Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout3551; POINSETTIA LANE OVERHEAD WIDENING; STRUCTURAL REVIEW; 2001-05-07Poinsettia Lane Overhead Widening Prepared by Daniel, Mann, Johnson, & Mendenhall 3250 Wilshire Boulevard Los Angeles, CA 90010 May 7, 2001 Poinsettia Lane Overhead Widening Structural Review The structural review and check report contained herein have been prepared by or under the direction of the following Registered Civil Engineers: Poinsettia Lane Overhead Widening Introduction The Poinsettia Lane Overhead Widening project is located in the City of Carlsbad and consists of widening the existing 44'-8" wide structure to 76'-0" wide. There is a 5'-0" wide sidewalk on the south side of the existing structure. There is no sidewalk on the north side of the existing structure. The final widened structure will however have a 6'-0" wide sidewalk on the north side of the structure. The bridge is a three span, 142'-2V4" long, structure crossing over two SDNR railroad tracks. The entire bridge in located within the railroad right-of-way. The existing bridge superstructure consists of precast prestressed slab units supported on two pier walls and seat type abutments. The widened portion of the structure will also consist of precast prestressed slab units. Both the existing and widened portion of the pier walls and abutments are supported on driven steel H piles. A copy of the General Plan for the bridge structure in shown on Appendix A. The overall scope of the project also included rehabilitation of roadway approaches at either end of the bridge and construction of expansion vaults behind the abutments to accommodate two water lines that run under the median of the bridge structures. DMJM's scope of work however, was limited to checking of the bridge plans, calculations, estimate, and supplemental provisions pertaining to the structural items. DMJM also checked the consistency of the bridge plans with the roadway plans and connectivity of the water lines to the bridge structure. Review Process DMJM performed the review of the bridge structure during three stages of the design process. Our review was made at 65%, 90%, and 100% completed stages of the bridge DMJM Daniel, Mann, Johnson, & Mendenhall plans. Our review of the plans identified any obvious omissions, conflicts, or incompatible structural framing or details. Geometric Layout - DMJM performed a complete check of the geometric layout of the bridge structure. As a part of the geometric layout check, we reviewed the magnitude of the minimum vertical clearance and its location together with the space required for construction operation and structure construction access plans. Any inconsistency or errors were brought to the designer's attention and corrected in the final plans. Superstructure - We reviewed the calculations made by the designer and the independent checker of the bridge structure. We also reviewed the plans and checked to ensure that the calculations and plans are consistent with one another. We checked the adequacy of prestressing force (Pf) and the number of strands. Submitted calculations were also reviewed for the required ultimate moment reinforcement and shear stirrups. Any inconsistency or errors were brought to the designer's attention and corrected in the final plans. Substructure - Design of the abutments were reviewed. Adequacy of the abutment reinforcement, seat width, and piles at the abutments were checked. We also checked the dowels connecting the superstructure to the substructure and their capacity to resist the transverse shear force due to seismic forces. The detailing of the abutment components on the plans were reviewed. The submitted computer runs for the design of the pier walls were also reviewed. Adequacy of the main reinforcement at the bent caps and pier walls was checked. The number of piles at the pier walls was also checked. The detailing of the pier wall components on the plans were reviewed. The calculations for the thickness of the bearing pads at the abutments and the bent caps were also checked. DMM 2 Da,,ie!, Ma,,,, Johnson, & Mendenhall Any inconsistency or errors in the calculation of the substructure forces and any deviations from the Caltrans Bridge Details guidelines were brought to the designer's attention and corrected in the final plans. Seismic Design Criteria - The design guidelines and modeling techniques used by the designer and independent checker were reviewed. Both the designer and independent checker had followed the Caltrans Seismic Design Criteria dated July 1999 which is consistent with the present bridge design practices. Any inconsistency or errors in the seismic modeling were brought to the designer's attention and corrected in the