Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement


Sights and sounds of a decaying Forth Road Bridge

Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date:
17 January 2008
IT IS just a blip on a graph. But every time the line shoots upwards, it is recording the sound of a snap in one of the 11,618 pencil-thin wires that are holding up the Forth Road Bridge.
These wires have now snapped at the rate of more than one a month for the past 17 months – a stark illustration of how the life expectancy of the 44-year-old bridge is shortening.

The wire breaks – detected by microphones embedded inside the cables – come on top of 86 found during a previous inspection four years ago.

But they tell only part of the story. The real worry facing bridge officials is how quickly corrosion of the remaining wires is sapping the strength of the crossing.

Now, The Scotsman has learned that the clearest picture of when traffic bans may have to be imposed on the crossing will be provided by a new inspection over the next month.

The results, which are expected by April, could determine whether a threatened lorry ban in just five years' time has to be brought forward – or can be pushed back.

Hauliers said they were praying planned repairs would be successful, to prevent the Fife economy being hammered by such severe restrictions.

Engineers will check the section of the cables with the worst-known corrosion for the first time in four years to see whether their previous predictions are still correct.

Corrosion and wire breaks among the wires that make up the 2ft thick cables have already cut the bridge's strength by 8-10 per cent.

A further 10 per cent loss of strength of the cables, which hold the bridge up, would first force a lorry ban, and then complete closure of the crossing in 11 years' time.

The calculations are based on the corrosion continuing unchecked at the fastest possible rate, and the bridge's strength falling below a minimum safety threshold.

When the bridge opened in 1964, the cables had a safety factor of 2.59 – or 2.59 times the strength required to hold up its own weight and that of traffic.

Vehicles account for 15 per cent of the total weight, half of which comes from lorries.

However, cable inspections in 2004 showed the bridge's safety factor had been cut to 2.23 times the strength required.

The Forth Estuary Transport Authority (Feta) said the minimum safety factor was two – a margin taking account of possible extreme weather, the heaviest traffic loads and any unknown deficiencies in the bridge structure.

It is currently calculated that this level could be reached in 2013 if the corrosion is not halted.

Officials will also use next month's scheduled inspection to ensure microphones detecting the wires snapping are working properly.

A total of 22 wire breaks have been recorded by the £866,000 acoustic monitoring system since it was installed in August 2006.

These are in addition to 86 wire breaks found during inspection of ten sections of the cables at various points on the bridge in 2004.

However, Feta, which runs the bridge, hopes it can halt the corrosion by blowing dry air into the cables to dry them out. But installation of the dehumidification equipment required will not be completed until October next year because of the traffic disruption it has caused.
A total of 22 wire breaks have been recorded by an acoustic monitoring device since August 2006. Picture: Ian Rutherford
A total of 22 wire breaks have been recorded by an acoustic monitoring device since August 2006. Picture: Ian Rutherford

Feta officials said it will not be known until at least 2011 whether the process has worked – when construction of a replacement bridge is due to start.

However, the new bridge, to be built alongside at a cost of up to £4.2 billion, will not be finished until at least 2016.

Feta has ordered next month's inspection so its results can be compared to those to be taken once dehumidification has started.

The cables will be opened and several 10ft-long wire samples removed for analysis. Replacement wire will be compressed on to the strands to maintain their strength.

The work, which is expected to take three weeks, will involve a 180ft long section of the east cable at its lowest point, half way across the bridge.

This section centres on a 60ft stretch which is thought to have been the worst corroded among those checked four years ago because it was where water had collected after seeping down the inside the cable.

However, Feta officials said they remained puzzled as to why this section was not the worst one for wire breaks among those checked four years ago.

They were also surprised to find the same section of the west cable was found to be less corroded, despite the prevailing westerly wind.

Feta said there had also been no pattern in frequency or location to the wire breaks detected by the microphones, which are positioned every few hundred yards along the cables.

The system is designed to give early warning of new problems.

Feta has said it would open up an area of the cable for inspection if several wire breaks were detected close to each other.

Barry Colford, Feta's depute general manager, said he could not predict the results of next month's inspection – or what implications they would have for the potential 2013 lorry ban.

He told The Scotsman: "It may alter that date, it may not. We hope it will be in the same 'envelope' as the previous results, but we do not know whether it will be slightly up or down.

"It should give us a better idea of how the bridge's safety factor is likely to change over the coming years.

"It will allow us to re-evaluate concerns that the safety factor could fall below two.

"The current rate of wire breaks is not causing undue concern."

Gavin Scott, the head of policy in Scotland for the Freight Transport Association, said: "We are praying the dehumidification does work so any lorry ban can be pushed back until a new crossing is in place.

"If not, you might as well switch off the lights in Fife."

Alan Russell, the chief executive of Fife Chamber of Commerce, said: "We must do everything possible to have a new bridge completed before any restrictions have to be applied on the Forth Road Bridge.

"That is vital to give businesses confidence to invest in Fife in the future. Planning decisions must be fast-tracked if at all possible."

Neil Greig, the Scotland director for the Institute of Advanced Motorists' Motoring Trust, said: "It is important to know exactly when the bridge is likely to face problems.

"I hope the inspection results will reassure drivers that everything possible is being done."
Stages of cable corrosion: stage one, an area confined to the centre of the cable, represents the least affected wires up to stage four, the worst affected, outer band of the wire.
Stages of cable corrosion: stage one, an area confined to the centre of the cable, represents the least affected wires up to stage four, the worst affected, outer band of the wire.

Phil Flanders, the Scotland director of the Road Haulage Association, said major roadworks on the Forth Road Bridge would provide a sign of things to come.

He said that next year's round-the-clock lane closures, due to be imposed while joints on the deck which carries the carriageways are replaced, should concentrate minds.

He said: "There will be even greater disruption, with all lorries having to travel via the Kincardine Bridge, if there is a ban on heavy goods vehicles on the Forth Road Bridge imposed four years later."

Red for danger: Colour-coded warning system graphically illustrates damage

WHEN Forth Road Bridge officials started a precautionary inspection of its main cables in 2004, they were shocked by the extent of corrosion found.

