the overall district project planning efforts and management of design. preparation of construction plans and right-of-way maps. I · El Paso District, Texas. Bridge engineer for the structural design and plan production for al I types of complex structures required. Included cost analysis. foundation design. and soil characteristics. I . Design engineer for structural load calculations and stress analysis on fuselage. wings, and miscellaneous structure; and complete structural analysis on actuating controls (rudder. brake, aileron and elevator) of the T-37 jet airplane. Included preparing test proposal reports. I I fil'1 I Luis Ybanez, P.E. Page 2 I · Field engineer responsible for construction of roads and proper foundations for multistory buildings. I Professional Activities I American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Committee on Bridges and Structures Ad hoc Committee Pier Protection and Warning System for Bridges Subject to Ship Collision Ad hoc Committee Static Pile Load Tests Technical Committee for Welding Rigid Culvert Liaison Committee Subcommittee on Design Task Force Preconstruction Engineering Management AWS Structural Welding Subcommittee I I I ASBI Transportation Official Board Member Transportation Research Board Committee A2 F04 "Construction of Bridges and Structures" National Council Highway Research Project Panel Member PCMA Texas Department of Transportation Liaison Committee I I AGC Texas Joint Liaison Committee Structures Committee 404 Permits Task Force Prestressed Concrete Institute Committee on Prestressing Steel Committee on Bridges University of Texas Member of Structures Advisory Committee I I Publications Ralls, Mary Lou; Ybanez, Luis; and Panak, John J., coauthors, "The New Texas U-Beam Bridge: An Aesthetic and Economical Design Solution," Prestressed Concrete Institute Journal, September 1993. I I Ybanez, Luis, "Open Trapezoidal Beams," Presented at Prestressed Concrete Institute, National Convention, Nashville, Tennessee, 1992. I Ybanez, Luis, "Segmental Bridges in Texas - Past, Present and Future," presented, American Segmental Bridge Institute's National Convention, 1992, Nashville, Tennessee. I Ybanez, Luis, "Bridge Designs That Cut Maintenance Costs," Better Roads Magazine, May 1991. Ybanez, Luis, "Innovations in Bridge Design," presentation, Transportation Research Board's National Convention, 1990, Washington, D.C. I Ybanez, Luis, "Aesthetics and Design: Some Considerations," Texas Department of Transportation Technical Quarterly, October 1989. I Ybanez, Luis, "San Antonio Y Segmental Bridge," presentation, AASHTO National Convention, 1989, Denver, Colorado. I I I I I Luis Ybanez, P.E. Page 3 Ybanez, Luis, "Bridge Design Manual," Master's Thesis project, 1968. I Honors and A wards I 1993 American Segmental Bridge Institute Leadership Award for Career Contributions to Development of Segmental Concrete Bridge Technology 1992 Professional Achievementin Government Award-Hispanic Engineer, National Achievement Award I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ID\ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Conrad P. Bridges, P.E., S.E. Structures Mr. Bridges has designed, supervised construction engineering, and managed design production for over 100 highway bridge projects during his career. He has been responsible for planning, feasibility studies, conceptual design, final design, and contract document preparation for a wide variety of bridge types, . including prestressed concrete, segmental concrete, structural steel, timber and cable-stayed structures for highway, railroad, and pedestrian loadings. Mr. Bridges has supervised condition inspections and capacity ratings of a large number of bridges including small to medium span and large cable-stayed, suspension and t10ating bridges. He has over 14 years of experience managing projects for the federal government, state departments of transportation, and local agencies. The following projects represent Mr. Bridges' experience: Basis For Team Selection M. 5./1 967/5tructural Eng inee ring B. 5./1 962/Ci vil Eng inee ring · Professional Structural Engineer · Has Been Involved with the Design of Over 100 Bridges · Segmental and Cable- Stayed Bridge Design Experience · American River Bridge Crossing, City of Folsom, California. Project manager (PM) for planning and design of a new bridge crossing the American River ill Folsom. Worked closely with a Citizen's Advisory Committee which was appointed to determine the visual and architectural features for the bridges and depressed sections in the project. Several presentations were made to the public, the city council, and staff. · El Dorado Trail Bike Path and US 50 Crossing, Placerville, California. PM for feasibility studies, design and plans, specifications and estimates (PS&E) for a crossing of US 50. Feasibility study investigation both tunnel and over crossing concepts. Final design is a cast-in-place concrete box girder spanning the highway and t1at slab approach spans. · Phase II Seismic Retrofit of California Bridges, Caltrans, Division of Structures. PM for a $ 2 million on-call contract to prepare strategies and PS&Es for retrofitting bridges statewide. · On-Call Seismic Retrofit fro Bridges Statewide, Caltrans, Division of Structures. PM for a $4 million contract to prepare strategies and PS&Es for retrofitting bridges statewide. In all, 37 structures were analyzed for which 22 underwent final design and PS&E. Responsible for budgets, schedules, quality control, and coordination of subconsultants. · San Joaquin Area Flood Control Restoration, San Joaquin County, California. Lead structural engineer, responsible for developing strategies, design, plans, and specifications to modify various bridges in conjunction with a comprehensive levee improvement project. More than 50 bridges, under private, railroad, city, county, and state ownership are affected. · EI Dorado Hills Boulevard Undercrossing, El Dorado Hills, California. Lead structural engineer for advance planning studies for reconstruction this US 50 interchange. Strategies considered the necessity of maintaining highway traffic throughout construction, and providing minimum vertical clearances under the structures without raising the existing highway profile. · Route 99 and Applegate Interchange, Atwater, California. Principal-in-charge responsible for the preparation of a project study report (PSR) for a new interchange. Also prepared the advanced planning studies for interim and ultimate interchange structures. lilt Conrad P. Bridges, P.E., S.E. Page 2 . Prairie City Road and US 50 Interchange, PSR, City of Folsom, California. Structural engineer for the modification of an existing diamond interchange to a partial cloverleaf interchange and auxiliary lanes on US SO. Prepared advanced planning study for interim and ultimate interchange structures. . Route 99 and Sutter Bay Boulevard Interchange, Sutter County, California. Structural engineer for the PSR and project report (PR) leading to the full PS&E documents for a new interchange in south Sutter County, California. . Rock Chute Creek Bridge, Humboldt County, California. PM for design and PS&E for replacement of a 3-span tlat slab bridge. New bridge incorporated the steel pile bents of existing bridge. . Antelope Creek Bridge, Rocklin, California. PM and engineer for the design and PS&E for a single span tlat slab bridge which replaced a three-barrel concrete box culvert. . Sheldon Road at Laguna Creek, Sacramento, County, California. PM for design and PS&E for a three-span flat slab bridge replacement project. . Folsom and Power Inn Road Grade Separation for Light Rail. Developed cost estimates for two grade separation structures associated with several proposed interchange configurations at Folsom Boulevard and Power Inn Road in Sacramento. Estimates were developed for a conceptual report as well as a PSR for city of Sacramento and Caltrans. . Route 99, Calaveras River Overpass. Completed an advance planning study for the Calaveras River Overpass (Central California and Traction Railroad) in Stockton. A through-girder design was utilized to minimize the structure depth and improve roadway clearance below. The structure length ranged from 180 feet to 260 feet with a maximum span of 152 feet. . Calvine, Sheldon and Route 99 Interchange L-R-T. Prepared cost estimates for future light rail crossings at the proposed Calvin Road and Route 99 interchange. PSR level estimates were developed for all facilities including rail bridges. . East San Jose Underpass, Route 101, Santa Clara County Traffic Authority. PM for design of a 300-foot two- span steel through-girder railroad bridge over State Route 101. . Jefferson Boulevard, Between Marshall Road and US 50, West Sacramento. Structural engineer for PS&E and PR for a 3.5-mile widening and new bridge over the barge canal. . 