November 9, 2009 BERKELEY, Calif. -- Caltrans has weathered no shortage controversy since the September 8 opening of the S-curve section of the problem plagued eastern span. But on Monday a UC Berkeley structural engineer issued scathing criticism against the agency, calling the reopening of the Bay Bridge “criminally negligent.”
Professor Abolhassan Astaneh said ever since the crack in the eyebar was discovered during the Labor Day inspection, the eastern span of the Bay Bridge has been unsafe.
“You have to shut down this bridge immediately,” said Professor Astaneh.”There's no doubt about it.”
The S-curve controversy aside, the professor said the bigger danger is the eyebar fix.
He said the repair means the bridge is vulnerable and that it cannot withstand 85 mph winds or a 7.3 magnitude earthquake as required under federal transportation guidelines.
“If Caltrans lets the public go on that bridge, they are committing a violation of this national standard that is criminally negligent,” insisted Astaneh.
The professor created a computer animation which he said illustrates the possible failure of Caltrans' eyebar fix during a 7.3 earthquake.
Add to that the sharp S-curve and he said the bridge has become even more dangerous.
“This is the most...how do I put it? The most criminally negligent thing that any engineer can do; to put sharp curves in the middle of a straight bridge,” said Astaneh.
During a Monday afternoon press conference, Caltrans defended its work.
We absolutely have not lost control of the Bay Bridge,” said Caltrans spokesman Bart Ney during a press conference. “The bridge is safe.”
There have been more than 40 crashes on the Bay Bridge in the two months since the S-curve was installed.
> November 9, 2009 > BERKELEY, Calif. -- Caltrans has weathered no shortage controversy > since the September 8 opening of the S-curve section of the problem > plagued eastern span. But on Monday a UC Berkeley structural engineer > issued scathing criticism against the agency, calling the reopening of > the Bay Bridge “criminally negligent.”
> Professor Abolhassan Astaneh said ever since the crack in the eyebar > was discovered during the Labor Day inspection, the eastern span of > the Bay Bridge has been unsafe.
> “You have to shut down this bridge immediately,” said Professor > Astaneh.”There's no doubt about it.”
> The S-curve controversy aside, the professor said the bigger danger is > the eyebar fix.
> He said the repair means the bridge is vulnerable and that it cannot > withstand 85 mph winds or a 7.3 magnitude earthquake as required under > federal transportation guidelines.
> “If Caltrans lets the public go on that bridge, they are committing a > violation of this national standard that is criminally negligent,” > insisted Astaneh.
> The professor created a computer animation which he said illustrates > the possible failure of Caltrans' eyebar fix during a 7.3 earthquake.
> Add to that the sharp S-curve and he said the bridge has become even > more dangerous.
> “This is the most...how do I put it? The most criminally negligent > thing that any engineer can do; to put sharp curves in the middle of a > straight bridge,” said Astaneh.
> During a Monday afternoon press conference, Caltrans defended its > work.
> We absolutely have not lost control of the Bay Bridge,” said Caltrans > spokesman Bart Ney during a press conference. “The bridge is safe.”
> There have been more than 40 crashes on the Bay Bridge in the two > months since the S-curve was installed.
I am not a regular user of the Bay Bridge, but me thinks the issue of the trucks (and some cars ) not being able to negotiate the 40 MPH S curve might be because the road deck is not banked.
From 500 miles away, I might suggest that a supplemental warning sign panel be placed with the curve waning signs with the text "CURVES NOT BANKED". I would assume Caltrans is already using the "leaning truck" warning sign with a "40" and S curve arrow.
Lets remember the old eastern span is not under construction, and I think this gives a sense to many drivers that they are not within an active work zone.
> > November 9, 2009 > > BERKELEY, Calif. -- Caltrans has weathered no shortage controversy > > since the September 8 opening of the S-curve section of the problem > > plagued eastern span. But on Monday a UC Berkeley structural engineer > > issued scathing criticism against the agency, calling the reopening of > > the Bay Bridge “criminally negligent.”