The move followed problems found in several suspension bridges in the United States, and the Forth was the first to be checked in Britain. Analysis of samples taken from ten points on the bridge's cables, which stretch the length of the crossing on either side of its deck, made sobering reading.

A colour-coded, cross-section illustration was created of the 11,618 wires inside the cables at the worst section found (pictured above). It shows the east cable at its lowest point, halfway across the bridge, on which next month's new inspection will focus.

The diagram is based on a system devised by US government highways experts – a four-stage guide in which red, yellow, green and black represent degrees of corrosion, with red the most severe and black the least. The central black areas are comparatively tiny compared to the other colours.

The Forth Road Bridge "represented" the UK on the US-led working group which drew up the code of practice for such cable inspections.

The cross-section shows most of the worst affected wires, shaded red, are towards the outside of the 2ft thick cable, although there are also areas of the highest-level corrosion closer to the centre.

The arrows show where wooden wedges were driven into the cluster of wires inside the cable's protective wrapping to inspect the interior.

This section was the most corroded part of the cable inspected in 2004, although it did not have the greatest number of wire breaks. The Forth Estuary Transport Authority, which runs the bridge, said looking at the diagram alone does not show the remaining strength of that part of the cable.

It said complicated calculations were required because the extent of corrosion in each wire provided only an indication of its residual strength.

The corrosion is thought to have been caused by water seeping into the cables – with the worst section suffering from water collecting at the cable's low point.

However, it remains unclear whether the way the cable was made when the bridge was built in the early 1960s played a part. There remains the possibility that bad workmanship and storm damage while the cables' wires were spun from one end of the bridge to the other could have had a role.

However, corrosion of cables on the Severn Bridge, which is two years younger than the Forth, has been found to be even worse.

Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 17 January 2008 1:27 PM
  • Source: The Scotsman
  • Location: Edinburgh
  • Related Topics: Forth Bridges
 
1

Conan the Librarian™,

17/01/2008 00:23:48
I remember the cold foggy day that Liz "opened" the bridge.I was on my Dad's shoulders to get a better view.
Only 44 years ago and it's creaking.Perhaps a tunnel next time;-)
2

BK,

Cyberspace 17/01/2008 00:36:19
But what about the Big Bang from the Squinty Bridge in Glasgow? Did that break the recorder
3

Wee David,

California 17/01/2008 02:27:08
Why is the bridge failing so early? The Golden Gate Bridge was completed in 1937; 70 years ago. Was there a design flaw with the Forth Road Bridge?
4

,

17/01/2008 02:54:31
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
5

Duncan in Edinburgh,

17/01/2008 07:26:43
#3 It's an interesting comparison. Did you know that the Golden Gate has undergone a massive, tens of millions of dollars rebuilding programme to reverse structural defects in the recent past?

One thing they did get right in SF was lane management - the bridge is designed so that more lanes can be used by the prevailing direction of traffic during morning and evening rush hours. They also spend toll money on bus and ferry services, ensuring that there is a mix of transport options for Bay Area commuters.

Nonetheless, those who commute every day are as full of criticism of that bridge's management as we are of the FRB. It's far from perfect.
6

Haggismaker,

Northern Bohemia 17/01/2008 07:36:43
Anyone getting fed up with American know-alls? American bridges collapse a deal faster than ours, and much more dramatically. Remember Tahoma? Besides, I think if you looked you'd find the Forth Bridge and all other suspension bridges in the UK are monitored constantly and maintained to the highest standards.
7

Tracy C,

Aberdeen 17/01/2008 08:10:18
It crazy to think that this corrosion is happening so relatively "soon" after the bridge has opened in comparison to the Brooklyn Bridge or the Golden Gate Bridge in the US for example.
8

Keithie Boy,

St Albans 17/01/2008 08:28:57
The simple reason why the bridge is failing so quickly is because it is being subjected to loads (for years!) that are beyond it's design capacity. All structures have a design load but once you go past that significantly you stress parts more often and to a greater extent. You narrow the gap between the design load and the fail load and thus damage to the structure occurs. This is largely irreversible and thus the overall fail limit lowers and you end up witha vicious circle which is fundamentally what's being discussed here. The Rail Bridge operates way below it's design capacity and so with sensible maintainence it'll stand for hundreds of years. It's a fallacy to suggest that there was a design flaw or that is was constructed poorly; if the bridge had been used at or below it's design load capacity then we'd be fine. But it hasn't so we need a new bridge. And please folks, this needs to be a biggie. It's got to have overcapacity in terms of load. Otherwise we'll be in the same position 50 years from now. The value of engineering not being interferred with by idiot politicians and like cannot be underestimated.
9

conservative,

Fife 17/01/2008 08:29:42
Half the cable damage due to lorry traffic (by weight) and most of the road surface damage due to lorry traffic yet the toll charges for lorries is only a little higher than for cars. If the tolls for lorries had been set at the ecenomic level there would have been plenty of cash to maintain the bridge properly. A reasonable cost for a lorry would be (say) half the cost of going via Kincardine.
10

Duncan in Edinburgh,

17/01/2008 08:44:12
#8 Did you read my comment about the Golden Gate Bridge? It has had more spent on it in remedial structural repairs than both the Forth bridges put together!

#9 and #10 you're absolutely bang-on. I would go further and suggest that until we as consumers pay, at the till, a fair price for all of the costs of transporting our goods, we will continue to see this sort of black-hole funding requirement for our transport infrastructure. Road haulage trucks are now typically 40 tonne laden weight, where the bridge was designed for a maximum of less than 20 tonnes per vehicle.
11

D Napier,

17/01/2008 08:44:25
I would like to point out to the American contributors to this thread that the cables on the Forth Road Bridge were actually constructed under the supervision of an American company - John A Roebling & Sons.
12

Alternative (High Octane) Fuel Head,

Edinburgh 17/01/2008 09:01:06
#7:

The problem with a causeway would be that ships have to get in and out. Either you'd need a removable/openable section (highly impractical) or you'd need a central bridge section which would have to be quite steep and high to allow clearance for ships' masts. If it wasn't for the major port, a causeway would be the idea solution.

