Appendix A Sample Inspection Report

PORT AUTHORITY OF ALLEGHENY COUNTY
PITTSBURGH, PENNSYLVANIA
REPORT ON THE NBIS INSPECTION OF CHARTIERS CREEK BRIDGE

BMS No. 02 7421 0000 9061

Submitted By:
Michael Baker Jr., Inc.
100 Airside Drive
Coraopolis, Pennsylvania 15108

September, 2011

STRUCTURE B.M.S. NUMBER: 02 7421 0000 9061

BRIDGE NAME: Chartiers Creek Bridge

LOCATION: Crafton, Pennsylvania

INSPECTION DATE: June 23, 2011

INSPECTED BY:

PREPARED FOR: Port Authority of Allegheny County

PREPARED BY: Michael Baker Jr., Inc.

Written By: Joseph E. Salvadori, E.I.T.

Reviewed By: Raymond A. Hartle, P.E.

PORT AUTHORITY AGREEMENT NUMBER: 11-08

OWNER OF BRIDGE: Port Authority of Allegheny County

COST INFORMATION:

DATE SUBMITTED: (Seal removed for BIRM)

TABLE OF CONTENTS

  1. Location Map
  2. Introduction
  3. Inspection Findings
    • Inspection Summary
    • Photographs
    • Drawings (Note — Drawings for this structure are not included in this example.)
    • Forms D-450’s
  4. Structural Analysis
  5. Recommendations And Cost Estimate
  6. Appendix
    • BMS Forms D-491’s (Note — Not included in this example.)

I. LOCATION MAP:

Figure A.1: Location Map (No Scale)

REPORT ON THE INITIAL NBIS INSPECTION OF CHARTIERS CREEK BRIDGE PORT AUTHORITY OF ALLEGHENY COUNTY

II. INTRODUCTION:

Location

Located in the Borough of Crafton, the Chartiers Creek Bridge carries two (2) lanes of the Port Authority of Allegheny County’s West Busway over Chartiers Creek, and the Pittsburgh Industrial Railroad, Inc.

Year Built

The approximate date of the original construction of the Chartiers Creek Bridge is 1948. The structure was built by the Pennsylvania Railroad Company. Rehabilitation was completed in July 1997.

Load Posting

None required.

Description

The Chartiers Creek Bridge is a three (3) span, non-composite, riveted and bolted built-up plate girder bridge with a total length of 253’- 11" (see photo no. 1). The 3 spans consist of one (1) main simple span 124’-0", one (1) simple south end span 55’-3", and one (1) simple north end span 68’-3" long. The span lengths are measured between centerline of bearings. The skew angle measured between the centerline of the abutment and West Busway is 900. There are AT&T conduits mounted under the deck, and light poles mounted on top of the concrete parapets (see photo no.’s 8 & 2, respectively).

The superstructure consists of four girders spaced at 7’-0" — 6’-0" — 7’-0" on centers, are laterally restrained with angle cross framing, and support an

8 1/2" reinforced concrete deck. The deck thickness includes a 1/2" integral-wearing surface. The deck measures 28’-0" between the reinforced concrete parapets present on both sides of the structure. Galvanized stay-in-place deck forms are present on the underside of the deck (see photo no. 8).

Span 1 girders are made up of a 5’-11" deep by 1/2" thick web plates, and 18" wide by 3/4" thick top and bottom flange plates (see photo no. 8). The main span consists of a 10’- 4 1/2" deep by 1/2" thick web plate, and top and bottom flange plates varying from 20" wide by 7/8" thick, to 20" wide by 1" thick (see photo no. 9). Span 3 girders are made up of a 6’- 10 1/2" deep by 1/2" thick web plate, and 18" wide by 3/4" and 7/8" thick top and bottom flange plates (see photo no. 10). New knee brackets, bolted to the fascia girders, measure 4’-9" wide, from the centerline of existing fascia girders to the centerline of the new W24x55 fascia stringers, with 1/2" thick web plates, and 6" wide by 1/2" thick top and bottom flange plates (see photo no. 4). Lateral bracing and diaphragms consist of angles, and angle x-bracing, respectively. Laminated elastomeric bearing pads are present at the girder ends.

The main span vertical underclearance, from the existing concrete channel bottom, at the centerline of the railroad measures 60’-9" and 36’-7" in span 1.

Gravity type substructures consist of a combination of original stone construction with newly constructed reinforced concrete abutment backwalls and pier caps (see photo no.’s 4 to 7).

III. INSPECTION FINDINGS:

Michael Baker Jr., Inc. performed this initial inspection, which follows NBIS procedures, on June 23, 2011, via a UB-40 underbridge inspection crane. In general, the structure was in good condition with a few minor problems.

Several conduits at the south abutment and in span 1 have severely buckled segments, and broken couplers and/or adapters (see photo no.’s 12 & 13). In addition, a conduit in span 3 is split and leaking water (see photo no. 14). These problems are due to the junction boxes being allowed to fill with rainwater during construction.

Approach

The north and south approach roadway and slabs are newly constructed with no deficiencies noted.

Deck

No deficiencies noted — new construction (see photo no. 11). All PennDOT Type 1 scuppers are in excellent condition. A few scuppers exhibit minor debris accumulation but are fully functional (see photo no. 15). Random hairline (< 0.01") shrinkage cracks along the length of the concrete parapets are present (see photo no. 16). Deck expansion joints consist of strip seals in good condition with minor debris accumulation (see photo no. 17).