> > Professor Abolhassan Astaneh said ever since the crack in the eyebar > > was discovered during the Labor Day inspection, the eastern span of > > the Bay Bridge has been unsafe.
> > “You have to shut down this bridge immediately,” said Professor > > Astaneh.”There's no doubt about it.”
> > The S-curve controversy aside, the professor said the bigger danger is > > the eyebar fix.
> > He said the repair means the bridge is vulnerable and that it cannot > > withstand 85 mph winds or a 7.3 magnitude earthquake as required under > > federal transportation guidelines.
> > “If Caltrans lets the public go on that bridge, they are committing a > > violation of this national standard that is criminally negligent,” > > insisted Astaneh.
> > The professor created a computer animation which he said illustrates > > the possible failure of Caltrans' eyebar fix during a 7.3 earthquake.
> > Add to that the sharp S-curve and he said the bridge has become even > > more dangerous.
> > “This is the most...how do I put it? The most criminally negligent > > thing that any engineer can do; to put sharp curves in the middle of a > > straight bridge,” said Astaneh.
> > During a Monday afternoon press conference, Caltrans defended its > > work.
> > We absolutely have not lost control of the Bay Bridge,” said Caltrans > > spokesman Bart Ney during a press conference. “The bridge is safe.”
> > There have been more than 40 crashes on the Bay Bridge in the two > > months since the S-curve was installed.
> I am not a regular user of the Bay Bridge, but me thinks the issue of the > trucks (and some cars ) not being able to negotiate the 40 MPH S curve might > be because the road deck is not banked.
> From 500 miles away, I might suggest that a supplemental warning sign panel > be placed with the curve waning signs with the text "CURVES NOT BANKED". I > would assume Caltrans is already using the "leaning truck" warning sign with > a "40" and S curve arrow.
> Lets remember the old eastern span is not under construction, and I think > this gives a sense to many drivers that they are not within an active work > zone.
> Any thoughts from any regular Bay Bridge users?
I drove the Bay Bridge going westbound today, and I honestly don't see what all the fuss is about, concerning the newly installed S-curve. I drove it at 40 MPH, the speed limit thru there, and I didn't have any issues. Fortunately, everyone else was also driving between 38 and 45 MPH through the curve at the same time, so we all got through with no problems at all. The CHP has said that every single accident, thus far, has been due to speeding.
My main issue is the relative lack of signs, warning of the impending S-curve. First-timers, or those from other parts of California (or the US) that rarely ever drive the Bay Bridge may not be aware of the changes. Sure, the speed limit drops to 40 MPH, about a half mile before the curve, but there needs to be more signs, perhaps flashing radar, even rumble strips and bot-dots installed. I think maybe they should also install 5, huge, red overhead warning signs with flashing yellow lights, with the first being placed at the beginning of the bridge, and then one about 1 mile before, 3/4 a mile before, 1/2 a mile before, and finally 1/4 a mile before, warning of such a sharp curve up ahead.
Like I said, if one drives the speed limit, one shouldn't have a problem negotiating the curves. I've honestly seen tighter curves on some individual stretches of the Interstate Highway System.
> > > November 9, 2009 > > > BERKELEY, Calif. -- Caltrans has weathered no shortage controversy > > > since the September 8 opening of the S-curve section of the problem > > > plagued eastern span. But on Monday a UC Berkeley structural engineer > > > issued scathing criticism against the agency, calling the reopening of > > > the Bay Bridge “criminally negligent.”
> > > Professor Abolhassan Astaneh said ever since the crack in the eyebar > > > was discovered during the Labor Day inspection, the eastern span of > > > the Bay Bridge has been unsafe.
> > > “You have to shut down this bridge immediately,” said Professor > > > Astaneh.”There's no doubt about it.”
> > > The S-curve controversy aside, the professor said the bigger danger is > > > the eyebar fix.