As usual, they've left everything to the last minute and the press are starting to hit the panic button about this issue. This is typical of labour mis-management. We should have been talking about an alternative crossing at least 10 years ago.
13

malkster,

Scotland 17/01/2008 09:11:03
#13

Exactly a causeway would be a bit of a snag for shipping. The Golden gate bridge does not suffer the same environmental factors as the Forth road bridge it hasa mediteranean climate.
14

Duncan in Edinburgh,

17/01/2008 09:13:34
#13 A(nother) disingenuous post from you. 10 years ago we *were* talking about an alternative crossing. We've been talking about it for decades. The argument against was that it wouldn't have solved any problems. At that time the only through-route from the bridge was to the Barnton junction, and an additional crossing would simply have moved traffic jams a few miles up the road to that junction.

It has been Labour's investment in the M9 spur which has enabled the possibility of a second crossing. But, and here's the rub, there are still strong arguments against on the basis of traffic modelling. The *only* compelling argument for a new crossing is as a replacement, not an alternative - and this is predicated on the as-yet unproven prediction that the current bridge will have to close.

In summary, your criticisms are as ever, way off. Building more roads has been proven, time and again, to lead simply to more traffic. We need to be investing in improvements to shared transportation systems - trains, buses, trams, car-pooling - rather than finding ways to accommodate more and more individual metal boxes for commuters. And we need to end the practice of building commuter belts and housing estates so far away from employment centres that commuting is necessary in the first place.
15

ddmc,

17/01/2008 09:14:21
box tunnel could be built in half the time, we could get our Norweigan neighbours to help, they have lots of experience.

I know people will tell me about the gradients, but how do we get in & out a multi-storey car park ?, we can drive round in circles till we get to the bottom & up again. Obviously it would be a bigger circle than a car park, i'm sure one of the tunnels in manhattan use a similar method.
16

hud of sleat,

Yorkshire 17/01/2008 09:38:08
I seam to remember from my naval days that we used to keep our wires greesed and oiled. A dry wire also rusts. Could it not be possible for the wires to be incased in plastic and to allow oil to be pumped through them. I know it might sound a bit far fetched and possilby expensive. But if it works, think of the money it could save.
17

sceptic,

17/01/2008 09:42:28
Premature failure of the Forth Bridge is a national disgrace. FETA is deadbeat politician led organisation instead of being engineering led.
As for #11 Duncan in Edinburgh's twaddle
"Did you read my comment about the Golden Gate Bridge? It has had more spent on it in remedial structural repairs than both the Forth bridges put together!"
Of course it has high maintainance it is 30 years older and has higher traffic density. Despite that it is not in need of closure like the Forth Bridge.
The pathetic FETA statement "They were also surprised to find the same section of the west cable was found to be less corroded despite the prevailing westerly wind." says it all. Of course there is less corrosion on the west side, the side subject to the drying effect of the prevailing wind.Perhaps if we had someone on FETA with "O" level physics they would speak more sensibly.
18

sceptic,

17/01/2008 09:47:47
#14
"The Golden gate bridge does not suffer the same environmental factors as the Forth road bridge it hasa mediteranean climate."
Absolute nonsense the Golden Gate bridge spends much of its time shrouded in salt laden mists rolling in from the Pacific Oceon.
19

Duncan in Edinburgh,

17/01/2008 10:06:23
#18 Erm, why do you describe my comment as twaddle when you confirm it is true?
20

Alexander,

Edinburgh 17/01/2008 10:22:27
11Duncan in Edinburgh
"Road haulage trucks are now typically 40 tonne laden weight, where the bridge was designed for a maximum of less than 20 tonnes per vehicle"
More disingenuousness the limit was 30t and it was known that the limit would shortly be increased to 33t, since further increased to 40t.
21

D Napier,

17/01/2008 10:27:21
Lets get a few facts straight here:

1. When it was built, the Forth Road Bridge was the longest span suspension bridge in the world, outside of the USA.

2. When constructed it was the most northerly long span suspension bridge in the world.

3. The bridge was designed in the 1950's and although designed in the UK it incorporates many features used in similar bridges in the USA.

4. As stated in my previous posting the cable spinng technique used at the Forth was American and was undertaken under the supervision of American engineers.

5. The bridge caries well in excess of it's design loading.

6. Despite comments, on this and other threads, to the contrary the Forth Road Bridge is constantly maintained.

7. There are a large number of bridges in the USA and elsewhere which have suffered corrosion of the main suspension cables.

8. FETA are the first bridge authority outside of the USA to have undertaken such a detailed examination of their bridge cables. As a result of this work, similar work was undertaken on the Severn Bridge and even worse corrosion was discovered.

I am a civil enginner, and the more I look into this subject the more I discover that the problems being encountered on the Forth Road Bridge are not uncommon on bridges of this type.

Maybe some of the other contributors should do more research before jumping to conclusions and making wild accusations.
22

Roy Forrester,

Bloomsburg USA 17/01/2008 10:28:07
The design factor is very important. We did not design for today’s traffic, either by volume or by weight both in the UK and USA and for that matter in the rest of the industrialised world. We just have to bite the bullet and pay the price. If a new bridge is required so be it and try not to underestimate the projected increase in traffic. The Forth Rail Bridge is a good example of good design for the projected load and my guess is that it will be around a hundred years from now, except that there will not be a rail system then!!!
23

Duncan in Edinburgh,

17/01/2008 10:29:16
#22 I stand corrected on the numbers. Doesn't really change the point though does it? The road haulage industry made changes which improved their profits at the cost of the taxpayer.
24

cm,

edinburgh 17/01/2008 10:44:33
the golden gate bridge has recently had an overhaul which has cost 100's of millions of dollars. most suspension bridges around the world are experiencing similar problems, it's just you don't hear about it because it's local news to each area.
25

sceptic,

17/01/2008 10:46:23
#21
"Twaddle" because you ignored the crux of the comparison, namely that the Forth bridge is to be closed while a similar much older bridge stays open.
The cost of a replacement bridge certainly far exceeds any repair costs to the Golden Gate.
26

Duncan in Edinburgh,

17/01/2008 10:50:57
#27 You don't appear to be living up to your name. Do you seriously believe that the current road bridge will have to close? Few other people do. Surely the most likely scenario is that once the "replacement" crossing is completed, HGVs will be banned from the original bridge and it will go back to being used within its design limits.
27

Transparent?,

Scotland 17/01/2008 11:23:56
I am surprised at reading the design safety factor was 2.59. There was a time when structural engineers used a safety factor of 4.00. In some cases this provided an over-design but at least it was safe.