1-280 Viaduct at Route 101 Interchange, San Francisco, California. Project engineer for design and contract documents for emergency repair and seismic retrofit of superstructure hinges, columns, and footings of a double deck freeway structure. . Route 5 and 55 High Occupancy Vehicle Connector Viaduct, Orange County, California. PM for design, plans, specifications, and estimates for a segmental concrete alternative design of a 1.25-mile-long structure. . Route 91 and ETC Interchange, Orange County, California. PM for preliminary structural engineering design and structure type selection report for seven interchange structures, including a 2,300-foot high occupancy vehicle connector viaduct. . Route 5 and 580 Separation, San Joaquin County, California. Design engineer for final design of a ll1ultispan cast-in-place post-tensioned box girder bridge. . Cypress Viaduct Replacement. Quality control engineer for design contract for replacement of earthquake damaged Cypress Freeway structure in Oakland, California. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Conrad P. Bridges, P.E., S.E.' Page 3 · Route 242 and 680 Separation Seismic Retrofit, Concord, California. PM for seismic retrofit of a I ,222-foot long structure, supported on piles crossing over Route 680 and the Walnut Creek channel. I · Sutterville Road Overhead Seismic Retrofit. PM for preparation of strategy and PS&E for seismic retrofit of a 40- year-old box girder bridge. I · West Connector Overcrossing Seismic Retrofit. PM for analysis, design and PS&E preparation for seismic retrofit. I · Concord Overhead Seismic Retrofit. Performed technical oversight for the development of an approved strategy and PS&E to retrofit the existing parallel four-span box girder bridges for seismic upgrading. I · East Huntington Bridge crossing the Ohio River, West Virginia. Principal design engineer for preliminary and final design of a I ,500-foot concrete cable-stayed bridge with a 900-foot main span and cast-in-place segmental concrete approach spans. I · Intercity Bridge over the Columbia River, Washington. Resident engineer responsible for the construction and erection engineering for the first concrete cable-stayed bridge in North America. I · San Bruno Avenue Overcrossing, San Mateo County, California. Designer for cast-in-place box girder bridge with precast boxes spanning State Route 10 I. I · San Bruno Off-Ramp Overcrossing and Westbound and Southwest Connector O\'ercrossings, San Mateo County, California. Design engineer for these multi-span continuous cast-in-place. post-tensioned concrete box girder ramp structures at the State Route 380 and 10] Interchange. I · Meadowlane Pedestrian Overcrossing, Los Angeles County, California. Designer for a curved, cast-in-place single-cell, post-tensioned box girder pedestrian bridge crossing a major interstate freeway, · Walnut Creek Separation, Contra Costa County, California. Design engineer for widening a steel plate girder bridge. I · Kearney Villa Overcrossing, San Diego County, California. Designer of a cast-in-place post-tensioned box girder frame over a major urban freeway. I · Brokaw Road Interchange over Route 101, Santa Clara County, California. PM for conceptual design study for the construction of a bridge carrying State Route 101 over a city street. Bridge is to be built under traffic on State Route 10 I. I · South Fourth Street Bridge, City of Tacoma, Washington. PM and principal designer of a sharply curved, 500- foot-long cast-in-place box girder ramp structure crossing an active railroad yard. Performed feasibility studies and final design. I · Chehalis Western Railroad Bridge, Pierce County, Washington. Final design of a single-span, 200-foot, structural steel through-girder railroad bridge over state highway. I · Various Overcrossings, Washington. PM for design of six precast girder bridges over various state highways. I · Design of 18 bridges for US Forest Service, Washington. PM for final design of various bridges composed of precast I-girders, precast deck bulb ties, precast slabs. steel plate girders, and timber stringers and decking. I lilt I I Conrad P. Bridges, P.E., S.E. Page 4 I . Intercity Bridge, Washington. PM for the condition inspection and preparation of a maintenance manual and inspection guidelines for a major concrete cable-stayed bridge. I · Tacoma Narrows Bridge, Tacoma, Washington. In-depth inspection, geometry check, and load rating of a long- span suspension bridge. Investigation included stiffening truss, suspenders, suspension cables, towers, and anchors. Prepared report and managed project. I '. Lake Washington Floating Bridges, Seattle, Washington. PM for the in-depth condition evaluation and study of hydrodynamic response of two long concrete pontoon floating bridges. Prepared report. I · Gurnsey Creek Bridge, State Route 36, Tehama County, California. Resident engineer for widening a reinforced concrete T-beam bridge. I . North Fork Deer Creek Bridge, State Route 32, Tehama County, California. Resident engineer for replacing a reinforced concrete flat slab bridge and approaches. I . Browns Creek Bridge, State Route 3, Trinity County, California. Resident engineer for realigning a stretch of State Route 3 and constructing a 150-foot, single-span, cast-in-place post-tensioned box girder bridge. I · Clear Creek Bridge, Placer Road, Shasta County, California. Resident engineer for realigning county road and constructing a 500-foot, post-tensioned box girder bridge, 200 feet above the canyon floor on falsework. I . Deck Restoration and Cathodic Protection. Resident engineer for the installation of state-of-the-art cathodic protection systems on three bridges in Plumas and Tehama counties, California. I . Berth 3, Port of Olympia, Washington. Principal designer for a 500-foot-long whaIi' with precast concrete deck units on precast concrete piling. I Professional Activities American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) American Public Works Association Structural Engineers Association of Central California Consulting Engineers Association of California I Publications I Bridges, Conrad P., "Behavior of Bridges in High Seismicity Environments", ASCE Illinois Section, Structural Division Lecture Series, March 1995. I Bridges, Conrad P., "Geometry Control for the Intercity Bridge," PCI Journal, Vol. 24, No.3. I Bridges, Conrad P., "Averting Construction Failures," presented at the Major Concrete Bridge Conference, sponsored by PCA and the Concrete Industry Board, April 1986. Bridges, Conrad P., "Bearings and Joints in the Pasco-Kennewick Intercity Bridge." Proceedings of the 2nd World Congress on Joints and Bearings, sponsored by the American Concrete Institute, October 1986. I Bridges, Conrad P., "Long Span Continuous Concrete Girder Bridge Supported by Cables," Concrete International, May 1979, American Concrete Institute. I I I I I I Conrad P. Bridges, P.E., S.E. Page 5 Bridges, Conrad P., "Wind Loading on Falsework," research report, 1975, Caltrans. I Bridges, Conrad P., "Analysis of Heavy Duty Shoring Under Combined Loads," Report, 1975, Caltrans. Bridges, Conrad P., "Report of Analytical Investigation, Falsework Collapse at Mayhew Road Overhead," 1973, Caltrans. I Bridges, Conrad P., et a!., "Bridge Falsework Manual," 1973, Caltrans (assisted in preparation). Professional Activities I American Society of Civil Engineers I I I I I I I I I I I I lilt I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I William M. Dowd, P.E., S.E. Structures Mr. Dowd is an executive vice president and national technical director of bridges for HDR Engineering. His responsibilities include coordinating interoffice design activities among the company's 14 bridge design centers. He also serves as a project principal or senior project manager responsible for . directing design work, client coordination and project quality control for major bridge and tunnel projects. In addition to his project management background, Mr. Dowd has extensive design, inspection and rehabilitation experience for highway, railroad, and pedestrian bridges. This experience includes work with steel, timber, pre-tensioned, post-tensioned, and conventionally reinforced concrete