24 August 2010

Report released into the GDE bridge collapse.

| johnboy
Join the conversation
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.

Join the conversation

7
All Comments
  • All Comments
  • Website Comments
LatestOldest

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!

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

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

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.

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.

Inappropriate4:35 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.

Well done, RiotACT commentators!

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

Daily Digest

Want the best Canberra news delivered daily? Every day we package the most popular Riotact stories and send them straight to your inbox. Sign-up now for trusted local news that will never be behind a paywall.

By submitting your email address you are agreeing to Region Group's terms and conditions and privacy policy.