‘Significant overload’ caused Norway’s timber bridge collapse

https://www.newcivilengineer.com/latest/significant-overload-caused-norways-timber-bridge-collapse-05-12-2022/

by mjmasn • 4 years ago

98 63 4 years ago

silvestrov• 4 years ago

The homepage of the "Norwegian Safety Investigation Authority" is much more informative and the 2 documents have interesting photos, e.g. closeups of where the wood broke.

https://www.nsia.no/Road/Investigations/22-441

It does not state why they conclude the cause was overload, only that "Uncovering the technical causal factors for the collapse of the Tretten bridge has been challenging. The expert group has worked its way through several hypotheses to be able to exclude non-relevant fracture mechanisms, by connecting findings to computational analyses. There was significant consequential damage to the bridge structure, both from the collapse itself, the impact with the ground and the salvage work, and it has been challenging to separate these from each other."

Personally I would think that a bridge should be able to handle "A passenger car and a truck with trailer loaded with lime were on the bridge when it collapsed".

bluGill2• 4 years ago

There are a number of bridges where I live that cannot handle a truck with trailer. They have large signs warning what the maximum load is.

They are mostly on rarely used roads in farm country (as in a handful of cars per week cross), so a truck with lime is one of the more likely potential loads, but of course the local farmers know that bridge can't handle the weight of a truck and plan their deliveries to take a different route (which often more than doubles the trip time vs if the bridge could handle the weight)

bombcar3• 4 years ago

The problem comes when those type of bridges don't collapse the first time someone overloads them; then people start using it because "eh it works" and eventually it fails.

rob74• 4 years ago

Here that doesn't seem to be the case. If you look at the western approach to the bridge in StreetView (which is from 2019, the eastern part has imagery after the collapse), there is no weight limitation sign to be seen. As such, you would expect the bridge to be able to carry the load in the worst case scenario of both lanes being filled to capacity with heavy vehicles, so failing because of one single truck and one or two cars is really bad...

beAbU• 4 years ago

This Norwegian bridge is practically brand new.

Are these bridges you are referring to from your area really old and poorly maintained bridges?

angry_octet• 4 years ago

I think they mean that this particular element was massively overloaded (200% more than its max, which would mean 400% of the design load), not that a few cars and a truck were overloading the bridge. It was more the structure self weight that is relevant. Somehow extra load was transferred onto that element which should have been taken by other elements. It doesn't seem good that failure of one element would cause the whole thing to fall down though.

h11h• 4 years ago

I read it to imply there was a design or construction problem that meant the part that failed experienced much more load than intended.

Someone• 4 years ago

Personally I would think that a bridge should be able to handle "A passenger car and a truck with trailer loaded with lime were on the bridge when it collapsed".

The Norwegian Safety Investigation Authority seems to agree. https://www.nsia.no/Road/Investigations/22-441?iid=35881&pid...:

“Checked according to the recommended calculation methods in today's current regulations for the design of wooden structures, the degree of utilization in the connections on the relevant diagonals was around 200%. That is to say, the capacity of these connections was half of what they should have been when calculating the bridge's failure limit state, where safety factors for both loads and strength of materials were taken into account”

brudgers2• 4 years ago

While the statement seems technically correct, it smells a bit disingenuous to me.

Most sophisticated structures are engineered using load factors in combination rather than traditional strength design methods because it leads to more efficient use of materials and hence lower cost.

Yes, strength design might require a 4x safety factor. That’s why engineering practice employs statistical methods and combined loads.

Keep in mind that the safety factors are never supposed to be the difference between stability and failure. If the structure relies on safety factors there’s a problem.

ArchitectAnon• 4 years ago

The headline is misleading. They are saying that it seems to have failed due to some kind of mysterious fatigue failure at a wood to steel structural interface. The investigators are struggling to work out how because the timber was damaged when it hit bottom of the river and then damaged further when it was hauled out for inspection. The overloading in the headline seems to refer to the ‘load shedding’ to other structural members that will have occurred after the joint (or joints) failed. (I’m not a structural engineer, but my profession is closely related.)

mc32• 4 years ago

Apparently the Siemen's Sports Arena failure[1] was attributed to brittle failure in dowelled slotted-in-plate connections, which is also what they used for the steel-wood interface for this bridge.

[1]https://www.researchgate.net/figure/The-Perkolo-bridge-after...

"... An overview of capacity models derived using the yield limit equations and following the European Yield Model (EYM) approach is provided in [20]. Major examples of structures collapse led by brittle failure in dowelled slotted-in-plate connections are the two trusses of the Siemens Sports Arena in Denmark [21] and the truss of the Perkolo bridge in Norway [22]. Uncertainty in the evaluation of connections' deformability is responsible for local damage in connections, and change of force transfer mechanisms compare to those considered in the design. ..."

GeompMankle• 4 years ago

I think a fairly good argument can be made that the design of this bridge was novel to the point of being negligent as per https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FSPI0xkTifI

kevinwang• 4 years ago

Damn, this is a really high quality, high effort video, with a lot of nice pictures. Thanks for posting.

Sakos2• 4 years ago

It's a fantastic channel. Watched all the videos on the Surfside condo collapse and they're all this high quality.

piskerpan• 4 years ago

I can’t get really past the guy’s attitude. From the get go he’s mocking the work from the marketing to materials, and he’s not doing it in a fun way. Just plain denigrating.

I thought you linked to B1M or something.

eCa• 4 years ago

I’ve been watching his videos since Champlain Towers South, and this was the first video that I found off-putting. I would recommend giving him a chance or two, I especially found the CTS videos interesting.

paganel3• 4 years ago

He's correct, though, a bridge that collapses after only 10 years of use demands mockery (and worse) for the people that designed it. Especially as this new bridge replaced an existing one which had, indeed, been up for more than 100 years. It's very fortunate that no-one died because of the incompetence of the people involved in building it.