structures. Basis For Team Selection M.5./1972/Civil Engineering B.S.! J 97 J /Civil Eng inee ring · HDR's National Technical Director of Bridges · Extensive QC Experience · Design, Inspection, and Rehabilitation Experience, including Steel, Timber, Pre- Tensioned, Post- Tensioned, and Reinforced Concrete Structures Specific project experience includes: · Orange County, California. Project principal for the precast concrete segmental alternate for the I-5/Route 55 high occupancy vehicle connector. The 1.5-mile horizontally-curved structure wa~ designed for a seismic oscillation of 0.4 g. · Oakland, California. Project principal for a major section of the Cypress Freeway replacement. This project involved the complete replacement of the existing double deck freeway, which collapsed during the Lorna Prieta earthquake. Designed along a new alignment through the Southern Pacific railroad yards, the structures have numerous geometric constraints. The project includes both a steel deck girder bridge as well as C.LP. post-tensioned concrete structures. · Stillwater Bridge, Stillwater, Minnesota. Technical director for the bridge alternative study for a new bridge spanning the St. Croix River between Stillwater, Minnesota, and Houlton, Wisconsin. HDR studied steel and concrete arches and segmental box construction while girder structures were studies by another consultant. The 3,000-foot bridge, which will span a designated scenic waterway, is receiving the attention of environmentalists, historians, recreational boaters, civic leaders as well as highway user groups. Three-dimensional computer-aided drafting and design modeling with extensive color enhanced computer rendering of each alternative has aided in the public involvement process. · Colorado River Bridge at Hoover Dam. Technical director. HDR's portion of the project involved development of preliminary concept drawings, estimates and specifications for a concrete arch on one alignment and steel arch structures on each of three alternative alignments. Clear spans ranged from 760 feet to 1.500 feet for the three sites. · 99th A venue, Phoenix, Arizona. Project manager for the design of the Outer Loop Freeway interchange with Interstate 10. The three level interchange included approximately 2 miles of widening of 1-10; I mile of the new Outer Loop Freeway, four directional ramps and two smaller interchanges. All 10 bridges, having a total length of more than I mile, are designed with post-tensioned concrete box girder superstructures. The four main directional ramp structures also have steel plate girder superstructure alternate designs. · 1-10 and 1-17 Interchange, Phoenix, Arizona. Project manager for preliminary and final design of the 4,200-foot twin four-lane viaducts carrying the 1-10 main line through the interchange. State-of-the-art features included finite element analysis for live load distribution, use of wide girder spacing (up to 15 feet-IO inches), redundant load path for steel pier caps and concrete stay-in-place deck panels. 1il'1 William M. Dowd, P.E., S.E. Page 2 . 1-80/I-480IKennedy Freeway, Omaha, Nebraska. Project manager for the reconstruction. Preliminary and final design for the replacement of 11 main line and directional ramp bridges of the existing interchange. Extensive staging of bridge construction is required to accommodate continuous traffic maintenance. Both steel plate girder and prestressed girder designs were used with four of the bridges being designed with concrete and steel alternatives. Each of the 11 structures are on horizontally-curved alignment. Three-dimensional finite element modeling was used for the curved steel plate girder designs. . Nebraska City Missouri River Bridge. Project manager for the construction phase and assistant project manager for the design phase. This high level structure includes a four-span cast-in-place concrete segmental river crossing with a maximum span of 416 feet. The balanced cantilever erection technique allowed uninterrupted use of the inland waterway navigation channel. The project also includes eight continuous prestressed girder approach spans. . U.S. 61, Dubuque, Iowa. Engineering management consultant for four final bridge design contracts. . Interstate 10, El Paso, Texas. Replaced two bridges. Rehabilitated and widened one bridge. . Franklin County, Florida. Apalachicola River steel alternate. . BeIYue, Kansas. U.S. 24, Union Pacific Railroad overpass. . 1-35 and 1-635 Interchange, Overland Park, Kansas. Preliminary design for rehabilitation and widening of five bridges. . Kearney, Nebraska. "H" Avenue viaduct. . Las Vegas, Nevada. Tropicana Avenue railroad underpass. . Omaha, Nebraska. Vinton Street viaduct. . Miami, Florida. Metrorail Miami River Bridge. . Omaha, Nebraska. "F" Street viaduct. . Dorchester, Nebraska. Dorchester viaduct. . Omaha, Nebraska. Harrison Street relocation. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Philip W. Walker, E.I. Structures Mr. Walker's professional training and experience has centered on analysis and design of several bridge structures. His background includes post-tensioned box girder bridges, as well as smaller bridges. , Engineering student trainee with the Federal Highway Administration on the Natchez Trace Parkway construction projects near Columbia, TN. The responsibilities entailed construction inspection of various concrete structures including: three 800-foot long post-tensioned cast-in-place box girder bridges, various AASHTO girder, and slab structures. Pertinent project experience includes: · 4th over 1-275, Pinellas County, Florida. Design engineer on the two- span (206'/208') cast-in-place post-tensioned concrete box bridges. · 9th Street Bridge over 1-275, Pinellas County, Florida. Design review of the two-span (142'/170') post-tensioned concrete bridge. · Ulmerton Road Bridge over 1-275, Pinellas County, Florida. Design engineer for the two span (211' 1 241 ') post-tensioned concrete box bridge. · South Skyway Fishing Pier Replacement, Pinellas County, Florida. Design engineer of the multi-span, AASHTO Type II girder bridge. Basis for Team Selection B.5./1990/Civil Engineering M. 5./1991 /Structural Engineering · Knowledgeable in design of concrete structures. · Proficient with structural analysis and design software including: - GTSTRUDL -SAP - SEISAB - LPILE/GROUP - SPAN · 1-4 Widening, Hillsborough County, Florida. Conducted type selections for several overcrossings. Structural types consisted of AASHTO prestressed girder, post-tensioned concrete box girder, and curved steel girder. · Construction Services, Florida. Inspection during construction of a multi-span curved steel girder. Engineering services on construction issues of various other projects. Aided a preliminary study of alternate ideas for value engineering services on a major bridge structure across Tampa Bay. · Precast Substructure Study, Florida. Assisted in study to determine cost effective ways for precasting substructure components for typical highway bridges. · Stillwater Bridge over the S1. Croix River, Minnesota. Design engineer on the twin fourteen span (102 meter span) precast cantilevered segmental bridges. · American River Bridge Crossing, Folsom, California. Provided assistance in the design of the main spans for the post-tensioned concrete box bridge. The structure's design is incorporating the use of light-weight concrete. · Metropolitan Washington Airport Authority Phase VI Highway Bridges. Provided preliminary design and conducted design reviews for two cast-in-place multi-cell post-tensioned concrete box bridges. · West Connector Overcrossing Seismic Retrofit, Concord, California. Performed seismic analysis of the nine span post-tensioned concrete box structure set in a 400' radial curve. · Route 242/680 Separation Seismic Retrofit, Concord, California. Seismic analysis of the 12 span varied superstructure bridge. · Route 92/101 Separation Seismic Retrofit, San Francisco, California. Performed design review of the multi-level interchange. Ii}"\ Philip W. Walker, E.!. Page 2 . Cypress Freeway Replacement (1-880), Oakland, California. Served as design engineer for final design and review of multiple segments of the large freeway project. Responsibilities included deck design for 18 steel plate girder spans, seismic joint analysis and review, substructure design and review, review of post-tensioned concrete box superstructure. design review and detailing of the concrete box superstructure for special seismic loadings. . Boston Central Artery (D012A - concrete alt.), Boston, Massachusetts. Design engineer for the superstructure of a three span unit using span-by-span construction. Design review of both superstructure and substructure for a seven span unit comprised of twin boxes. . Seabreeze Bridge (Florida SR 430), Volusia County, Florida. Conducted peer review of the superstructure for the 49' wide haunched box girder with 250' spans using balanced cantilever construction. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Heidi Elliott, E.I. Structures I Ms. Elliott has 8 years of experience in the areas of prestressed concrete bridge design as well as post-tensioned concrete box girder bridge design.. Her experience also includes reinforced earth retaining walls, shop drawing reviews, and the design of various sign structures and foundations. Basis For Team Selection I B.S.//987/Civil Engineering I · Performance of advanced preliminary engineering for the preparation of bridge plans including horizontaVvertical curve analysis and structural analysis; . 5 Years of FDOT Design Experience . 8 Years of Bridge Design Experience Her experience includes: I . Design of bridge components of reinforced concrete, structural steel and prestressed concrete including footings, piles, columns, girders, diaphragms, slabs, wing walls and bridge barriers; I · Design of overhead truss and cantilever sign structures; I . Design of cantilever arm-mounted signals structures; · Initiating and implementing statewide Railroad Grade Crossing Inspection Program; and I · Analyzing and recording data involving hazard areas and interpreting plans for the formulation of solutions to highway/rail safety problems. I Specific projects include: · 9th Street Bridge over 1-275, PineIlas County, Florida. Design Engineer for the two-span continuous cast-in-place post-tensioned concrete box girder bridge over 1-275. I · 4th Street Bridge over 1-275, PineIlas County, Florida. Design Engineer for the substructure of the two-span continuous cast-in-place post-tensioned concrete box girder bridge over 1-275. I · 1-4 Bridges over Tampa Bypass Canal, HiIIsborough County, Florida. Design Engineer for three AASHTO Girder Bridges over the Tampa Bypass Canal. I · Polk County Parkway Bridges, Polk County, Florida. Design Engineer for two AASHTO Girder Bridges over 1-4. I · Spring Road Bridge, Polk County, Florida. Design Engineer for the AASHTO Girder Bridge over Polk County Parkway. · SR 776 over Ainger Creek, Charlotte County, Florida. Participated in design team for the 220' prestressed concrete bridge. I · Howard Frankland Bridge, PineIlas County, Florida. Ship impact study for the old bridge across Tampa Bay, as well as, finalization of bridge rehabilitation plans. I · Dual Overpass over SC-170, Beaufort, South Carolina. Performed design of 250' continuous steel plate girder bridges. I ID'1 I I Heidi Elliott, E.!. Page 2 I . US 221 over South Tyger River, Spartanburg, South Carolina. Perfom1ed design of a 250' continuous prestressed concrete bridge with 50' spans. I · Twin Bridges over South Tyger River on 1-26, Spartanburg, South Carolina. Widened and rehabilitated 400' prestressed concrete bridges to include an additional lane, as well as, a 10' wide shoulder on each bridge. I · Overpass over US 76/37B, Union, South Carolina. Performed design of a 332' structural steel rolled beam and steel plate girder bridge with a 130' main span. I · Overpass over Becker Sand and Gravel Railroad, South Carolina. Design of a 200' continuous structural steel rolled beam bridge. I . Lloyd Creek Bridge, Edgefield, South Carolina. Design of a 150' bridge consisting of tlat slab concrete approaches and a prestressed concrete main span. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Jos van Dijk Structures I Mr. van Dijk has over five years experience in bridge engineering; initially, two years in construction and inspection and currently in bridge design. He has extensive experience in the 5.1. (metric) system. His specific project experience includes: Basis For Team Selection I B.S./] 990/Civil Engineering I · SR 77 over North Bay (Bailey Bridge), Bay County, Florida. Design Engineer of substructure consisting of pile bents and prestressed concrete AASHTO beams for this 3,600'-long bridge. · 6 Years Experience Using Metric System . Extensive Design Experience . Segmental Construction Experience I · Ulmerton Road Bridge over 1-275, Pinellas County, Florida. Design Engineer of substructure, pot bearings, and strip seal expansion joints for this cast-in-place concrete box girder bridge. I · 9th Street Bridge over 1-275, Pinellas County, Florida. Design Engineer of pot bearings and strip seal expansion joints for this cast-in-place concrete box girder bridge. I · SR 90 over Gordon River, Collier County, Florida. Design Engineer of anchored and cantilevered retaining walls, consisting of precast concrete sheet piles. I · 1-75 Sound Barrier Wall, HiIIsborough County, Florida. Design Engineer of precast post and panel sound barrier wall. I · Central Artery (1-93)trunnel (1-90) Project, Boston, Massachusetts. Design Engineer of edge beams and modular expansion joints for the precast concrete segmental box girder viaducts. · Various FDOT Projects. Design Engineer of span wire structures, cantilever signal structures, and steel cantilever and span overhead sign structures. I · Seminole Expressway Lake Jesup Bridge, Seminole County, Florida. Responsible for all aspects of construction engineering inspection and concrete and soil testing for these twin 1.5 mile long AASHTO girder bridges. I · 1-595/SR 84/ US 441 Interchange, Broward County, Florida. Responsible for all aspects involving the construction of precast concrete segmental bridges using balanced cantilever construction and AASHTO girder bridges. This is a four-level interchange consisting of 19 bridges. I I I I I lil\ I I .. I " I Q) I I I I C) u c: Q) .- ..... ... I O:J . ... "0 CI) C. .::.t. ... ~ CO CI)>c. Q)..... I .~:c ~ CO ._ :J .c c: ..... ... 0 CI) :J .- Q).....~ I ~ Q) ... :t= - u ::OQ) ... ... ..... "OC:~ I c: O:t= Q) U :: /Xl "0 ~ c: CI) CI) Q) I Q) co- :J Q).c CI) ... ~ CI) CO c: 0 U ".P I .- ~ U ..... CI) :J Q) .- ... ~-..... ..... = CI) CI) Q) c: Q) ~ 0 I <X:CI)U I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I '~ CI)..... co "- ~ ~ co "0 ~ C CI)~ ,+=..0 Q) C ~ 0 CI) ".j:i ..... u () 2 Q) ..... ..... CI) o c .... 0 C.u , 0) CI) C "~ ".: en ....:J::,{. co "0 .... :J co t)~c. Q):O"O "_ c ~..oco ..... .... .- :J C ~.....o - ".j:i ...... 0 co '"' .::. Q) C C .... Q) 0 U a:l U ~ ~..c Vl +-' I co .- .... ~ ~ 0) CO "0 0) C C ..c 0) C) Vl- I C ,+=.0 L.U - ~ Q) C ..... ..c 0 (,) Vl .,p 0)- (,) I ....... 0 ..... ::::l o .... (,) .... ......... Cl.. C 0)..... ..... Vl ~ 0 o C u.iu .... 0 I 0..:> 0.(,) ..... ~ C) ~ - Vl C . C CO 0) .- Vl 0) ::::l .- .... ~ O)d ro ::::l .... I > ~ Vl ::::l "0 CO .....>0. .... . 0) Vl ..... O)L.U ::::l 0) .- "0 "00..: Vl ~ C Vl ..c.oCO C I ro"O .~ ~ C > ~ ~ ..... .Q - ..... C 0 "0 o CO ::::lQ .... 0) 0)- C ..... .... 0) C (,) I ..c := o 0) I-CO CO u .... I I I I I I I I I I 1/ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I .c "'0 .... e .~ co "'0 II) Q) .~ .::,t, ... ... .... 0 Q) ~ E 0 cO Q) Q) 0) ....c '\ CO.... 0 ~. .~ 0 0 c i' i ..'- ... 'i"Xlil -.t 0 E C'l .... II) c .~ ";: J: Q) Q) e CII i+:: c II) Q) ....; C'l e ... e c ... 0 Q) W .d.;.: Q) E (J .... a: e II) .... 0 0 c.CO :I: ., U ::::l ~ 0 .... (J ... Q) ~~~ .~ 0)- Q) 0 '\v~ .c e c. ~~ .... Q) II) N .... Q) .~ .c . ~.- 0) (J .- .... (J Q) '0' ... a.. j .~ ,.J.c LL.... me ... 0 . Q)-oW ~~a.: ... - ....; 0 c . LL:s:~Li! .!: 0 > a.. Q) :; Q; > u.i .g>>"Ooa.: .;:: ~ e cc cccoCOe"O e .... > co ~ o(J)eEo .~ cc ~ >- 0 "Oo.cco- wI....3;:C6 a: UJ > a: UJ UJ J: (.) I- W <: C) J: o dj a: 0 a:l 0 ...J Z <: o (.) en UJ o J: W I- a: UJ > o /j) (') r-. a: Cf) I ,.;., ". '0,( I I I I I I I I I I I I I I; I I I I +-' (.) Q) '0' .... c.. c o . LlJ "0 . Q)c.. .:::t. ~ ....c OQ)w s~~ 0.... ~ . ..c Q) >w S"OO~ '+- ceo ~ '+-co or< CO > C '-' +-' CO~ U)cEo 0:: :::::l >.0 O Q) co- I~Si:O t , '~........._'" ..c "0 ;~ C ~ co "0 ~ Q) .- .:::t.,;; .... Q) ~ ~ ~ Q) ~~ ......c <t:+-' (.) 0 ._ 0 .... E BU) .~ Q) I C 'i=+-' .. Q) C ~ 0:: Q) .... 0 E Q)+-,+-, (.) en co C C. Q) O:::::l~ U 0 (.) .... Q) .~~ 0 Q)cc.. ..cQ)+-, t) .!:::! ..c Q) .~ C) <t:U:.J , ~ 1 , ~e' "0 C ... ~ Q) ..0 Q) 0 .s: +-' Q) C) (/) C) c: c: "0 W E .~ +-' :J OJ U 0 J:tt. Q) .~ u ... 0 ca ... ... Q) a.. a.. "0 Q) ~ c: . +-' W Q) ca +-' a.. (/) (f) ~ c: c: ca J:tt. ... :J Q) ~ ca cc Q) c.. > > (/) c: Q) ... Q) J:tt. Q) :J tI) ... "0 (/) Q) :J (/) Q) ~ c ... "J;'..,. ca u +-' > .p= c Q) ca .c +-' :J +-'.c Q) tI)+-, .c Q) .