The other cable specification I would be interested in is the material of construction. If this is not precisely manufactured, then the cyclic-life stress calculations could be misleading - to say the least. Another reason for using a higher safety factor.

When corrosion 'eats' away at a material which is under load, the load-bearing area is reduced and hence the safe working load is reduced. If that load is exceeded then it's a disaster waiting to happen. Such failure is usually sudden and catastrophic.

I have no plans to cross the Forth Road Bridge in the near future.
28

ARP,

Scotland 17/01/2008 11:35:03
I have not been following this scandalous tale, but it seems as though Scotland is once again demonstrating 'incompetence'.

Is no one to be held to account? Like that monstrosity the Parliament building, the bridge is not fit for purpose or it is being over used - whatever - the taxpayer has once again been fleeced.

Where are the auditors and why have they not told us who has ripped us off? The 'blame-free' culture and the cosy comfort, in which the incompetent and/or crooked people in high places relax, should be disturbed and those responsible held up to public ridicule and more.

Where is the Fourth Estate - the investigative press? Covering transient headline grabbing events of no great import; while the big scams are ignored. Or is it too as corrupt and indolent as the rest of them?

In my Utopia, the Engineer in Charge of building a bridge that fell down would be banged up in jail and left to rot unless and until he could prove that someone else should take his place.

Wasting public money is wasting human lifetime - in my book it is a crime tantamount to murder and should be so regarded.
29

John M,

Melbourne, Australia 17/01/2008 11:38:58
Has anyone considered replacing the main cables by adding height to the support pylons and suspending new cables from these new points then dropping new hangers from the new cables? The new hangers need only drop as far as the existing cable (making a double cable) and share the load with it, but maybe it would be better to remove the existing cable and leave the space free for a possible second cable at a later date.

I have no ides if this is technically feasible; I just wanted to throw the suggestion on the table.
30

GP,

17/01/2008 11:47:50
It is clesr from the propaganda being issued that we will not have a tunnel even although it would be the cheapest safest and quickest way to go. There is far too much relaince on road connectivity which in reality could actually lead to greater connectability to exisiting road networks at low cost. The big issue is that we don't have a long term plan as evidenced by our existing infrastructure. Look at the crossing from Denmark to Sweden then ask what should we do with the little gap problem we have.
Vested interests none of which are in the public interest will take over as is ususal in small vision and short term thinking Scotland.
31

Duncan in Edinburgh,

17/01/2008 11:48:07
#30 I fear your suggested public ridicule of politicians, and imprisonment of engineers, would simply result in us having even less able politicians, and fewer top-flight engineers prepared to work on public projects.

It's easy from this juncture to view the FRB as representing incompetence, but in fact in a whole range of ways it also reflects excellence. All we hear about today is worries about cables and maintenance, but it would also be quite easy to find shining examples of brilliance in the design and implementation of the FRB.
32

Man of Reason,

17/01/2008 12:11:06
~30 ARP - FETA's inspection of the main cables was indeed subjected to an independent audit on teh orders of Tavish Scott, the former Transport Minister. This was carried out by consulting engineers Flint & Neill Partnership and praised FETA for being proactive and for a well-organised and thorough investigation.

You can read it for yourself here:

http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2006/03/03154220/0

I think some armchair experts are too quick to castigate public officials when if they did a modicum of research they would find that the Forth Road Bridge is in fact leading the way in this field.

The article says it all - the Severn bridge only carried out an inspection after what the Forth discovered, and they have even worse corrosion.

Perhaps we should be grateful that the issue is being monitored and reported so openly rather than covered up or ignored.
33

Man of Reason,

17/01/2008 12:12:56
#31 John M - Your suggestion is a good one and is indeed being considered - you can read about it on the Forth Road Bridge website www.feta.gov.uk.

34

Man of Reason,

17/01/2008 12:15:11
#27 Sceptic - When was it announced that the Forth Road Bridge has to close?

I thought this was only if current efforts to tackle the corrosion failed?
35

Ron S,

Edinburgh - near the Dean Bridge! 17/01/2008 12:26:38
"Vehicles account for 15 per cent of the total weight, half of which comes from lorries."
According to post #22 the lorries now weigh 40t from compared with an original design weight of 30t ie an increase of 33%.

Therefore the total load has only increased by 33% of half of 15 percent, ie 2.5%

This is negligible and suggests that whatever is wrong with this bridge is nothing to do with the slight increase in load.
36

531 Biker,

NQ 17/01/2008 12:36:32
As someone who crosses the bridge every day I have a bit of an interest in it. The whole process followed, public consultation etc, has been a farce. It has been pretty obvious to anyone living near the bridge that some substantial road structure changes have been taking place in the past few years which has pointed to a corridor D route.

I have no issue with a new bridge, but cannot understand why steps are not being taken now to minimise damage to the existing one. Should we not be restricting HGV's now? The bridge has been closed to HGV's and high sides a lot more in the recent past than ever before which points to concerns about the strain on it in high winds.

Yet what do we have to look forward to in the near future? The tolls will be removed, meaning (no doubt) an increase in traffic over the bridge and a lot of that will be HGV. As well as the environmental concerns (and I don't buy into the "flowing traffic causes less of a problem") surely this will increase wear and tear leading to a swifter closure to heavy goods. Still - if it's in your manifesto....