> > > He said the repair means the bridge is vulnerable and that it cannot > > > withstand 85 mph winds or a 7.3 magnitude earthquake as required under > > > federal transportation guidelines.
> > > “If Caltrans lets the public go on that bridge, they are committing a > > > violation of this national standard that is criminally negligent,” > > > insisted Astaneh.
> > > The professor created a computer animation which he said illustrates > > > the possible failure of Caltrans' eyebar fix during a 7.3 earthquake.
> > > Add to that the sharp S-curve and he said the bridge has become even > > > more dangerous.
> > > “This is the most...how do I put it? The most criminally negligent > > > thing that any engineer can do; to put sharp curves in the middle of a > > > straight bridge,” said Astaneh.
> > > During a Monday afternoon press conference, Caltrans defended its > > > work.
> > > We absolutely have not lost control of the Bay Bridge,” said Caltrans > > > spokesman Bart Ney during a press conference. “The bridge is safe.”
> > > There have been more than 40 crashes on the Bay Bridge in the two > > > months since the S-curve was installed.
> > I am not a regular user of the Bay Bridge, but me thinks the issue of the > > trucks (and some cars ) not being able to negotiate the 40 MPH S curve might > > be because the road deck is not banked.
> > From 500 miles away, I might suggest that a supplemental warning sign panel > > be placed with the curve waning signs with the text "CURVES NOT BANKED". I > > would assume Caltrans is already using the "leaning truck" warning sign with > > a "40" and S curve arrow.
> > Lets remember the old eastern span is not under construction, and I think > > this gives a sense to many drivers that they are not within an active work > > zone.
> > Any thoughts from any regular Bay Bridge users?
> I drove the Bay Bridge going westbound today, and I honestly don't see > what all the fuss is about, concerning the newly installed S-curve. I > drove it at 40 MPH, the speed limit thru there, and I didn't have any > issues. Fortunately, everyone else was also driving between 38 and 45 > MPH through the curve at the same time, so we all got through with no > problems at all. The CHP has said that every single accident, thus > far, has been due to speeding.
> My main issue is the relative lack of signs, warning of the impending > S-curve. First-timers, or those from other parts of California (or > the US) that rarely ever drive the Bay Bridge may not be aware of the > changes. Sure, the speed limit drops to 40 MPH, about a half mile > before the curve, but there needs to be more signs, perhaps flashing > radar, even rumble strips and bot-dots installed. I think maybe they > should also install 5, huge, red overhead warning signs with flashing > yellow lights, with the first being placed at the beginning of the > bridge, and then one about 1 mile before, 3/4 a mile before, 1/2 a > mile before, and finally 1/4 a mile before, warning of such a sharp > curve up ahead.
> Like I said, if one drives the speed limit, one shouldn't have a > problem negotiating the curves. I've honestly seen tighter curves on > some individual stretches of the Interstate Highway System.
> -Brent- Hide quoted text -
> - Show quoted text -
More warning signs needed...definitely! Signs are supposed to be for unfamiliar drivers pointedly anyway. That is especially true since inadequate warning could be a deadly surprise in slick conditions or to an unfamiliar driver in light or unusually brisk traffic on the bridge. As to the condition of the bridge...I think California thinks that anything that might collapse in an earthquake should be closed and demolished immediately, which is good planning but unrealistic. If it can stand on its own legs while the earth is not moving violentely, then it is sound until then. Everything standing and open to the public cannot be to seismic code since money is limited (especially now). Back east, we'd lose most of our structures in a less intense earthquake event than those you've come to expect out there. In that line of thinking, all of the Mississippi River bridges in Memphis should be closed immediately because they are old, rickety and will definitely collapse in a major earthquake.