- ~ <( ~ I .Ai-'~ ,. .... .'" '" I c Q) a. ~ 0 Q) = - Q) "O~ I c c -- C> ro:::: c Ul Q) W C II) +'" E~ I u Q) ::J CO ,r .0' o a. ~ u.c - a. "0 :~ ~ I ,- w Q) ~ f/II "0 Q) a. c_ ::J.o , c o "- Q,) a:ro I Q) 0. > en E ~ Q) 0 Q) ::J U "0 en Q) I en ~ C Q) CO U ~ > "';:; c Q) = .c II) I ::J 1;) ~ Q) .c Q) Q) >1 I- ~ ":;; I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I cW "'0 C ro ... Q) ... Q) Q) C "'0 0) ... c 0) w ~ Q) +-' =0......: 0) U "'0 Q) Q) ro 'i: '0' ..c Q.l co ... u c. a.. c c. ::l ro w ro ro I :J a.. CIl c > Q) ... Q) 0 > CIl '+- Q) C '- ::l E Q) CIl "'0 CIl :J C 0 ro u u - > "';:: "'0 .__.r._,....~4.1 Q) Q.l C ..c ..c ::l +-' U Q) CIl +-' ..c Q) 0 l- e::( c - I .... Q) "0 .... .... Q) 0) Q) co I c:: +-' 0) c:: c:: Q) w E - Q) +-' 0) co I 0) () Q) Q,) , "0 Q) en a. .... '0' : a. eo .... "0 ro 0.. Q) ro ~ .c ~ I, w () en c:: .- 0.. ~ > co .... ~ J: 0 c:: Q) '4- I Q) c:: > en E .... Q) ~ Q) ~ 0 "0 en en () ,I c:: "0 ro () Q) > +-' .c c:: Q) () .c +-' I ~ +-' 0 Q) en c:: ..c:: Q) I- <t:~ I I I I I ',';,..i I " \~' I ',,: I. i.~~7;0~\. " ::'~~,1,;"i,. ."~'~~ ;', I ,,::xc, ~"'" .' ,', , '~~:~~._:.'}\'-,: ',. ..,..,~",,\.~ ...~ .~..\ .-.0, ~~t .,>~1;~;:.~~b-: ,~',~--'~~~r I ,"-" '" .;~L ~~~. ,;'" . .,-' / . I!' 'i ,v.,.~:;~.i).,.;: '.,,<, , ,t.,;.'o' ,....J "C,-." ,.....}j'\../ ',-""----- . ~::,;-';);;~: ','. :-,,~~}~.~.~ _"'I"_t~ '('"7,").,..,.1'< 'A oft' '\.' ..' ...~.- - :t,:" ' , ',' ',~j" ,-., I ~fi;~</. >;;",.F~"=)+ ~ :'j;,?"""" ..'. ' \. iit: 1~> .!f " 1_ I ," ...; .'..f\ . \ ,\ ~;: <'~ ';~\' ,. -~ .........~ ..,~ .."'... \ . ",:. ---....... " . '\ .\". :~, .~(~ - "'t';.,,... .~.,- .....~ " ":~.\: I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I - ...: .~ ~ 'II. I ,~,~\ ,I, i , L.U \ .~: j"'rJ \'" I \. \ u ";:: +-' Q) E > en ~ o '+- ..... Co Q) U C o U "0 Q) .c. u ~ <1: .. en Q) ::J- enC'O enQ.l - c.. uc.. ".j:j <( Q) .c.- .....C'O en:J Q)"~ <1:> I I I I I ~ o C '+- .Q ~ CI) +-' Q) .l: ro Q) +-' +-' "~ ~ ~ g> ~ ~ W C Q) E Q) ::J';; 0"0 U 0 Q) 0 , .0 ~ W ro"O a.. "-=: ro , ro.l: a5 > >- Q) > > CI) ro ~ Q) Q) Q) ::J.l: "0 ~-5 ~ :;.~ > "';:; C) C Q) C ::J -5:C Q) CI) C .l: Q) Q) 1-<.0 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ..... CJ Q) '0' .... Cl. .~ .c ~ c Ow -g~ ~ , ....c w o Q) ~ Q) Cl. 0> .1/) .c....wQ) > Q) . C) >-oCl.-o c ,'- ro -0 .... >~OJ CO-o c::Joe o~=g I~mU I I I I I I I I I I I ,: ,1[' C-o Ctl c a.ro I/) rno 0)'- c E I/) .- 0 15.. -0 C Q) C 0 CJ :J CJ C e Q) o .... u:J"": I/) ro Q) .c C 0)..... 0 -0 .- .- .- > ..... .... > CJ OJ-oC c :J Q)- OJ Q) OJ ..... CJ Ctl a. E I I I I 'il " . li!~ , ;'\'r!fc::' !i~ " E ro o -0 I/) ~ Q) . o ~ I/) Ctl o I/) -5 :J I- I/) CJ 0)._ ._ C > 1i) Q) Ctl .c.....Q) t)ro~ Q) Q) Ctl <{c,E I I ~ I ~~ I I ..... I (.) Q) '0' '- [l. I c 0 -0 Q) .:,t. '- I 0 ~ 0 ..c w I ~ [l. ..... ..... -0 CO 3: ..... en 0 I a: 0 0 I OJ I I I I I > I CO ::::l .. (I) (I) .- c > C, '- c I Q) Q) .- (.) .0 ..... C ..c o .~ U ~ - .....-0 I C c Q) CO E c iii ..coO) ......= c I (1)>:= Q) c .- < Q) e I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Q) ...... o 'l- Q) CO I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 0) C "'0. C 0) .0 "'0 C co II) 0) c 0) ""'"' .Vi .c ""'"' o o E II) 0) c .~ CO o Cll .c .... II) CO - Cll -0) .c o)+-' CO.c E .t= =- ~ I I I I I I I I I I Q) I ~ 0 '+- Q) OJ = I I c ro I .c ~ => I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I CI) CI) Q) () M~ 0>- .- CO ;:; ~ .~ Q) C > .~ .!: "0 ~ O)(/) c: Q) .- c: c: ._ Q)- -o..c: .- +-' ~gCl) >-Ec: CO CI).~ ~ 0)-0 ..c: c: Q) 0)-- E .- ~ :I: 0-0 CI) ..c: Q) .- CI) (/) >. ~ CO -Q) .... o 0) 0) CO-o E c: =- co III II n~'/ ~"\-'~~ --...~ q;" (") O'li <0' > w. ....J. LLI ."S- "/":H :i:\ :&;;; I ~ '~d~~ li0;~oc'J ~ ,Ii:' 1\ Ii tff=== ! !/I:,' " ". ~, . ."' ~ ' . 1-" ~ - ~ ' .: j 11 ~ ~;::-----:- .... ~ ::J l:ll it C/) c:: ~ t': III -(;1 'Vi r: o () 't] r:: ClC\1 CII l: :::Eo c:'.;: o ,e- '- ..... ..... \.) CII (J) I.l Cll .3C) Cll QJ .... ..... U5 {fl ri3 ;:" 0: >( '0 ..... II Cii '= (!) ;:" o t: l!J Ol:ll Cl.."O Cll '- lJ:el1 ~c:: ::J.E -- C/)::J CIl~ ~~ I- (!) ..... ~~ "0::;:: ...... .."" .....- 0)Cf) ll. lL ::l -d ro Z (jj Z o () (f) ~ ,. /1~ , Ji:;:J //! 2 . <C( w a: ~ (f) Z S o o '&{ ~~: c5 ~ U) o .....~ !.'l III I>", ~ ,~ I!. ~ Q .- "= ~ ~ \!l "e '(fj !Il e: e: Q 00 ".;:-0 Cll r: ~ Cll .,JI:; ...,0 1::;: 'o'~ Q.~ III !Il ~!1l ~Q !;; !1l ~~ ~ (J.j li f I I ; I' I ~ I, ", \!l ::., ii: ,~ ~ "'" U ...: lJ) "" \!l ~ o .... ... Cll 8.~ III '- l:l:: ... I:Q ~!;; ::::! () ...,:::: lI) :':l \!l l:l e.~ ~~ l!l~ ~~ .~ ~ Cl:lU) ! ~fil ~ [,1 ~~ i ~ Il:':l [, ~ ~ i ~~;a ~!i ~4 .--..", :!t -~ ! ~ ~iI ~E' ~Q, :;':j~ m~ ~ .i<l ~~ ',\';I g ~g ~ {:) ~ <ll ~ 'ti1 ~ G "'" ~. ~ ~ <<; <ll "" ~~ I ~~ :" <!l~ f 'Iil III o"g <::::;J ~ ii' =. -~ 5'~ ~ '>>. '91 Ij; ~ ~ @,,1Ji '1;1 @ :;, 'li;J [tl ~- i ~. ~ \yj ,~ tJ ~ 'I .~ ~~II f% \l!J 3 !i " IJ ,~ t:-;, ,~, ifI~ '~jl <5 .~.,~ (f} Pi ~\ "'"" P! 1'\.) Ie' E1 ~) ~.. ,~ ~~ ~ ('(I ,~~ ~.,. \.1~ ti: J';;: "'""-J I: Q, l\l ()i ~l a ~ q~ l!)- c:~ (t~ ~~ .~ ~ .~ Q ~-'"=l (\ ':----; (fJ ~\ fj 't~ ti Ct Q) 0;; ~ F~ ~ .2 (f) 'g ~~ h ~.~ (II tl:1 tJ) ~: ~~ rn (!) ~ ~ Q) " ~ it .t:: e ~ (Qo:t: ~ Q> -- (II C\) c: t5 ;c I:::: I;) .9 t::l ~,' ~, \), s; ~ ,~ Q >.. () [I) "" ~i :>, o I "= t"., t:n o 6i Q.'Q III '- O:O:i :.., 'tI l':: :,,2 i/)'5 Cll a Q..J: :..,":' I-~ Q> ~ ~! ...... ~ "'- COt/) 23) -fill. r?) ~..~ lj~; ~\II lr: ~ CHALLEI\I.GING THE '90s TiillOUGI-I TECHNOLOGY !}c,] 8J&1! [/ Dlj ((~; " 21) (Lf] fJiJ(cO !/@jrn~I:{) (0 {f E:\/s'!~!.:;don !(;t!)J(ljji/D'J:[r"y/ spanning rivers and water- Location Studies ways, railroads and transit, reservoirs Layout, Concept and Feasibility Studies and lakes, highways, canyons, ravines Borings and Subsurface Exploration and structures. Bridge engineering demands a wide range of specialized knowledge and experience, At HDR Engineering, this is reflected in our broad bridge capa- bilities: Steel and Concrete Arch arid L'"':o:1strucdon Simple, Continuous, and Cantilever Trusses Design Development Beam and Plate Girder Foundation Design Box Girders Structural Design Cast-in-Place and Precast Segmental Specifications and Special Provisions Prestressed Concrete Construction Documents Post-Tensioned Concrete Analysis and Design Manuals Suspension Spans Erection and Demolition Analyses Cable Stayed Consultation during Construction Curved Steel and Concrete Structures Construction Inspection/Management Shop Drawing Review ~~tEi With sensitivity to function, environ- ment and cost, HDR Engineering offers Inspection the experience, the people and the Evaluation modern design techniques for all Rating bridges-long and short spans, simple Fatigue Analysis to complex. Damage Surveys Repair Analysis Rehabi litation Failure Analysis P'ATHIF!NIDJIE~'1lS Program of Excellence Excellence is a way of life at HDR. We practice excellence in service to our clients and strive for continuing excel- lence within our company. As Pathfinders - those who discover the way, problem- solvers and innovative thinkers, HDR employees seek and find solutions in all areas of architecture, engineering and facilities management. Our Program of Excellence is called PATHFINDERS. HDR Engineering, Inc. li)~ .....- I I I I I I I I I I I I I Prestressed Girders Stretch to Meet Railroad Needs by Hernan Solarte, P.E., and William Dowd, P.E. Many North American railroads began exten- sive use of precast prestress concrete slabs and "T" girders for trestle spans in the early 1970s. Box girders began capturing a larger share of the intermediate trestle span market during the later part of that same decade. Presently, the majority of the trestles built on the continent are constructed with precast concrete components. Most railroads have developed standard plans and use annual contracts with precasters to supply their bridge component needs. In addition to competitive cost, reasons for the increased use of precast prestressed bridge systems include the follow- ing value added features: . Inherent corrosion protection without painting . The bridge deck and girders are combined into single units . Speedy erection . Standardized modules can be replaced rapidly if damaged The increased use of precast pre- stress beams has generally been Precast, prestressed design technology met restrictive project requirements on the Lewis Street overpass in Anaheim, Calif. confined to straight forward stream crossing structures with spans of 20 m (60 ft) or less. As the com- fort factor with precast concrete systems has