We should be upping the tolls, not decreasing or removing them. I moved to Fife knowing that I'd have to pay to cross the bridge (since I usually travel on two wheels during the week it's not an issue anyway)and I presume the tolls are not a major factor for those who cross the bridge everyday or more of the single occupancy cars I see ploughing into Edinburgh would be parked in train stations in Fife or at park and ride.

Funds raised should be used to subsidise maintenance and provision of alternative transport routes or types. Gritting and clearing NCN1 would be a start!

We really screw up in this country when looking at integrated transport and the way this whole Forth Crossing matter has been dealt with is symptomatic of that. Piecemeal, fund wasting nonsense.
37

Memyself&I,

17/01/2008 12:38:22
Do people just open their traps and spout absolute nonsense?
#13 This problem wasn't known about 10 years ago.
#14 The Golden Gate Bridge has a mediteranean climate does it? Have you ever been there? Utter drivel.

Comments like these just show that people come onto forum and talk from their behinds.
38

TheBridgeTroll,

17/01/2008 12:42:29
Why do self proclaimed experts insist that the FRB problems are down to traffic load. Have you read this article and all the relevant study documents? This bridge is rusting and that is the sole reason that a hasty decision has been rushed through.

#31's initial thought was a creative solution to a repair. Where is our consideration of this? Buried, and yet we have rushed out a decision to commit to a new structure at 20 times the cost of the original in today's money and before the dust settles a modern Scottish bridge demonstrates more structural failure in Glasgow.

The replacement job is not favoured because of the predicted impact on traffic although the final document is not expected until April (a year overdue).

#30 ARP has a valid point. Suppose I was responsible for servicing you Ford and I didn't notice a failing cambelt with the result that your engine demolished itself. I doubt you would use my services again or console yourself with how shiny I kept the spark plugs. You absolutely would not use me to maintain your new Ferrari.
39

Memyself&I,

17/01/2008 12:48:26
#30 "I have not been following this scandalous tale, but it seems as though Scotland is once again demonstrating 'incompetence'. "

You should have stopped there,......
40

Jay Kay,

Burntisland 17/01/2008 12:50:17
It seems to me that we are all debating the wrong agenda here, as I see it the real agenda is, as discussed in yesterdays threads, that London is spending a kings ransom on infrastructure in London for the bl**dy 2012 olympics and yet 17 million of Lottery money due to come to scotland has been diverted to help out those poor londoners.

The blame should lie firmly with the labour and Conservative governments who for the past twenty years have ignored constant demands for a new crossing, the plans for a new bridge were drawn up over thirty years ago and have been lying in a cupboard gathering dust ever since.

This is one of the highest priorities in Scotland if this bridge had been on a major link into central london it would have been repaired/replaced years ago.

41

Alternative (High Octane) Fuel Head,

Edinburgh 17/01/2008 12:59:51
#19:

River traffic, yes, quite possible. However, the Forth
regularly has large ships of greater than 30,000 tonnes moving in and out of it. Therefore, the problem becomes considerably more complex.

The Forth is tidal and has quite a large range of tide. It is also very large, which means that anything put across it that would restrict the flow would need to be constructed more like a dam than a causeway. this in turn would make it far more difficult to privide a route for shipping---which must be deep as well as wide and high.

Causways tend to work well in relatively shallow waters where they do not impede the flow of water or the passage of shipping. A good example is the causeway between Bahrain and Saudi Arabia. The Forth has none of these attributes and therefore a causeway is simply not the answer.
42

CRAGman,

Edinburgh 17/01/2008 13:01:06
Why doesn't the road haulage industry think of paying for its own dedicated new crossing? It's lorries that have caused most of the problem, constitute around half of the traffic weight carried and are pounding the current bridge so much that re-surfacing work has to take place now every 3 or 4 years.

Cars are really only a congestion problem. They don't wear the bridge out like lorries do.

So, any new crossing should be paid for by the road freight industry. A £4.2 bn subsidy to them is far too much. I'd rather have new schools and hospitals than more juggernauts.
43

Alternative (High Octane) Fuel Head,

Edinburgh 17/01/2008 13:10:10
#15:

Duncan, are you the new head of propaganda and stupid comments for the labour party?

I remember the discussions on a replacement crossing years ago and every single suggestion that was made was poo-poo'ed by stupid people (mainly labour) who had an axe to grind about something or other or were just making wild assumptions---many of which you cite in your post.

The labour party managed to turn the sensible discussions regarding bridge proposals into an anti-car argument. As a result, the important issues got swept under the carpet.

You talk about the M9 extension and how "labour got it built". Well, what would have been wrong with constructing a new bridge (or whatever) at THE SAME TIME and opening them both together? That would have kept the anti-car moaners away and would also have addressed the real problems.

Had they done that, then we wouldn't be in the situation where a major part of Scotland's infrastructure is old and creaking---but of course, the anti-everything brigade know best. Don't they?
44

Duncan in Edinburgh,

17/01/2008 13:11:25
#37 Your calculation of the effect of vehicle weight is flawed for at least two reasons. First, weight increases do not act linearly on stress factors - in fact, very small weight increases can amount to very significant stress increases. Second, the total weight of all traffic on the bridge is not the key measurement - it is the stress at various points on the bridge which is important, which means increases in individual vehicle weights have a huge effect on stress-related damage.

In summary, the effect of increase road haulage axle weights is accepted to be very significant in the wear and tear of the bridge.
45

Duncan in Edinburgh,

17/01/2008 13:21:24
#46 Don't get your knickers in a twist old chap. You're the one whose sole purpose on these forums, as shown by your choice of usernames over many months, has been to unthinkingly champion the right of individuals to pollute, speed, rat run and generally selfishly abuse our shared environment as if it was their individual property. It's a bit rich to suggest I'm a stuck record!

