Hayes
1
As I drive on an old country road I come across a worn down, rusty, old bridge
My neighbors and I drive down this road almost every day of our lives. The road is also
a shortcut for a major intersection, so the bridge is very well traveled. It is just a small
bridge that provides a link over the creek bed below it. The bridge appears to have been
constructed in a rush and then left there, forgotten. I begin to wonder the specifics of
how a bridge is said to be safe, or who the person is that says the bridge is safe. As for
me I am still thinking that the bridge doesn’t appear to be in the best possible condition.
As a resident citizen, I want a bridge to insure safety just by the sight of it alone. I want
to know that the bridge is safe to travel on. Not everyone is able to determine for himself
or herself whether a bridge is actually safe or whether it is a disaster waiting to happen.
As I pondered this I also wondered if the local public is made aware of bridge inspection
reports or safety hazards concerning a bridge. I believe it is just as important to feel safe
as it is to be safe. If a person does not feel that he or she is safe then they can never truly
be safe, there will always be a concern or worry underlining their thoughts. I have
several friends who live in Charleston, South Carolina. They have a genuine concern for
their safety as they travel over the Cooper River Bridge from Mt. Pleasant to Charleston
and back again. Some of these friends go extremely out of their way just to avoid
traveling across the bridge. This should not happen, a city, county, or the state should not
allow a structure such as a bridge to terrorize its citizens into a fear where they absolutely
avoid a confrontation with disaster.
Ancient Rome was known at least partially for its brilliant architecture and
withstanding structures. Even today we marvel at the still, strong standing, ancient
structures that cloud over all other surrounding buildings or bridges. Today we are lucky
Hayes
2
if a structure is to last our lifetime. I am not attempting to say that bridges today are not
constructed with the same efficiency as they once were, however, I am saying that
bridges, structures do fail and we should be aware of that. Unfortunately, history has
provided us with information that people neglect the fact that bridges can and will
collapse. They neglect and deliberately ignore the fact that certain bridges consistently
score below federal and state standards. The ethics of those who are in charge of
maintenance of bridge structures must be questioned in such incidents. As a human
being how can anyone allow a risk such of the likes as bridge collapse to continue for
years until they are forced to invest in improving the structure? I don’t believe money is
important enough to risk people’s lives.
Bridges were constructed of different materials. They range from simple logs and
rocks laying in a stream to a wooden or steel construction. The cause behind each
bridge’s construction is also different, whether for war, peace, art, or just as a gift they do
have one thing in common and that is a connection. Bridges connect one object to
another. The history of bridges spans back to the cave man crossing a creek by stepping
on a fallen log. Since that primitive time bridges have become more artistic and better
defined as a support structure. One early type of bridge was called a Rainbow bridge. It
was a folklore bridge, one born out of a story or passed down by word of mouth. The
Old Testament of the Bible has an example of a Rainbow bridge. A rainbow followed
the Great Deluge that was sent by God to flood the world. That rainbow was a promise
to humanity that He would never again flood the Earth with water. The rainbow connects
two worlds; it connects Heaven with Earth. It is a celestial bridge between God and Man.
Another such bridge in Christianity is Jesus Christ. Once Man and God were on level
Hayes
3
ground until sin separated them from one another opening a great gap. Jesus came and
bridged that gap. Even in such civilizations as the Medes and Persians celestial bridges
can be found deeply rooted in their culture. In an ancient Germanic legend the emperor
Charlemagne blesses the vineyards as he crosses the Rhine River on a moonbeam. As
time progressed bridges were built with specific purposes. In ancient China a bridge was
a symbol of peace and many people gathered there. From that purpose a small house
type structure was usually put at the ends or in the middle (Whitney).
There was a boom in the construction of bridges mainly due to the increase of
traffic. First it was the railroad and then automobiles added a need for a type of bridge.
More and more bridges were constructed and more and more often the bridges were
constructed in haste in order to get it up and running so that a profit could be made
(United States). As I researched I came across many numbers. I discovered a listing for
every state and the number of bridges that state has, and what percentage of those bridges
are considered to be in poor or worse condition. My home state of South Carolina was in
that listing. As I compared South Carolina to the rest of the United States I was surprised
to find that we stack up rather well to most of the country. The numbers show that South
Carolina’s percentage of “bad” bridges is comparatively lower to that of other states.