final plans. Structure Foundation Report - We have reviewed the Structure Foundation Report prepared by Agra Earth & Environmental, Inc. and have compared it with the required items listed in the Caltrans Bridge Aids Section 15-3 that should be addressed. We found that all the required items have been adequately addressed in the Foundation Report. Supplemental Provisions - We have reviewed all the pertaining structural items and ensured that all required items of work have been adequately addressed. This includes special standard for construction workmanship, calculations of pay items, and method of payment for each of the structural components of the bridge. Any inconsistency or errors were brought to the designer's attention and corrected in the final document. Summary DMJIM reviewed all plan details with an overview perspective to verify that the details are complete, reasonable, structurally sound, and constructible. All moment connections were checked to verify that details are adequate to resist moments resulting from various loading conditions. We have confirmed that there are sufficient details shown for modifying the existing structure and joining the new structure to existing structure components. We have also checked the construction sequence, all the notes and details and ensured that these notes are consistent with the details shown and these details meet the Caltrans guidelines. We have reviewed all the revisions to the plans, calculations and MWM 3 Daniel, Ma,m. Johnson, & Me,,de,ha!! supplemental provisions to ensure that they are in compliance with the review comments. We have clearly identified any design deficiencies and have closely coordinated with the designer to convey our concerns and communicate these review findings in order to facilitate an expedite response to our review comments. It is our professional opinion that the final set of PS&E package dated January 29, 2001, adequately addresses all our review comments and that this set contains details that are constructible. It is also our professional opinion that this PS&E package is in conformance with the applicable Caltrans bridge design and detail codes and standards and meets the applicable City Codes and Standards. PMM Poinsettia Lane Overhead Widening Appendix A General Plan Prepared by Daniel, Mann, Johnson and Mendenhall May 7, 2001 PROFILE GRADE NO 5.510 ¶ k'Q 681 To. Cl' (Ill 2. -- \RR Mo/fl 710, 0, I.5\,, ± —Th ELEVATION 7-20-0 0, sf60,619 s60. for doflfy _ji0 6' (III - / T,o012 / 21 --, ,,TOP of VIII hM ell 3-8,1st Pross.? PlosilosSok slob urns ---------------- I, TYPICAL SECTION - STAGE I (-'0.-a. _—C P0/5680!. too. as..) I V8-=-,I. ..8 Roisod 0111, 5' 20 ofo8.'c"\ I! V oss So ulilil/ol Ple, 68.31 To.'.7 ROIIIflQ O'D. K us. dliii & 486 d~W per INDEX TO PLANS susio. 6-6 .5 st~d pl5 50.1486019 FlOSS 8,1st oV. Bol',Io, (ppo 25 33 Go.o.'d Plo,, .'/ c'.m uso Ro.5fl0—__ 34 Deck Co1w,s 35 Fusn6ok/o,, Plo, 36 IA4,e68 Lg8I 37 681m68 Details 38 6081 081./Is 39 T.pf48 248/on 48 4068/o,o,.on 0./oils 4/ Ct48sU4, Rolling Type 3 42 P,esl,'ossod Crr68. SlObs 43 Slrcou'e AcProxh TYM 4,3051 44 Sh'48o,e 682082 0o1,c81 0./oIls 45 SIlO. Povfrç - P11/ SlOpe 46 Espenslo, Poll SlrWurol oiIs Me I 47 Eopolsbo, V,'ssl SI,UOWOI l36oiis N. 2 48 I/fUlly HOW 06./LI 49 51,82,.'. on Plan 50 Leo of Test Barligs STATE STANDARD PLANS DATED JULY. /992 S/OS' No. TItl 6104 AHO'otlotlOfls .1108 5y68015 6620 Uriis of P19068 For E,o.sollo, And 8.1111/I 8r14pe 50-I &189e 081.1/s 50-3 Bridge 060/IS 50-13 Bridge 081./is 82-5 Pile 001.113 CI,,Ss 45 And Doss TO 68-21 .168 Sods (U.s/on.. Uo..0e68 Roll46 . 2') 85-54 Co'o81 ftr,'Io' Tyi. 26 — 7-3 T.'.ry Roll/Ic (Type 6) 7-4 T.r50'O,y 7,61/. Sa'OS, 51684,6 P.5 5/68 OS E[ 6'- 0601/Ion C4,4,81e &,,llel Type 68 W/ 06810 Uno R.II/0,.._.—,"c C s1sl P./n68110 L0Se__1 Te.''o'y TNTIC So'een LEGEND I P8/N 82146.80 47C-0598 2 18081 P0/68(Io to.. 08 & .5.510,06 3 8282e o,' Slob Tpee 85305) - 64,0001151119 1814,6' .6. o4,1 0820100. o Eo/51dN6 odn 82108201.5 "0/. To. 060r481' .81/I verify 811 osU48/Il'0 field dloo,11011 060'. .'681.'SS 0' f82148frç GIl' o82'IN, EIo.T&86 50*5&D4 8,150 0.5,. DOKKEN_°i tN.,NtC.,S. nj.., ....oa........ .COC.',fl2..... P.11685. too. (.50) Pl,, Slob WitsilsPrecast P048os68 . 8451 P.51 P82.568 lTI2 -' I _ P480/448 WHO' Uo. . Who. Uo.. 0./st P81/IS.'?!. •So.o' 048 WOI6 J, 006 WOIO' 581815 D*en ",, II II II TYPICAL SECTION - STAGE 2 7-47-0 'OS 582, , SAN DIEGO REGIONAL STANDARD 8JIINGS awina No.. Till. 7-20-0 8-3 8.51110 From 68 ToO C0'824,11 Co.o's He..5. 005 Barrier mm ExIsfirg Concrete For U.Fls or Rdlrwd - . ---- ---- ---- -- -- ---- -- ---- -- ---- -- ---- ---- -- [CFFYOFCARLSBADI IPOINSETTIA LAW OVCRIOEAO WIVEMIK GCICRSL 0too 75l' C5'351'Oi OTT £10011 5*11 i1L-1 I-.