Skip to content Skip to main navigation

News

Skilled legal advice with
accessible & personal attention

Report released into the GDE bridge collapse.

By johnboy - 24 August 2010 7

GDE collapse

The Department of Territory and Municipal Services (TAMS) has released the report into the GDE bridge collapse.

It appears that our commenters on the original story were on the ball:

This report concludes that the main girders supporting the formwork were not braced to prevent lateral movement of the girders when subjected to the loads imposed by the concreting works. The inclination of the beams from the vertical meant that the loads in them were not carried concentrically and excessive stresses were induced through bending of the girders’ webs. Thus the cause of the falsework failure was the inability of the main longitudinal girders to carry loads arising from the 3% crossfall of the bridge deck.

The parts of the remaining permanent works that are likely to be salvageable are limited to the central pier and abutments, but these will need to be protected during demolition and inspected for damage, distress and excessive movement when the opportunity arises.

What’s Your opinion?


Post a comment
Please login to post your comments, or connect with
7 Responses to
Report released into the GDE bridge collapse.
MissChief 1:37 pm 25 Aug 10

I heard a great suggestion for the tangled mass of steal and concrete left over from the bridge collapse: Pile it up at the side of the bridge as another artwork!

shirty_bear 11:02 am 25 Aug 10

They’ve issued a report in which you can undo the redactions? No wonder they can’t build a freaking bridge. Hopeless.

knuckles 6:09 pm 24 Aug 10

This is obviously Stanhopes fault. He should have been down there checking the structural soundness of the framework before the concrete pour began. OH, HOW LONG WILL WE HAVE TO PUT UP WITH THIS GOVERNEMENT

bobbatty 6:00 pm 24 Aug 10

Deref said :

Well done, RiotACT commentators!

Now – what does it say about whose responsibility it was to check and approve the bracing before the pour?

I’d say they were unlucky Deref…very unlucky. Could have happened to anyone I believe.

“..not carried concentrically and excessive stresses were induced through bending of the girders’ webs” sounds just like a slight shifting.

verbalkint 4:43 pm 24 Aug 10

The engineering firm who designed the project was contracted directly by Abergeldie (the head contractor) and they were also the firm that checked that the formwork company had faithfully reproduced the design.

They certified that it did, however, subsequent assessment has found that the end product did not in fact match the design.

So it seems like the fault lies with the certifying engineer who missed the faults in the implementation of his design and also with the formworking company who didn’t fully implement the engineer’s design.

Inappropriate 4:35 pm 24 Aug 10

And in typical ignorance of PDFs, you can undo the redaction of the report by deleting the red-lined white boxes.

Deref 4:17 pm 24 Aug 10

Well done, RiotACT commentators!

Now – what does it say about whose responsibility it was to check and approve the bracing before the pour?

Related Articles

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

Top
Copyright © 2017 Riot ACT Holdings Pty Ltd. All rights reserved.
www.the-riotact.com | www.b2bmagazine.com.au | www.thisiscanberra.com

Search across the site