That is for bridges that have been rated by inspection alone (). There are more than likely
many bridges out of the ones that are given passing ratings that do not make one feel safe
while crossing it. One such bridge is located in the large city of Charleston, South
Carolina. The name of the bridge is the Cooper River Bridge, and it connects the city of
Charleston to Mount Pleasant. This is a major bridge that is traveled on like an interstate
and is known for its 5 o’clock traffic usually backing up vehicles for hours at a time. I
Hayes
4
was not able to inspect the Cooper River Bridge but I instead interviewed several people
who live in the Charleston area or people who drive across the bridge regularly. What
they had to say about the bridge did not surprise me. Larry Miller, a student that travels
to Charleston every weekend stated “It scares me, I don’t like to ride on it” (Miller). A
College of Charleston student, Adrienne Bennett told me “You can see debris falling
from the bridge.” Also Adrienne told me that she is frightened of the bridge and hopes it
will be replaced in the very near future (Bennett). In an informal discussion I recently
had with classmate Lisa Christopher, I discovered she too is from the Charleston area.
When asked what she thought about the bridge she told me that she drives out of her way
to avoid crossing it.
I could not visit Charleston in order to do research for this paper so I decided to
look a little closer and I found what I was looking for. I heard about a small bridge not
far from Clemson University that was in terrible disrepair. I decided to visit the bridge
for myself and take notes on what I saw and experienced. Also I went through a mock
inspection of what civil engineers would go through when rating a bridge. The bridge
was located in the town of Seneca, South Carolina off of highway 123 about three-tenths
of a mile on Radio Station Road.
A fellow classmate told me directions to the bridge but did not say exactly which
bridge it was; he only said, “You will know when you come across it.” He was right. I
knew as soon as I saw the bridge that this is the one he was talking about. Firstly I went
around the bridge from every angle possible taking notes on the condition of different
parts of the bridge such as the deck or superstructure. As I took notes I also snapped
pictures of the bridge and interesting things I noticed about it or its surrounding
Hayes
environment. I arrived at the bridge sight on Sunday April 18, 1999 at 4:10pm. I
evaluated and observed the bridge for approximately one hour. I approached the bridge
with extreme caution. I was forced to reduce my velocity from 35 mph all the way 15
mph. This was without oncoming traffic in the left-hand lane. I crossed over the bridge
in order to find parking and felt the many bumps and potholes embedded in the deck..
This is a straight on view of the bridge. It is not very wide at all and because of
this traffic had a tremendous decrease in speed while approaching the structure. At one
point there were six cars on top of the bridge because they had to decrease their speed so
much traffic backed up. The white sign reads “Weight Limit, 3 tons per axle, 6 tons
gross”.
Unfortunately the last time I checked a single car weighs close to two tons by
itself. When there are six vehicles on top of the deck I have to assume the limit has been
exceeded. This is a horrible use of approach by the bridge constructors. If a car must
5
Hayes
6
slow down considerably to pass over a bridge the approach is said to be low (). The cars
were backed up because of the decrease in acceleration upon the approach of the bridge.
One of the first things I took notice of was the guardrail on each side. They were wooden
railings that, in my honest opinion, could not catch a cold if it wanted to jump off. The
superstructure was the first place on the bridge I examined. A superstructure is the
portion of the bridge that supports the deck and covers the entire bridge (). The
superstructure was comprised of two long iron bars spanning the width of the gap.
Smaller iron or other metal bars were placed on top perpendicular to and evenly spaced
on the larger and longer metal bars. On top of that (and what is the main section the deck
was placed on) were wooden slabs placed parallel to the long metal bars and
perpendicular to the smaller metal bars. The same proportions of the small metal bars to
the large metal bars were used for the amount of wood laid on the small iron bars. The
construction of this bridge reminded me of Lincoln Logs, how everything was just
stacked on top of each other with out much care.
After seeing the underside of this bridge I was not persuaded to cross it again.