grown, the occasional use for longer and more complex spans is now becoming more com- monplace. HDR recently had the opportunity to use the advantages of precast prestressed girders for a relativity complex grade separation structure, the Lewis Street overpass in Anaheim, Calif. Lewis Street Grade Separation The project, designed for the Southern California Regional Rail Authority (SCRAA), is a grade separation of a mainline railroad over Lewis Street, a high-volume urban arterial. The end spans measure 18.1 m (59.5 ft) with the two interior spans measuring 29.9 m (98 ft), a relatively long span for a precast railroad bridge. The width of the single-track structure is 5 m (Continued on Page 2) INS IDE D Nrxfo/Polnls II D rTyp.J Prestressed P-Delta Metric Girders Put Analysis Moment to the Test Clarified ID~ The web thicknesses of the inverted "T" bent caps vary to accommodate the horizontal curve. (Continued from Page 1) (16.5 ft) plus a .8 m (2.5 ft) closure plate between the new and existing bridges. Each of the four simple spans, utilize four 2 m (6.5 ft) deep by 1.1 m (3.5 ft) wide precast, pre- stressed concrete single-cell box beams. (See Figure 1) The total of these 16 side-by-side precast beams form the entire superstruc- ture of the bridge. Skew Complications The severe skew angle (63 degrees) between the alignment of the rail- road and the four-lane divided arterial street below complicated the design and limited structural options. The severe skew, the presence of an adjacent continu- ous, cast-in-place post-tension concrete box girder railroad bridge, and the requirement to maintain highway traffic below eliminated the consideration of a more traditional cast-in-place con- crete structure. The steel girder alternatives considered were plagued by the requirement to use either heavily skewed substructure elements or integrally framed bent caps. Both of these options were considered to be less reliable than the precast solution. The bridge substructure consists of "U" shape concrete abutments and three cast-in-place single column bents with inverted "T" caps. The flexibility of precast simplified the complications of the skew. By using radial orientations for the inverted "T" pier caps and by pro- viding dapped ends on the pre- stressed girders, the bottom of the bent caps were made flush with the bottom of the boxes. This allowed the bent caps to cantilever over the traffic lanes without restricting the vertical underclearance. Impact on Vehicular Traffic Of all the structural systems considered, the precast girder system had the least impact on vehicular traffic. Pile driving and bent construction at the shoulders and in the median had minimal impact on traffic. All 16 of the precast, prestressed B I box girders were erected during a 30-hour window on a single week- end. With the exception of this period, the roadway remained open to traffic throughout construction. Furthermore, the use of prestressed girders eliminated the customary period of substandard vertical under clearance that accompanies cast-in-place construction. I I I I Seismic Shear Transfer The precast system is quite effec- tive for transferring the high seis- mic forces. Since the bent caps are situated in the same plane as the girders, a direct bearing path is created for compression forces from longitudinal seismic loading. Since the railroad track is ballast supported, flush mounted steel restrainer plates for the longitudi- nal seismic tension forces could be placed above the girders and bent caps. (See Figure 2) This detail allowed the placement of a water- proofing membrane over the com- pleted structure. Shear pins and (Continued on Page 3) I I I I I Strand Pallern Between Harp POints '\ I' Symm abouf € I ;- Strand Paffern I crt Jacking end I T 'I~ I I 5 Spa Q Z' 10" ~ ~ Clo & I -V2""Strand (ZTO UIJ Typ ~ ~ .... 1 ll'l ~ '- ~~ 7 Spa Q Z" (-2' I 162 - 'h"" Slrands) I. 3 Spa tJ Z" 6" 1 J'-f) STR AND PATTERN DIAGRAM FOR EXTERIOR AND INTERIOR GIRDERS Scole: 'h"" (-<J' Figure 1 I I 1 I I (Continued from Page 2) I concrete restrainer blocks completed the seismic force transfer mecha- nIsms. I Meeting All Project Needs The use of precast, prestressed con- crete provided not only the most economical structure at the site, but also one that could be constructed with the least impact on railroad and vehicular traffic. The precast system provides a structure that can accommodate the heavy railroad loading on relatively long spans and also can perl'orm extremely well under seismic loading conditions. I I I I Furthermore, the use of simple span prestressed girders can be easily maintained, repaired or even replaced if unforeseen conditions such as overheight vehicular impact occurs, or if a major railroad derail- ment causes damage to the structure. I I For more information, contact Hernan Solarte, HDR-lrvine, (714) 756-6800 or Bill Dowd, HDR-Omaha, (402) 399-1000. G I I Se, Detail 8 ~. x 0'-9' x 7'-6 AJ6 Graae It. tl}<1Nanlzod! I Debond by lIastle Tope. Tape Stvll be Wrapped Around tile Pin to T/'/ckness If ~. Fill with Epoxy Resin Grout after Girder Plocemen! I 1 Fill Gap ! w/ PoIystyr8f>e ~ 'I I All 16 beams were placed within a 30-hour period. Nxitma/'lt end J'-'" typ ~ Emrlng . ~ pin I typ ! (16 GUa<)e 9' x 4'-{7 Galvanlzod I Sheet Metal with Groasod , Coating at Top I( Fill Void between soot and top of Girder with Rubber/zod Asptvlt I , , ~ 6"0 blocJ:out : I, Typ I I'" :': I F-.- ~ I YO AJ6 Grade pin ('laNanlzoo) JB", 16" x 1'/2 - Elastomerlc 80arlng Pad w,TIZl Hole" Cen/er Fixed End ~- Yz'lZlX 2r-10' Hair Pin SrranG' 1Z70 /(slJ Ancoor-Bend t: 7' 0 L-lr 7'-J' E xponslon End ANCHOR DETAIL AT BENTS 2 AND 4 Seal'" %" r-{7 Figure 2 I I II Column Buckling and Moment Magnifications by Dr. Sharad H. Mote, S.E., and Louie Caparelli, P.E. Even though most bridge piers and columns appear rather bulky at first glance, many fall into a catego- ry requiring moment amplification for slenderness. Nearly every bridge engineer has found him or herself methodically calculating the moment amplification factor only to be totally surprised by the order of magnitude of the resulting answer. It is at this point the engineer notices the key word "approximate" in the title of AASHTO Section 8.16.5.2 This begs the question, "How approxi- mate is it?" The answer to this question can be "not even close" for many bridge applications. Even though bridge piers generally are vertical members that carry the gravity loads, they also carry high lateral and longitudinal forces from the various AASHTO load groups. These loads generate large shears and bending moments that often control the design. When columns are sized for all of the loading con- ditions, bending moments generally predominate, and axial loads can be quite nominal. The resulting mem- ber can be described as a vertical bending member that also carries axial load. It is for this reason that the AASHTO approximate applica- tion factors can become overly con- servative. It is important to keep in mind that the moment magnifiers were originally developed by ACI for building columns, which have relatively high axial loads and more nominal bending moments. When confronted with unrealistic moment application factors, the design engineer has three choices: . increase the cross sectional dimensions of the member . use a more exact analysis method . get reassigned to a different bridge project The boss may not accommodate the last opinion, and there are cer- tain limitations on the first. This creates an uneasy feeling that the middle option, as scary as it seems, may be the only way out. This article will not give guidance on talking your boss into rescheduling your assignments, but it may help improve your comfort level with "higher order" analysis. Buckling Evaluation Method The Euler Buckling Load of a col- umn with any boundary condition can be evaluated with a nonlinear P-Delta method. The method is load dependent or non-linear as it starts with known primary displacements. Computer software can greatly sim- plify the required analysis, which involves the repetitive adjustment of the stiffness matrix to account for the deflected shape of the column defined by the prior iteration. In this iterative method: . Primary displacements are cal- culated for the applied loading. . Stiffness corrections are applied on the members stiffness matri- ces based on observed displace- ments. A new global stiffness matrix is assembled based on revised member stiffness matrices. . Load vectors are revised to include the secondary effects