Tell me one thing that is wrong with the suggestion that consumers should pay at the till the true cost of transporting their goods - instead of paying billions in tax to replace infrastructure worn out by the transport industry?
46

Montford's Jaicket,

Over here 17/01/2008 13:31:22
#30 - your sentiments about throwing the designers in jail and throwing the key away are a bit extreme. The bridge is over 40 years old so anybody involved in the design would be at least 70 (unless they were a junior engineer).
#41 Good to know you still drive a 1964 Ford Popular / Anglia. :-)
Any structure has a design life - look at the North Sea oil platforms for evidence of this. If the bridge was intended to have a 30 year life or even a 40 year life then it has met this. Perhaps we need to trade in the Anglia for a Mondeo or better? Cost? Well, in similar comparison, a mini cost around a grand in 1964 but a new Mini currently costs considerably more than that. What's the average salary compared to the equivalent in 1964? So a new bridge is going to cost a lot of money but if we buy to a higher spec then perhaps it will last longer than the old one... and if we don't - what do we do then?
47

Gordiedoonsooth,

Engerland 17/01/2008 13:38:52
I seem to recall that when the bridge was opened with all the usual 'hype' on such an occasion, that the press,TV (only one channel -BBC1 in those days) were telling us that the cables were umpteen times super-protected with this, that and the other to withstand all that harsh Forth weather etc. etc. Hmm!
48

stellarossa,

Cincinnati 17/01/2008 13:39:54
The Roebling company worked on the Golden Gate bridge. Roebling built the Brooklyn Bridge which was basically a larger version of his first attempt, a bridge over the Ohio river in Cincinnati. I'm looking at it out of my window in downtown Cincy. It's the blue bridge Tom Cruise and Dustin Hoffman drove over in Rain Man.

Anyway, disgrace, new bridge, hovercrafts!, comparison to GG Bridge, scrap tolls!, increase tolls!, lane closures, blame the gub'mint, gogsy Broon etc..
49

GalacticCannibal,

Murrieta,.California ..a captured Mexican territor 17/01/2008 14:11:05
#4 Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
---------------------------------------------

Its sad to see that a ban on freedom of speech (script) is alive and well.

No reason given for banning #4.

GC
50

Man of Reason,

17/01/2008 14:16:03
#51 Stellarossa - the Roebling company also worked on the Forth Road Bridge and the cables are spun using the same technique. I wouldn't be surprised if the Golden Gate has similar issues, but the factor of safety is greater on older bridges so it's probably not such a pressing concern.

I do notice however that the GG are now carrying out a major project to re-wrap their cables following a recent inspsection:

http://goldengatebridge.org/projects/documents/Main_Cable_posters_02.pdf

I quote from the Golden Gate Bridge's official website:

"The most recent inspection showed that the existing
paint system on the exterior of the main cables was
starting to surpass its useful life in protecting the
main cables from the external elements to which it is
exposed – nearly constant salt air and fog.

"The main cables are now scheduled for a complete
restoration beginning in 2008 at an estimated cost of
$30 million."

Sounds suspiciously like they have indeed discovered corrosion.

Clever of them to brand it as a "restoration" project though!
51

Graeme2,

Aberdeen 17/01/2008 14:19:11
All Civil engineering jobs are done to code, however they all have one weakness they do not understand the modes of failure associated with their designs. So how can we expect the maintenance of the bridge to be 100%?
Installing industrial air driers should be standard for this type of construction in this environment. I am a bit appalled by the costs of this retrofit and think the owners are being taken for a ride by the so called "consultants". Basic corrosion engineering practises and an Asset Management approach to life cycle costs should be the way forward for big projects such as these.
52

malkster,

Scotland 17/01/2008 14:50:04
#40

Ok Geography 101 san fransisco (we werent talking about another bridge?). Lies in the area affected by the North Paciifc High (like the Azores High for californians) which gives it a Med climate type. Yes I HAVE BEEN THERE. Have also been to Barcelona several times with temps ranging from 3 degrees and raining to 39 degrees schorchio but its still in the Med.
53

Frank LeVanque,

17/01/2008 15:06:41
#53 MOR that is fascinating about the Golden Gate Bridge.

Maybe all these Yanks who keep telling us how much better their bridges are will now eat humble pie ...or maybe not!
54

Duncan in Edinburgh,

17/01/2008 15:11:52
#55 I'm not sure you were paying much attention in "Geography 101". SF's climate is deeply unlike the Med's. The GG is shrouded in fog for more of the year than it isn't. SF also experiences much lower average summer temperatures - a good 8 to 10 degrees Celsius difference. I'm not sure what your point was but it wasn't helped by this assertion.
55

IanBinnie,

Des Moines Iowa USA 17/01/2008 15:11:55
Thanks for the warning. I will shortly be visiting my grandson who is doing a year at St. Andrews U.

I will take the long way round.
56

Neil,

Glasgow 17/01/2008 15:26:18
"Now, The Scotsman has learned that the clearest picture of when traffic bans may have to be imposed on the crossing will be provided by a new inspection over the next month."

So not only is this a puff piece based on no actual new news but there is going to be something to hang it on next month - if the news is bad. Which suggests those behind this story think it won't be bad news.

In any case dehumidifcation is probably going to work. In any case re-cabling would work. In any case the last bridge cost £314 in today's prices so there is no need for this one to cost £4 billion. In any case the Noregians & the contractors at glendoe have proved we could have a tunnel for 100th of the £4 billion.

For £4 billion we could dig tunnels under most highland lochs & connect most of the islands to the mainland which would revolutionise travel in Scotland but the Edinburgh based political elite want to blow it on this.
57

D Napier,

17/01/2008 15:28:56
Another factor about increased loading which has not been mentioned has been the change in recent years to lorries which use what are known as super single wheels.

Up until a few years ago, the rear axle of heavily loaded lorries had two pairs of standard wheels. Most new vehciles now only have one wheel on either end of the axle, but this as wider than that previously used. However, you now have the same load carried on a contact area approximately 30% less than with the old arrangment.

Having spoken to some of my colleagues who know more about this than I do, it would appeear that this change was implemented across Europe without any investigation into the effects on bridges. The only investigations undertaken concerned vehicle noise and reduced costs for hauliers.

