The problem here was to connect a straight bridge (the Eastern Spans of the Bay Bridge) to a Straight tunnel on the YerbaBuena Island. The entire activity was responsibility of bridge/structural engineer to design. Of course during the design, bridge/structural engineer had to get input from various sub fields such as geo, transportation, seismology, piling, etc.. It is the bridge/structural engineer who decides the radius of horizontal and vertical curves on the bridges by satisfying AASHTO provisions. For a bridge of this magnitude, with 270,000 cars crossing it daily, these radii should be such that the current speed limit of 50 m/h is maintained. In this case, the curves are far smaller than the AASHTO requirement. As a result, transportation engineers had to come in ( I am not sure even if they were consulted) and see if the properties of curves are appropriate and such a short radius curve at this location can be used given the volume of traffic. If they approve the curves to be appropriate for this application, then the proper speed limit is established given the radius of the curves , the tangent connector in the S-curve, driver expectation, etc. to ensure that with even this small curve, the level of safety , or risk of accidents is pretty much the same as what is in the rest of the bridge. In this case, there was no reason for structural engineer to select such a small horizontal curves for the S curve. I have studied this bridge for past 20 years since Loma Prieta , with one month full time working on the bridge with 20+ of research associates investigating the Loma Prieta damage to this bridge. The entire intersection is on Yerba Buena Island with all the land below the S-curve available. As for 35 versus 40 m/h, until this fatal accident occurred, the speed limit was posted as 40 on the S-curve (50 on the rest of the bridge). Now it is not clear if it is 40 or 35. Caltrans has mentioned 35. I have to check it when I cross it next time.
One of the main reasons for these accidents , in addition to lack of engineering competence , is the unbelievable corruption of most members of the Caltrans Seismic Advisory Board , as I mentioned in my previous post and the Caltrans top brass. I have worked on Caltrans projects as researchers and consultant (not anymore!) and have known more than 100 engineers over these years. I have stated repeatedly in the past that I have highest respect for middle and junior level Caltrans engineers, but, when it comes to top brass, they definitely put preserving their jobs and public relation way ahead of public safety.
Best wishes and thank you --gm for your very thoughtful post.
A. Astaneh
===================
With Respect,
but why should structural engineers be looking at acceptable speed limits,
turning radius and traffic safety measures for this? I'm also not saying the
design is doesn't have its flaws. But realistically speaking, this is
probably the trickiest portion of the span replacement with a new bridge
next to an old bridge and a tunnel all in the same area.......
******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
* Read list FAQ at: http://www.seaint.org/list_FAQ.asp
*
* This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers
* Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To
* subscribe (no fee) or UnSubscribe, please go to:
*
* http://www.seaint.org/sealist1.asp
*
* Questions to seaint-ad@seaint.org. Remember, any email you
* send to the list is public domain and may be re-posted
* without your permission. Make sure you visit our web
* site at: http://www.seaint.org
******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********