due to primary displacements. . The new set of equations are solved to generate new displacements. . Member forces and support reactions are calculated from these new displacements. The P-Delta analysis is recom- mended by the ACI Code in lieu of moment magnification methods. II I I In essence, the P-Delta method con- sists of subdividing the column into an even number of segments, say eight, and run the P-Delta analysis on any general purpose frame pro- gram that has a nonlinear analysis option. HDR uses the program "STAAD" or "STRUDL" for this analysis. The loads are incremen- tally increased until column buck- ling occurs. The method is similar to "Newmark's Method" in the days of hand calculations. The method gives upper bound answers, and the answer converges to the buck- ling load. The finer the subdivision of the column, the more accurate the answer. The column must be subdivided into subelements so that at least the three lowest buckling modes can be reasonably represent- ed by the deflected shapes. The method is valid for any boundary condition, including elastic fixity at the ends and variable cross section. I I I I I I I I Buckling load of frames without hinges can be directly evaluated by STRUDL using eigenvalues and eigenmodes of the stiffness matrix. I I Test Problems The validity and accuracy of the above statement should be verified by running some examples with known answers. The following two cases will be investigated to determine the buckling load for a column with constant EI, divided into eight segments, and having the following boundary conditions: I Problem A: column pinned at both ends Problem B: column fixed at the base and free at the top The specific data for each of these test problems is presented in (Continued on Page 5) Column Data for P Both Test Problems t A = 0.657 m2 E: 1= 0.0343 m4 E: "- E: <:: "- E: rv, <:: lC) r--...: r = 229 mm lC) '" ~ ~ r--...: E = 25000 MPa I I I I I Per' 157 MN I Figure 1: Classical Column Buckling Test Problems (Continuedfrom Page 4) I Figure 1. The test problems were solved with STAAD. I In both cases the vertica110ads will be applied starting at 95% of the buckling load and increased gradually to a load level that will give diverging deflections as stated in the convergence criteria noted below. A nominal lateral load should be applied to the system to disturb the equilibrium. I I Convergence Criteria Analyze the nonlinear system for say five cycles, six cycles and seven cycles. Let the critical deflections for each respective cycle be 65, 66 and 67. If the difference (66-65) < (67-66), then the deflection is divergent. If the difference (66-65) > (67-66) then the deflection is convergent, i.e. the frame is not buckling and the load can be increased. The results of the test problems show good correlation between the values determined by the P-Delta method and the classical Euler the- oretical buckling loads: Problem A: 4% higher than the theoretical value Problem B: 1 % higher than the theoretical value Per' 39.3 MN 5) The gravity loads should be increased to find the minimum frame buckling load and to determine which column buck- les first. 6) As this analysis considers only geometric nonlinearity and does not consider material nonlinearity, convergence to the frame buckling load will occur with no consideration for the permissibility of those stresses. Since column buckling is not a ductile failure mode, the frame buckling analysis should verify that the column axial loads are at least two times the factored col- umn loads. It was also observed that higher values of KL/R give more accurate answers than lower KL/R values. The KL/R for Test Problem A was 32 and for Problem B it was 64. Evaluation of Frame Buckling The buckling analysis of a contin- uous concrete rigid frame bridge structure represents a common yet complicated type of buckling problem confronted by bridge engi- neers. For this type of structure, the model and procedures used to evalu- ate column buckling should consist of the fol- lowing: 1) The model should include the full plane frame. 2) The columns should be subdivided into at least eight equal segments. (See Figure 2) 3) The moment of inertia of the variable sections should vary as in the real structure. 4) For the first pass, the effective moment of inertia of the column "Ie" should be assumed to be Ig/2 to represent a locally cracked col- umn. B The buckling values are linearly proportional to E and I of the columns. Both E and I of the (Continued on Page 6) It. Unloaded Column Nodalo!splacements Used to Ad Just the Stfffness Matr!x (Typ.J Figure 2: Model of a Fixed Base, Integral Top Column for P-Delta Analysis (Continued from Page 5) frame are changing with time. Therefore, it is difficult to arrive at a unique moment magnification factor. A realistic range of Ec *Ie has to be assumed and the design made safe for the assumed range. Use Ec for buckling analysis; where Ec is modulus of elasticity of concrete at 28 days. The plane frame analysis will pre- dict column buckling loads in the plane of the frame. If columns are slender in the lateral direction, a similar analysis is required to assess lateral buckling. Biaxial assessment may be necessary if similar slenderness exists in both directions. For many rectangular bridge columns, lateral buckling resistance will be higher than the longitudinal buckling, and there- fore will not be critical. Evaluation of Moment Magnification Using the P-Delta Method The P-Delta analysis of the frame with factored loads should give reasonably correct moment magni- fication since the intermediate nodes in the columns realistically repre- sent the deflected shape of the structure. The following procedure is non- linear so the analysis should include all of the factored loads for a given AASHTO group loading: 1) Analyze the frame with factored loads for a given column for the appropriate group loadings. 2) Design the column reinforce- ment for the factored loads. 3) Evaluate the cracked I of the columns for service loads and chosen reinforcement and eval- uate Ie as per AASHTO (8-13). 4) Check the range of Etle's to account for the appropriate amount of cracking, long-term creep and compression reinforce- ment stiffening. For P-Delta analysis use Et to account for creep deflections, where Et = Ec/(l +Bd). 5) Rerun the model for the brack- eted range of Et *Ie' 6) Repeat steps one and two for worst loads. 7) Repeat steps three and four. If the range of new Et *Ie is within the assumed range, the design is complete. Otherwise repeat the process with an expanded range. STAAD or STRUDL cannot account for time dependent defor- mations. HDR uses a program named BRUCO for time dependent analysis. It is probable that the deformations computed by BRUCO will be different than the results from STAAD. This will always be the case for post-tensioned concrete rigid frames where axial creep and shrinkage will shorten the girder members. In such cases, a correc- BRUCO "STAAD" Correction to Result Result "STAAD" Loads P PI P2 PI - P2 ~ ~l ~2 P~ PI~1 P2~2 PI ~l - P2~2 Table 1 m I tion must be made to the STAAD or STRUDL loads to account for the differences between the STAAD and BRUCO models. Table 1 shows the load correction which should be applied to the STAAD or STRUDL model for the P-Delta analysis. In this way, effects of time dependent deforma- tions can be included. For this case, corrections should be based on Ec and not Et because BRUCO has the effects of long-term creep included. I I I I I E = modulus of elasticity Ec = modulus of elasticity of concrete at 28 days Et = effective modulus of elastici- ty to account for long-term concrete creep I = moment of inertia Ig = gross section moment of inertia Ie = effective moment of intertia of cracked columns Bd = absolute value of maximum deadload moment to maxi- mum I I I I For more information, contact Dr. Sharad H. Mote or Lou Caparelli, HDR-Omaha, (402) 399-1000. G I I Dr. Mote recently joine'4 HDRasa Senior BrUl;ge Ccmsultantin. the Omaha office. He has more than 38 years of experience in structural engineering desigitandconstructiQn. I I I I I I I Hold on to Your Yardstick by Dr. Sherif Morcos, P.E. The National Highway System Designation Act (Senate Bill 440), signed by President Clinton in November 1995, postponed the mandatory metric requirement for federal-aid projects until Sept. 30, 2000. This mixed message has state DOTs skeptical about the government's commitment to the metric system. I I I I I I I Preliminary results of a survey conducted by AASHTO in