Know wonder our bridges are suffering.
58

Thomas J,

Dunfermline 17/01/2008 15:39:47
FETA’s PR Consultants consistently try to make a virtue out of the sad fact that FETA’s highly-paid bridge staff aided by their costly engineering consultants have, for over 40 years, failed to notice that water has seeped into the supposedly well-maintained, and watertight suspension-cable and combined with air to make, shock!—horror! —RUST ! Once discovered FETA say without blushing—who could have foreseen it?—Well actually just about anyone could have foreseen it.

Rust (a red or brown oxide coating on iron or steel caused by the action of oxygen and moisture) has been known about since the dawn of the Iron-Age when, to prevent it, primitive man smeared animal fat on their spear-heads. Not exactly rocket science is it?

And hardly cause for celebration that it went undetected for so long.

In late 2004 FETA produced a 14-year budget up to the year 2018 and just 1% of that budget was for the suspension cables. 1% was also the allocation for office extensions and improvements and 1% was allocated for landscaping and car park facilities for the office workers. So even recently FETA have been more interseted in their own surroundings than the integrity of the bridge.

Last weeks fiasco when falling parts from the painting platform closed the bridge typifies FETA who seems to be surprised by just about everything from rusting to high winds.

Time for a public inquiry into the fact that despite having spent tens, if not hundreds of millions of pounds of toll-payers money on corrosion prevention over a 40-year period we face the bridge being closed prematurely due to – corrosion!
59

D Napier,

17/01/2008 16:14:02
#61. Is that the esteemed Mr Minogue????

As stated in a previous posting by another, FETA's handling of the corrosion problemin the cables has been independently audited by internationally engineering consultants, at the request of the Scottish Executive and found to be exemplary.

Exactly what is your problem??? I gbet you wish you had been about when the first Tay Bridge collapsed - you would have had a field day wouldn't you?

If you had read the rports you would have been aware that before FETA opened up the cables in 2004, there were no outward signs of corrosion, i.e. rust staining on the wrapping, as has been the case on simialr bridge in the USA. Suspension bridge cables are not soething that you open up just for the sake of it as you damage the integrity of the protection system in doing so.

With regard to the wind damage to the painting cradle, I don't hear your moaning when roads are closed because a scaffold has collapsed or a lorry has been blown over or a roof has blown off a building.
60

Duncan in Edinburgh,

17/01/2008 16:14:43
#61 A fair point about the foreseeability of corrosion, but your central para is outrageous. You appear to have neglected to mention all but 3% of the budget(!), a great deal of which was allocated to maintaining the integrity of the bridge. Such hugely partial reasoning is deeply unhelpful. Are you a politician?
61

Man of Reason,

17/01/2008 16:18:26
#61 what utter tripe from Tom Minogue.

As an anti-tolls campaigner and former contractor on the bridge I guess he has his own agenda. He is suprisingly bitter considering tolls are now being removed - perhaps it's personal.

I suggest Mr Minogue takes a good look at himself before he spouts his next diatribe against those who have devoted their careers to public service.

Quoting accounts from the year before the problem was identified and criticising the lack of expenditure is simply juvenile.
62

Man of Reason,

17/01/2008 16:37:55
Minogue also contradicts himself - on the one hand he criticises the lack of expenditure, then goes on to say that FETA spent "tens, if not hundreds of millions of pounds of toll-payers money on corrosion prevention"

This man is a clown.
63

zigzag,

Tecumseh Canada 17/01/2008 16:56:53
PING...Ooops , I think I just heard another one go snap.

Zing go the strings of my heart.
64

zigzag,

Tecumseh Canada 17/01/2008 16:57:53

SNAP CRACKLE AND POP.
65

S MacLeod,

17/01/2008 17:08:18
9 Keithie Boy,

To summarise,

Observe the rated capacity of a system, and not the designed capacity (i.e., capacity including factors of safety), when making decisions that may stress system limits.
66

mr angry,

arshire 17/01/2008 17:28:36
If fixing the cables on the Golden Gate bridge is $30M, why are we spending £4.2 Billion on a new bridge. Why are they not just not putting new cables in. Apart from the rubbish they spout about disruption to change cables, if its falling down they will have a lot anyway as they will never have a new bridge up before its knackered and will be at £10 Billion by that time.
67

E.A. Swimmer,

17/01/2008 17:35:49
Using the recommended route on Google 'get directions':
Dunfermline to Edinburgh (via present Kincardine Bridge) is 40.3 miles, and via Forth Road Bridge it is 17.7 miles. Difference therefore 22.6 miles.
St Andrews to Edinburgh (via KB)75.9 miles, and via FRB 52.8 miles. Difference 23.1 miles.
Dundee to Edinburgh (via KB) 77.5 miles, and via FRB 55.4 miles. Difference 22.1 miles.
On a daily commute these differences have to be doubled, of course.
This is a very simplistic view, and no specific acknowledgements are made of the existing poor infrastructure between Dunfermline and Kincardine.
However, I have to ask if the massive replacement costs of the FRB are justified just to save 'x' amount of time, and 'y' amount of fuel, for the relatively few people (on a nationwide basis) who use it?
Maybe there is an equation that makes, or can be made to make, sense. If so, I would like to see it.
68

Trade-wind,

USA 17/01/2008 17:39:24
I don't suppose anyone ever considered building the superstructer to provide a place to install a second cable when this kind of thing happened. That way when the first cable became worn to the extent that it needed replaced, they could have strung a second cable
and took the weight of the bridge off the first cable. Then removed the bad cable. Then go over the superstructer and repair any problems there was with the cable support system that carried the first cable, so that when the second cable went bad they could string a new one where the origional cable had been in place.
Scotland today, Scotland tomorrow, Scotland forever!
69

whitebaron,

EK 17/01/2008 19:41:18
an idea would be to use the forth rail bridge as a posible alternative

theres really not that many trains go across and they could be replaced by coaches

by converting two or more lanes for cars would take a lot of traffic off the road bridge and make it last longer


70

OhIdoliketobe,

Beside the Seaside 17/01/2008 20:05:56
I was born the day the Bridge was opened. I think some of my wires are snapping now. But then I don't know what's come over me.....
71

Duncan in Edinburgh,

17/01/2008 20:23:09
It's been a tough competition but I think a surprise late entrant at #74 has just stormed into the lead with the suggestion of the day. Bravo.
72

Seoras67,

Edinburgh 17/01/2008 21:37:51
Get Eliza Jane down from the Glen Doe Hydro project and get tunnelling.
73

Stuart y,

Edinburgh 17/01/2008 22:45:27
Come on Duncan, this stuff is for entertainment, fun and high opinion. Its like celeb mags and soap operas.