Superstructure

The superstructure has no visible structural deficiencies. Girders, fascia stringers, knee brackets, and lateral bracing are newly painted. The paint shows no visual defects, but the girders and bracing exhibit evidence of prior minor section loss and member pitting. Fascia stringers and knee brackets are in new condition with no deficiencies noted (see photo no. 4). Diaphragms are in good condition, but show areas of freckled surface rust under the broken conduit in span 1. Approximately 50% of lateral bracing connections between girders 3 & 4, in span 2, were not painted with final paint coat (see photo no. 18). Laminated elastomeric bearing pads are functioning properly with no problems noted.

Substructure

The north and south abutments are in good condition, with a few minor problems noted. Both abutments have newly constructed reinforced concrete backwalls, bridge seats, and wingwalls with no visual deficiencies noted (see photo no.’s 4 & 5). The stem tops consist of new reinforced concrete construction, also with no visual deficiencies noted, and are attached to the existing stone masonry bases. Some locations of the stone masonry show minor cracking and loosening of mortar.

Piers 1 & 2 are in good condition with minor cracking and loosening of mortar on the existing stone masonry portion of the stems. The bridge seats, caps, and stem tops are newly constructed reinforced concrete with no visual deficiencies noted (see photo no.’s 6 & 7).

Photograph showing the general upstream evelation of the bridge

Photo No. 1: General Elevation (Upstream)

Photograph showing the south approach (or the near approach)

Photo No.2: South Approach (near)

Photograph showing the north approach (or the far approach)

Photo No.3: North Approach (far)

Photograph showing the South Abutment (or the Near Abutment) elevation

Photo No.4: South Abutment (near) - Elevation

Photograph of the North Abutment (or Far Abutment) elevation

Photo No.5: North Abutment (far) - Elevation

Photograph of Pier 1 North Face (looking south)

Photo No.6: Pier 1 - North Face (Looking South)

Photograph of Pier 2 North Face (looking south). Note the electrical lines.

Photo No.7: Pier 2 - North Face (Looking South), note electrical lines

Photograph of the general underside view in Span 1

Photo No.8: General Underside View — Span 1

Photograph of the general underside view in Span 2

Photo No.9: General Underside View — Span 2

Photograph of the general underside view in Span 3

Photo No. 10: General Underside View — Span 3

Photograph of the general deck view

Photo No. 11: General Deck View

Photograph of a conduit in Span 1. Note the longitudinal crack/split.

Photo No. 12: Conduit, Span 1 — note longitudinal crack/split

Photograph of the conduits and couplers in Span 1. Note the bend in the conduit and the coupler separation.

Photo No. 13: Conduit and Couplers, Span 1 — note bend in conduit, and coupler separation

Photograph fo the conduit in Span 3. Note the conduit is split and leaking water.

Photo No. 14: Conduit, Span 3 — note conduit is split and leaking water

Photograph of a typical PennDOT Type 1 scupper

Photo No. 15: Typical PennDOT Type 1 Scupper

Photograph of a typical parapet crack.

Photo No. 16: Typical parapet crack

Photograph of a strip seal at the North Abutment, typical. Note the minor debris accumulation.

Photo No. 17: Strip Seal at North Abutment (typ.) — note minor debris accumulation

Photograph of lateral bracing connection between Beams #3 and #4 in Span 2. Note no final paint coat and rust freckles

Photo No. 18: Lateral bracing connection between beam #3 and #4, in span 2 — note no final paint coat, and rust freckles

IV. STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS:

Bridge Load Ratings (Tons)

LOAD FACTOR H HS ML P

Inventory w/o F.W.S

115

159

152

---

Inventory w/ F.W.S

112

155

148

---

Operating w/o F.W.S

191

265

253

346

Operating w/ F.W.S

187

259

247

338

Table A.1: Bridge Load Ratings (Tons)

Note:

  1. Critical rating is for a beam controlled by shear in span 3
  2. Due to no analysis being performed as part of the inspection, the above table is reproduced from contract drawings.

V. RECOMMENDATIONS AND COST ESTIMATE:

Item Estimated Quantity Unit Cost Total Cost

Drain junction boxes, and conduits filled with water. Repair bent conduits, and broken couplers/adapters.

N/A

Lump Sum

$7,500.00

Paint locations requiring final paint coat between girders 3 & 4 in span 2.

20 SF

Lump Sum

$1,500.00

TOTAL COST $9,000.00

Table A.2: Repairs

Note: The above costs are only for the items listed and do not include additional costs which would be incurred when the work is performed, such as mobilization, maintenance and traffic protection, engineering, etc.

PennDOT D-450 form showing site data

Figure A.1: Example Bridge Inspection Report

PennDOT D-450 form showing bridge data

Figure A.1: Example Bridge Inspection Report (continued)

PennDOT D-450 form showing abutment data

Figure A.1: Example Bridge Inspection Report (continued)

PennDOT D-450 form showing pier data

Figure A.1: Example Bridge Inspection Report (continued)

PennDOT D-450 form showing waterway data

Figure A.1: Example Bridge Inspection Report (continued)

PennDOT D-450 form showing waterway data

Figure A.1: Example Bridge Inspection Report (continued)

PennDOT D-450 form showing waterway data

Figure A.1: Example Bridge Inspection Report (continued)

PennDOT D-450 form showing bridge data

Figure A.1: Example Bridge Inspection Report (continued)

PennDOT D-450 form showing maintenance needs data

Figure A.1: Example Bridge Inspection Report (continued)

Note: The Appendix section for this report is not included here. The BMS 491 Forms for PENNDOT are that state’s version of the FHWA SI&A sheet with additional state items. The documents included in the report are typically red marked revisions to the file copy and reflect changes identified during the inspection.