In contrast, most of your modern structures out there are built to pretty high standards (tell me if I'm wrong). I think the risks out there must just be realized, and it is good that something is being done and now to that bridge. I mean, think about it, earthquake planning even in California was not a priority until 1973 or the double-decker fiasco in SFC would never have made it off the drawing board. That means pretty much everything out there built prior to 1973 was unsafe, yet people thought it was worth the calculated risk to live there and utilize its infrastructure anyway. Unless you have the BIG one, you're probably still more safe than we are here with a much smaller freak big one. Imagine even a 6.0 striking the heart of NYC, Miami, Memphis or Atlanta (shudder).
>November 9, 2009 >BERKELEY, Calif. -- Caltrans has weathered no shortage controversy >since the September 8 opening of the S-curve section of the problem >plagued eastern span. But on Monday a UC Berkeley structural engineer >issued scathing criticism against the agency, calling the reopening of >the Bay Bridge “criminally negligent.”
>Professor Abolhassan Astaneh said ever since the crack in the eyebar >was discovered during the Labor Day inspection, the eastern span of >the Bay Bridge has been unsafe.
>“You have to shut down this bridge immediately,” said Professor >Astaneh.”There's no doubt about it.”
>The S-curve controversy aside, the professor said the bigger danger is >the eyebar fix.
>He said the repair means the bridge is vulnerable and that it cannot >withstand 85 mph winds or a 7.3 magnitude earthquake as required under >federal transportation guidelines.
>“If Caltrans lets the public go on that bridge, they are committing a >violation of this national standard that is criminally negligent,” >insisted Astaneh.
>The professor created a computer animation which he said illustrates >the possible failure of Caltrans' eyebar fix during a 7.3 earthquake.
>Add to that the sharp S-curve and he said the bridge has become even >more dangerous.
>“This is the most...how do I put it? The most criminally negligent >thing that any engineer can do; to put sharp curves in the middle of a >straight bridge,” said Astaneh.
>During a Monday afternoon press conference, Caltrans defended its >work.
>We absolutely have not lost control of the Bay Bridge,” said Caltrans >spokesman Bart Ney during a press conference. “The bridge is safe.”
>There have been more than 40 crashes on the Bay Bridge in the two >months since the S-curve was installed.
This is the same professor who was on the radio a few weeks ago in Sacramento -- listening to him speak, he has a very clear agenda, and comes off sounding pretty silly.
If there were another option (the Southern Crossing should have been built to take the load during this rebuild), it might make sense, but there simply isn't. The economic impact would be devastating, and many more people will lose their lives on an 80 mile detour than on this bridge.
Since they were the ones needlessly delaying this, the cities (and residents) of San Francisco and Oakland should pony up any funds needed to accelerate the opening of the new span as quickly as possible.
Josh wrote: > This is the same professor who was on the radio a few weeks ago in > Sacramento -- listening to him speak, he has a very clear agenda, and > comes off sounding pretty silly.
As soon as I saw that he was from the University of the PRB, I knew that reading farther was a waste of photons.
> If there were another option (the Southern Crossing should have been > built to take the load during this rebuild), it might make sense, but > there simply isn't. The economic impact would be devastating, and > many more people will lose their lives on an 80 mile detour than on > this bridge.
Seems like the Southern Crossing was an old subject when I moved to the Bay Area in the 60's--by which time the I280 stuff had already been stopped north of Army Street.
I wonder what the the accident rate is on that S curve thing is as compared to, say Doyle Drive. Or the Bay bridge before the kink was installed.
(The western approaches eastbound used to scare me sh*tless in the afternoons.)
> Since they were the ones needlessly delaying this, the cities (and > residents) of San Francisco and Oakland should pony up any funds > needed to accelerate the opening of the new span as quickly as > possible.
You are joking, right. They don't "do". They whine.
-- Requiescas in pace o email Two identifying characteristics of System Administrators: Ex turpi causa non oritur actio Infallibility, and the ability to learn from their mistakes. Eppure si rinfresca
> > > November 9, 2009 > > > BERKELEY, Calif. -- Caltrans has weathered no shortage controversy > > > since the September 8 opening of the S-curve section of the problem > > > plagued eastern span. But on Monday a UC Berkeley structural engineer > > > issued scathing criticism against the agency, calling the reopening of > > > the Bay Bridge “criminally negligent.”