My dad is a retired civil-engineer and he displays the same type of mockery (and worse) when he sees badly built stuff. Because he very well knows that badly built stuff can cause people to, well, die. It's not "they made an ooopsiee, let's not make it worse by denigrating the designers/builders", it's "they really f.ed things up, people could have died, they're morons (and worst)".

rojobuffalo• 4 years ago

That's a lesson I wish more software engineers would internalize. Novelty is a reliable way introduce failure modes. That was my main takeaway from a book that was mostly about bridge failures: Case Histories of Error and Judgement in Engineering by Henry Petroski.

rch3• 4 years ago

head of the Centre for Wood Science ..., identified steel truss issues as a possible factor.

You don't say...

sgt• 4 years ago

Wood community vs the steel folks. Worse than emacs vs vim

Sakos2• 4 years ago

I'd like to hear from the Centre for Steel Science.

rch3• 4 years ago

I think they'd agree that hydrodynamic effects on the concrete support columns should be considered.

thordenmark• 4 years ago

I frequently cross the Golden Gate bridge. This is my nightmare. Can you imagine plunging to your doom if that bridge failed? Yikes!

smilespray• 4 years ago

Suggested viewing: Final Destination 5

infamousclyde• 4 years ago

Anti-recommendation system has potential

giraffe_lady2• 4 years ago

My intuition is that the huge iconic ones in globally significant metro areas probably receive closest to an adequate amount of attention and maintenance.

I'm much more worried about like, a random 40 foot bridge outside of the second largest suburb of the third largest city in a southern state or whatever. A short fall into icy water or just getting bonked by a piece of the falling bridge at the bottom is less dramatic but you'd be just as dead. And I'm pretty sure those bridges haven't seen an attentive engineer since whenever they were finished.

jessaustin2• 4 years ago

I'm much more worried about...

Various ancient bridges near my rural home have been "saved" by local morons (here they might be called "hillbillies") who organize elaborate campaigns to demand that the highway department not close them despite their ill repair. In some cases an alternative bridge has been built nearby at vastly increased expense, in other cases it just means that only morons use the existing rusted-out (or in the case of the "swinging" variety, multiple-broken-planked) bridge, carefully driving so they don't drop a tire into the holes.

How a utilitarian object riveted together out of commodity steel in 1910 is such a triumph of human will that it must be imposed on posterity forever, surpasses understanding.

jhallenworld• 4 years ago

The Goldstar memorial bridge over the Thames river in Connecticut is the same type as that I-35W bridge that failed in Minneapolis (only Goldstar is older and higher). I worry every time I cross it..

https://bridgehunter.com/ct/new-london/3819/

I_complete_me• 4 years ago

You might be interested to know that the term for avoiding bridges is gephyrophobia.

toast0• 4 years ago

One morning I drove across the Tacoma Narrows Bridge and it was quite foggy. I couldn't see the road surface very far ahead of me and had to just assume it would be there. Thankfully, it was. When I drove across the return span later in the day, I was happy to see the whole bridge before I started.

theandrewbailey• 4 years ago

Pittsburgh allegedly has more bridges than any other city in the world. One collapsed last January.[0] I had driven over and walked under it many times. An uncomfortable number of other bridges in the city are in poor repair.[1] If one of the bigger ones over one of the rivers here collapse, it will be a tragedy of similar magnitude to your nightmare.

[0] https://triblive.com/local/frick-park-bridge-collapses-natur...

[1] https://archive.ph/5u4de

sbaiddn• 4 years ago

Ya but the bigger the bridge the better the monitoring. I used to use one that fell daily, but its not a bridge your average Yinzer crosses even on a yearly basis.

It just doesn't really go anywhere except a couple thousand homes.

The big bridges on the three rivers, on the other hand! It seems to me that they're always always under repair.

numbsafari• 4 years ago

It'd be neat to integrate ChatGPT into a "bridge builder simulator" type game, and have it generate post-mortem news reports like this one for the bridge failures.

nottorp• 4 years ago

Considering what i saw posted about GPT thingies cost, you'd have to pay a subscription for that game.

mywittyname• 4 years ago

Building Integrity on YouTube is a fabulous channel to watch if you're interested into deep dives into failures such as this. The host is a civil engineer who specializes in performing structural audits of older buildings (specifically condos, I think).

He did a an episode on this bridge. It is excellent, and it provides some context about other timber bridges that is not discussed in this article.

baking• 4 years ago

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FSPI0xkTifI

tpmx• 4 years ago

Well, then it was underdimensioned.

londons_explore• 4 years ago

TL;DR: One of the diagonal beams was only designed to be half the strength it needed to be, and it snapped.

This type of bridge needs every beam - so when one broke, the whole thing fell.

The mystery really is why it didn't collapse sooner - that's still under investigation.

pornel• 4 years ago

Can someone provide background on this — what makes this accident and/or bridge notable?

jseutter• 4 years ago

It's notable because it's practically a brand new bridge - only 10 years into its 100 year life span. Bridges that fail are typically much further into their projected life spans, and the ones that aren't make headlines (like Tacoma Narrows). It's also a novel design, so lots of heads will be scratched while figuring out where the mistakes were made. Was the mistake in analysis? Materials? Something else?

I say novel design, but it's more like some novel techniques for combining wood and metal together. The basic bridge design is fairly common but typically built using all wood or all metal. When you look at it it's fairly similar to train bridges from last century.

hackrnusr• 4 years ago

Can't wait until all of the timber skyscrapers that they're building to fight global warming meet the same fate.

‘Significant overload’ caused Norway’s timber bridge collapse

Related Stories