If you want real life and facts go the the Journal of Bridge engineering.
74

Stuart y,

Edinburgh 17/01/2008 22:46:56
Anyway, thats probably someones kid you are talking about.
75

Aoda,

Leeper 17/01/2008 22:56:44
This isn't international news and hesitated to comment. First of all U.S.A. should not have been brought into the comments but where because of Roebling Co. making the cable. I read a comment saying that the Golden Gate Bridge and the Brooklyn Bridge are much older. A fair question but really can you compare those bridges withe their location and enviroment with the Forth Road Bridge?

Roebling, a German immigrant that settled in Saxonburg, Pa. (Butler County and where I grew up) invented the wire rope, cable. Yes he did build a bridge across the Ohio River and was chief engineer for the Brooklyn Bridge. He died before it was finished and his son took his place. Nothing to do with this thread but since he was mentioned thought I would add that.
As to the Forth Road Bridge, not being a citizen of Scotland I have no comment. Thank you.
76

Duncan in Edinburgh,

17/01/2008 23:10:18
#79 That's usually the way it works, aye.
77

BK,

Cyberspace 17/01/2008 23:11:26
#78 And what would that journal tell us? Our bridge builders, from The Tay Rail to the Squinty Bridge, with the Forth Road in between, have only shown us one thing - they seem to know d@mn all about their subject and would disgrace a primitive third world country.
78

Sharon D.,

newmarket 18/01/2008 00:42:45
http://www.confederationbridge.com/ problem solved
79

Sharon D.,

newmarket 18/01/2008 00:43:30
http://www.confederationbridge.com/
80

,

18/01/2008 00:51:23
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
81

,

18/01/2008 00:55:09
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
82

Drum Major,

Australia 18/01/2008 01:23:43
Although I have a Civil Engineering qualification I would not be making most of the criticisms above. Scottish engineering has been at the forefront of the profession for years. The politics controlling the engineering has been at the other end of the scale. All bridges, structures, buildings etc must be maintained and the required amount of money budgeted each year. I have always been amazed how politicians (at all levels of government) and "managers" after spending a fortune on a new building, structure, pipeline, bridge etc do not recognise that with each new peace of infrastucture comes a maintenance cost. The more complex the infrastucture the greater the maintenance. The Sydney Harbour Bridge (single arch not suspension) has a team continually painting the bridge. When they get from one side to the other it is time to go back and start again. It would appear that there was a need to have a team continually greasing the cables and droppers. This would have required an injection process to ensure all wires were covered. The question must be asked what maintenance program did the "managers" have in place.
83

Sharon D.,

newmarket 18/01/2008 04:35:26
http://www.confederationbridge.com/en/media_gallery/popup.html?../../images/photo_gallery/bridgepe4.jpg ......This is a link to a photo, there is not a ship built that can't get under this Causway-Bridge, no.44 & 19 have a peek. there is a simular ne out of Swedan to Denmark I think.
84

D Napier,

18/01/2008 09:13:27
#87 Drum Major. I suggest you read this document:

http://www.feta.gov.uk/download/files/firstinsp.pdf

85

Mr. Lachie Todd,

Edinburgh 18/01/2008 11:17:25
88# The Confederation Bridge on the Trans Canada Highway between New Brunswick and Prince Edward Island,
and the Oresund Bridge, the 'Great Belt', between Sweden and Denmark, were built in much deeper water than the Firth of Forth! The largest ships in ther world can sail under these structures.
86

Liberal for life,

Dunblane 18/01/2008 16:17:26
Surely this highlights the shortsightedness of building a replacement suspension bridge as another one will surely be required within the next 50 years and so on. Why can't the politicians, and I mean all the MSP's, agree to invest in a proper tunnel or perhaps a bridge more like the Tay Bridge construction thats not suspended by wires?

This short-termism approach is crazy to say the least.
87

geekpie,

forfar 18/01/2008 16:21:00
The SNP removed tolls. This is bad for business as it increases congestion on the commuter roads into Edinburgh. The SNP is bad for business.
88

Roger Irrelevant,

19/01/2008 00:39:47
Dalton Scrap again!

Hello, Earthlings.

I come from Planet Tharg, in search of intelligent life forms.

There are none here. Can you re-direct me?
89

,

19/01/2008 00:41:11
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
90

"Scotty",

Minnesota, Usa 19/01/2008 20:40:49
Enough already about the blessed Golden Gate Bridge. We just had a bridge collapse here in Minnesota not so long ago and several others are in "a dangerous condition". The bridge which just collapsed was built 40 years ago; the bridge near where I work in Saint Paul is to be replaced in 2011 but in the meantime, it is in a extremely dangerous condition.
91

Friar Tuck,

20/01/2008 19:26:02
Combination causeway, bridges & tunnels - EAST of Edinburgh!

http://www.cbbt.com
92

Drum Major,

20/01/2008 22:35:07
#88 FETA is 6 local govt politicians who would be advised by managers. What was the situation before 2002? FETA and the previous controller had a role "to maintain". That does not mean collect tolls and repair crash barriers. Preventative maintenance may seam costly at the time but the costs are much higher without it.
93

Drum Major,

21/01/2008 02:13:10
Remember maintenance starts the day the bridge, building, pipeline, structure etc opens.
94

Rabhairt,

Cannons Creek AUSTRALIA 25/01/2008 03:21:47
NUMBER 101 Spot on!!!!! The Sydney harbour bridge is constantly being maintained and is fitted with all kinds of devices which send signals to a central control station. My guess is a money starved Scotland has some responcibility here.

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
 


Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.