Hayes
7
Below is an image of aforementioned wood supporting the deck. It is not viewable from
the picture placed above. Unable to see but a section of the superstructure I was angry at
the sight of what I found. The wood had already gone through some rotting and splinters
and cracks are easily visible.
As I took this picture cars were traveling by and as they moved across the bridge
it shook back and forth like a wave travelling towards shore. The actual deck was
primarily pavement. A deck is the part of the bridge that is driven on. The deck was in
poor condition. Patches of pavement were splattered all over in order to fill in cracks or
potholes. It contributed in the action of slowing vehicles down as they pass.
The mock inspection results of the bridge were not staggering numbers. The
inspection guidelines were taken from website. The bridge is divided up into separate
parts. Each part is rated on a 1-10 scale with a 10 being the highest. Please refer to table
1 to see the actual numbers given on the inspection. The Deck describes the bridges
overall condition on the bridge’s deck. The Superstructure was given a low rating
because of the depleting wooden supports. The Substructure was in adequate condition
as far as the rest of the bridge is concerned. The substructure supports the superstructure.
The Structural Evaluation is an overall rating of the strength of the bridge’s structure.
Hayes
8
Bridge traffic is a factor in this evaluation. Since the bridge traffic was high I was forced
to give it a lower rating for the poor overall quality of the bridge. Deck geometry the
width of the bridge concerning the amount of traffic used by it (). My 1985 Toyota
Corolla could barely fit in the right-hand lane so I gave it a low rating. Underclearanceis
a measure of the adequacy of the vertical and horizontal clearances under the bridge ().
The vertical clearance was fine however the horizontal distance was very small from the
sides of the gully. The Approach is measured by how much traffic must slow down in
order to cross the bridge. As stated several times the traffic practically came to a halt in
the presence of oncoming cars. Waterway Adequacy is designed to rate the flow of water
from the structure (). I was unable to find a time where it was raining so I just observed
the topography of the surrounding area.
Table 1
Bridge Part
Rating
Deck
4
Superstructure
3
Substructure
6
Structural Evaluation
4
Deck Geometry
2
Underclearances
5
Approach
2
Waterway Adequacy
6
I must say I felt a sense of importance in what I was doing even if I am just a
college freshman working on a research paper. I felt like what I was doing mattered and
Hayes
9
was important not only to me but to everyone that travels over the bridge. I couldn’t help
but wondered how some bridges get away with poor or worse ratings on their inspections.
Just as a student I realized people depend on engineers to tell them the bridge is or is not
safe and then the people depend on the town, county, or state to adhere to the engineer’s
recommendation.
On Tuesday, December 1, 1987 the House of Representatives met to investigate
into bridge safety of the United States. They discussed the status of the National Bridge
Inspection Program. At this point the nation recognized that even with this committee
there was still a problem with the nation’s bridges. The committee recognized bridges
and their maintenance as a vital link to the nation’s economy. Of course the safety
hazards was the main and most important concern of the committee. One deteriorated
bridge is capable of shutting down miles upon miles of highway. There was what can be
called a bridge boom in the fifties and sixties. Those bridges were ending their life span
at the time of this inquisition. The hearing sought an in depth look at the problems of
bridge design, maintenance and inspection. Several incidents led up to this hearing. One
such incident was the Schourie Creek Bridge collapse in New York. Flood conditions
caused this bridge to collapse. Flooding is a common cause for bridge collapse (United
States).
How does one maintain a bridge in good conditioning? The most obvious answer
is a regular routine of inspection and maintenance. The government, local or state needs
to make sure that this routine is not broken.
Hayes 10
Works Cited
Bennett, Adrienne. Personal interview. 10 April 1999.
Miller, Larry. Personal interview. 10 April 1999.
United States. House of Representatives. Bridge Safety, Subcommittee on Investigation
and Oversight, Committee on Public Works and Transportation. Washington: US
Government printing office, 1988.
Watson, Sarah Ruth, Wilbur J. Watson. Bridges In History and Legend. Cleveland:
Jansen, 1937.
Whitney, Charles S. Bridges. New York: Rudge 1929.