> > > Professor Abolhassan Astaneh said ever since the crack in the eyebar > > > was discovered during the Labor Day inspection, the eastern span of > > > the Bay Bridge has been unsafe.
> > > “You have to shut down this bridge immediately,” said Professor > > > Astaneh.”There's no doubt about it.”
> > > The S-curve controversy aside, the professor said the bigger danger is > > > the eyebar fix.
> > > He said the repair means the bridge is vulnerable and that it cannot > > > withstand 85 mph winds or a 7.3 magnitude earthquake as required under > > > federal transportation guidelines.
> > > “If Caltrans lets the public go on that bridge, they are committing a > > > violation of this national standard that is criminally negligent,” > > > insisted Astaneh.
> > > The professor created a computer animation which he said illustrates > > > the possible failure of Caltrans' eyebar fix during a 7.3 earthquake.
> > > Add to that the sharp S-curve and he said the bridge has become even > > > more dangerous.
> > > “This is the most...how do I put it? The most criminally negligent > > > thing that any engineer can do; to put sharp curves in the middle of a > > > straight bridge,” said Astaneh.
> > > During a Monday afternoon press conference, Caltrans defended its > > > work.
> > > We absolutely have not lost control of the Bay Bridge,” said Caltrans > > > spokesman Bart Ney during a press conference. “The bridge is safe.”
> > > There have been more than 40 crashes on the Bay Bridge in the two > > > months since the S-curve was installed.
> > I am not a regular user of the Bay Bridge, but me thinks the issue of the > > trucks (and some cars ) not being able to negotiate the 40 MPH S curve might > > be because the road deck is not banked.
> > From 500 miles away, I might suggest that a supplemental warning sign panel > > be placed with the curve waning signs with the text "CURVES NOT BANKED". I > > would assume Caltrans is already using the "leaning truck" warning sign with > > a "40" and S curve arrow.
> > Lets remember the old eastern span is not under construction, and I think > > this gives a sense to many drivers that they are not within an active work > > zone.
> > Any thoughts from any regular Bay Bridge users?
> I drove the Bay Bridge going westbound today, and I honestly don't see > what all the fuss is about, concerning the newly installed S-curve. I > drove it at 40 MPH, the speed limit thru there, and I didn't have any > issues. Fortunately, everyone else was also driving between 38 and 45 > MPH through the curve at the same time, so we all got through with no > problems at all. The CHP has said that every single accident, thus > far, has been due to speeding.
> My main issue is the relative lack of signs, warning of the impending > S-curve. First-timers, or those from other parts of California (or > the US) that rarely ever drive the Bay Bridge may not be aware of the > changes. Sure, the speed limit drops to 40 MPH, about a half mile > before the curve, but there needs to be more signs, perhaps flashing > radar, even rumble strips and bot-dots installed. I think maybe they > should also install 5, huge, red overhead warning signs with flashing > yellow lights, with the first being placed at the beginning of the > bridge, and then one about 1 mile before, 3/4 a mile before, 1/2 a > mile before, and finally 1/4 a mile before, warning of such a sharp > curve up ahead.
> Like I said, if one drives the speed limit, one shouldn't have a > problem negotiating the curves. I've honestly seen tighter curves on > some individual stretches of the Interstate Highway System.
I would add the radical suggestion that warning signs and other attention-getting devices -- and not a reduced speed limit -- should be suffiicent. The problem is not a legal one, as much as a violation of driver expectancies. Since the violation is unavoidable, the only way to address it is by giving drivers ample, conspicuous notice that something unusual is ahead.
I also think extra-high side barriers on the curved sections should be considered in order to help prevent vehicle departures.
|
