Forum Index > Public Lands Stewardship > Greider area bridge replacement proposals
 Reply to topic
Previous :: Next Topic
Author     Message
AA+
Kim Brown
Member
Member


Joined: 13 Jul 2009
Posts: 6192 | TRs | Pics
Kim Brown
Member
PostThu Feb 25, 2021 10:07 am 
DNR's SEPA site has details on this project in the Morningstar NRCA

--------------
" I'm really happy about this! … I have very strong good and horrible memories up there."  – oldgranola, NWH’s outdoors advocate.
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Lightning_bug
Member
Member


Joined: 29 Aug 2016
Posts: 10 | TRs | Pics
Location: Seattle
Lightning_bug
Member
PostSun Feb 28, 2021 11:01 am 
Wow, this is pretty neat!

One of my earliest hike attempts, shortly after I moved to Washington, was Boulder Lake. My friends and I were crestfallen when we saw the notice in the parking lot warning of the unsafe bridge over one of the creeks. We decided to check it out anyways, only to find it was completely washed away. My friend was feeling bold and stupid that day, and he foolishly tried to find a way across. Needless to say he took a dunk, got completely soaked, but thankfully was not swept away. Such a scary, but ultimately funny, early hiking memory for me. Greider Lakes ended up being our consolation prize that day. From then on, I was hooked! smile.gif

It's great to hear that I might actually be able to make it up to Boulder one day! Does anyone know if there is plane wreckage nearby? I thought I heard something about that once, but I very well could have imagined it.

Thanks so much for posting, Kim!

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
RodF
Member
Member


Joined: 01 Sep 2007
Posts: 2579 | TRs | Pics
Location: Sequim WA
RodF
Member
PostSun Feb 28, 2021 7:01 pm 
All three spans are FRP (fiber reinforced polymer) trusses, which have a history of early failure, compared to traditional steel or timber beams.  Hope they're engineered that out by doubling all the connection points and stiffening them against flexure, but if so, they may have less or no advantage in weight or cost vs steel?

--------------
"of all the paths you take in life, make sure a few of them are dirt" - John Muir
"the wild is not the opposite of cultivated.  It is the opposite of the captivated” - Vandana Shiva
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
brineal
Snarky Master



Joined: 30 Oct 2017
Posts: 143 | TRs | Pics
brineal
Snarky Master
PostMon Mar 01, 2021 1:43 pm 
RodF wrote:
All three spans are FRP (fiber reinforced polymer) trusses, which have a history of early failure, compared to traditional steel or timber beams.  Hope they're engineered that out by doubling all the connection points and stiffening them against flexure, but if so, they may have less or no advantage in weight or cost vs steel?

There may be a decent savings at this time since lumber and steel prices are very unfavorable.  Materials costs have been wild the past year.

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Kim Brown
Member
Member


Joined: 13 Jul 2009
Posts: 6192 | TRs | Pics
Kim Brown
Member
PostMon Mar 01, 2021 2:47 pm 
RodF wrote:
All three spans are FRP (fiber reinforced polymer) trusses, which have a history of early failure, compared to traditional steel or timber beams.  Hope they're engineered that out by doubling all the connection points and stiffening them against flexure, but if so, they may have less or no advantage in weight or cost vs steel?

The report was written in 2006 about bridges installed in 1991. Though damage was done at delivery or installation in some of these highlighted cases, it's not likely any bridge will last beyond 15 years anyway.  clown.gif

I wonder if the composition of the material is different nowadays? I can't imagine making connection points stiffer is a way to help the integrity; too rigid means it will snap; bridges need to be a bit flexible.  But I suppose the connection points can be stiff so long as the material and non connection points give...? (I'm making stuff up at this point; I'm not an engineer, but fascinated by this)


Weight might be an issue – the bridges need to be out of the highwater mark so they are longer; otherwise they will be classed as “in-stream” crossings. But will fiberglass handle snowload? If steel, they might be so heavy a post is required, and a hydraulic permit might be denied. So many questions.  My studies on the subject re: hydraulic permits, etc. is old and rusty, so I may be full of sh##; but my interest has been piqued.

And I bet cost is an issue, esp. since any bridge, as I mentioned, won't likely last very long anyway.  Or the material is better for fish. The related hydraulic applications haven’t been submitted yet, and Golder’s discussion indicates that the bridge material is a DNR direction.

At any rate, for DNR to even consider bringing this area back to snuff is borderline miracle – no, actually it IS a miracle, given the Morningstar Trails Plan meetings were in 2017 and this project wasn’t adopted then as priority. This is lightning speed.

Sorry if my post rambles and isn’t organized. I’m free-versing here.

--------------
" I'm really happy about this! … I have very strong good and horrible memories up there."  – oldgranola, NWH’s outdoors advocate.
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
   All times are GMT - 8 Hours
 Reply to topic
Forum Index > Public Lands Stewardship > Greider area bridge replacement proposals
  Happy Birthday HundsSolo!
Jump to:   
Search this topic:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
   Use Disclaimer Powered by phpBB Privacy Policy