December 1995 indicated that the majority of the state DOTs will continue their metric conversion and implementation efforts as originally planned, without delays. A few state DOTs will delay metric implementation as late as possible, while a few others will delay it until the conversion of all of their publications, manuals, standards, and computer programs are com- pleted and published. Other states are still assessing the impacts of the new deadline on their sched- ules for metric implementation. I I I I I The new legislation will relieve the pressure on some state DOTs who were struggling to meet the 1996 deadline. It will also elimi- nate the need for the time con- suming task of providing justification for projects that need exception to the metric require- ments. FHWA granted a total of 3,000 exceptions to the 1996 deadline and rejected 200 as of November 1995. I I I I Several state DOTs indicated that delaying their metric implementa- tion program will result in high cost of maintaining a dual system of units for a longer transition period. I I I They are also concerned that some contractors, manufacturers, and suppliers will get the impression that the metric system will never be implemented, and they will be reluctant to provide metric prod- ucts, services, or convert their operations to metric. The follow- ing are the metric implementation plans of some of the state DOTs: PennDOT metric conversion pro- gram, which is one of the largest in the nation, is progressing on schedule. It involves a compre- hensive effort to update all publi- cations, manuals, computer programs, and procedures in order to include current enhanced national specifications, such as Load and Resistance Factor Design (LRFD) for bridges, and new products, such as the F-shaped barrier. In response to the new bill, PennDOT will begin metric implementation on Jan. 1, 1997. Caltrans will have about 90% of the projects on the state highway system in metric units by the end of 1996. All projects in the seis- mic retrofit program are designed in English units and will be let before the end of 1996. The II counties, cities, and other local governments have the option of continuing in the English system or converting to metric. Illinois DOT will meet the original 1996 deadline but is concerned that the new legislation will encourage local governments to pressure the state for delays in metric imple- mentation. Illinois DOT currently has 23 metric projects in different phases of construction. Texas DOT will meet the 1996 deadline on 90% of its projects. The Department will not delay metric implementation, since it can significantly impact its letting schedules. New York DOT is progressing on schedule and will continue the design of all current and future projects in metric units. Currently New York DOT has 350 metric projects in all phases of design. The first metric project was let in the fall of 1995. Florida DOT has several hundred metric projects at different phases. Currently Florida DOT is assess- ing the benefits and costs of metric implementation since there will be a high cost to convert the current metric projects back to English units. There is also a significant cost to continue toward full metric implementation. West Virginia DOT conversion effort is more than 95% complete, with full metric implementation scheduled by July 1, 1996. WVDOT feels that it is too far along in transition to modify its current schedule. (Continued on Page 8) (Continuedfrom Page 7) North Dakota DOT will delay its metric conversion, training, and implementation for three to four years, in response to the new 2000 deadline. South Dakota DOT will delay its metric program schedule and will begin metric implementation to meet the new 2000 deadline. AASHTO and FHWA are encour- aging the state DOTs to complete their conversion efforts without any delays and begin metric imple- mentation as soon as possible. Delaying the metric requirements until the year 2000 will allow AASHTO and FHWA more time to convert the remainder of their manuals, publications, and com- puter programs to metric units. It will also allow them more time to take the lead and establish national standard hard metric dimensions for several items and products that are currently soft converted. FHWA indicated that all of its David Christensen Joins HDR David L. Christensen, PE., has joined HDR's Salt Lake City, Utah, staff in the position of Senior Structural Engineer. Christensen was formerly the Chief Structural Engineer for the Utah Department of Transportation Structures Division where he super- vised the design of nearly 250 new bridges. BridgeLine Staff Editor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Christine Kaldahl Technical Editor. . . . . . William M. Dowd, P.E. National Program Coordinator. . . Trish Newell Graphics Production. . . . . . . . . Rhonda Diers Bridgeline is a technical publication produced and distributed twice yearly by HDR Engineering, Inc. Subscription inquiries, address changes, and all correspondence should be sent to the attention of: Editor BridgeLine clo HDR Engineering, Inc. 8404 Indian Hills Drive Omaha, NE 68114 Internet e-mail address: bridgeln@hdrinc.com lilt Volume 6, NO.2 February 1996 Christensen has more than 30 years of experience in structural engineering and design. At the Utah DOT he was responsible for design and detailing of all new major highway structures. His duties involved overseeing design, maintenance and inspection of all the 1,750 bridges in the state. He designed the Eagle Canyon Bridge, which is a 130 m (428 ft) long buttressed, solid rib deck arch. Christensen also served as a I future publications will be in met- ric units. I What will happen when we come closer to the year 2000? Will the metric mandate be enforced or will it be postponed again and again, until it goes away? It sounds a lot like the same song we played in the '70s! I I I For more information, contact Dr. Sheri/Marcos, HDR-Harrisburg, (717) 772-0566. G I I member of the AASHTO Bridge Committee with assignments on the T-14 Technical Committee for Structural Steel Design and the T-13 Committee for Culverts. I I At HDR, Christensen will serve as lead structural engineer and trans- portation project manager. He will be instrumental in the business development activities to continue building HDR's Utah office. G I I I HDR Offices Nationwide Albuquerque, NM ................(505) 884-6065 Alexandria, VA .....................(703) 518-8500 Anchorage, AK ....................(907) 274-2000 Atlanta, GA ..........................(404) 843-8464 Austin, TX ............................(512) 912-5400 Boise, 10..............................(208) 342-3779 Boston, MA..........................(617) 443-9400 Charlotte, NC.......................(704) 338-6700 Chicago, IL ..........................(312) 774-7900 Clark, NJ..............................(908) 815-7807 Columbus, OH.....................(614) 481-6561 Dallas, TX............................(214) 960-4400 Denver, CO..........................(303) 764-1520 Fort Worth, TX .....................(817) 738-7891 Fresno, CA ..........................(209) 497-8746 Fort Lauderdale, FL.............(305) 772-3303 Harrisburg, PA .....................(717) 772-0566 Irvine, CA.............................(714) 756-6800 Kansas City, MO..................(816) 421-5070 Las Vegas, NV.....................(702) 256.4895 Minneapolis, MN..................(612) 591-5400 Missoula, MT .......................(406) 543-9758 B I Olympia, WA........................(206) 754-4265 Omaha, NE ........................(402) 399-1000 Orlando, FL .........................(407) 872-7801 Overland Park, KS...............(913) 469-9224 Pasco, WA ...............,...........(509) 544-9254 Pensacola, FL......................(904) 432-6800 Phoenix, AZ........,................(602) 248-6600 Pittsburgh, PA..,..,................(412) 497-6000 Portland, OR........................(503) 635-9760 Raleigh, NC.........................(919) 878-3397 Rancho Cucamonga, CA ....(909) 483-0261 Richmond, VA......................(804) 648-6630 Rock Creek, OR ..................(503) 681-8214 Sacramento, CA ..................(916) 939-4100 Salt Lake City, UT................(801) 523-0700 San Francisco, CA...............(510) 937-0985 Seattle, WA..........................(206) 453-1523 Sioux Falls, SO ....................(605) 338-2660 Tampa, FL ...........................(813) 282-2300 Virginia Beach, VA...............(804) 671-1500 White Plains, NY .................(914) 328-8505 I I I I I I