Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
(Farquharson, 1940)
PM3110
Mr. ?
[UNIT 4 ASSIGNMENT 1:
SIMULATION CASE STUDY 7.2
THE TACOMA NARROWS
SUSPENSION BRIDGE]
Name?
PM3110
17 Jan 2014
Case Analysis:
I.
Executive Summary
This Case Analysis was conducted based on the Project failure of the Tacoma
Narrows Bridge in Washington State which took place in 1940. This case is an important
one for a lot of reasons but the one that stands out the most is that todays engineers
gained very insightful knowledge about the effects of Dynamic loads on Structures. The
bridge spanned a distance of 2,800 feet with an approach at each end both 1,000 feet, yet
it was only designed for two lane traffic. There are three key factors that contributed to
the failure of the Tacoma Narrows Bridge and they are; the width-to-length ratio of
construction, the substitution of key structural materials, and the choice of location for
the bridge construction geographically.
II.
Funding was tight for Washington State for the initial $11 million Project
Federal assistance needed from the Public Works Administration (PWA),
but it came with stipulations for another Bridge Engineer to redesign the
bridge.
Bridge failure ultimately after only four months of being in service
Engineer responsible was Leon Moisseiff of Moran and Proctor, a Bridge
Architectural consulting firm from New York.
III.
Name?
PM3110
17 Jan 2014
2005).
Traffic surveys did not justify the construction of a bridge with multiple
2005).
They tried to make the scheduled June 30th completion date by pushing to
complete 200 feet of the deck per day.
The issues that were apparent after the bridge was completed and open for public
transportation are as follows:
The first one is the width-to-length ratio construction; the bridge was too
bridge.
Torsional oscillation or Torsional Flutter as it has become to be called
by engineers today was determined as the main cause of failure
(Washington State DOT, 2005). The scientific method needed to come to
Name?
PM3110
17 Jan 2014
this conclusion was not available in 1940, therefore the cause was
determined a mystery.
The last key factor that should have been thought about well ahead in the
planning stages of this project was the bridges geographic location. Just
like many other things, Location is Key, the project management team
should have had a geologist on the team for just this very reason .
IV.
V.
Name?
PM3110
17 Jan 2014
Risk Assessment
There are several risk factors that should have been weighed but seem to have been
ignored. These contributing factors may have been assessed in the original plan and
design of the Tacoma Narrows Bridge by Clark Eldridge, but completely overlooked or
disregarded by Leon Moisseiff when he decided to redesign the bridge. Moisseiffs
decision to redesign the Tacoma Narrows Bridge in order to make it more to his
Modernistic Art Deco style and a more flexible, lighter bridge for $4 million less than
the original budget is what was to be in my opinion the point of failure for the project.
Below is the list of risk factors that accounted for the failure of the project (Washington
State DOT).
Category
Probability
Impact
Risk Level
Site Location
90
98
High = 88%
100
98
High = 98%
100
95
High = 95%
95
95
High = 90%
High Winds
80
88
Medium/High = 70%
Funding Issues
75
80
Medium = 60%
65
70
Low/Medium = 45%
65
74
Low/Medium = 48%
VI.
Name?
PM3110
17 Jan 2014
Risk Mitigation
The best risk mitigation that could have been done for this utter failure would have
been for the Project Managers to pay attention to all of the pre-cursers that were
previously mentioned. Another thing that could have been done was to not have deviated
from the original design of the bridge just to save some money and a chance of possibly
making a bigger name for yourself in the engineering world. Attention to details could
have diverted the disaster that ultimately cost the State of Washington more money to
scrap the failure and have to rebuild a whole new bridge.
References
Name?
PM3110
17 Jan 2014
Works Cited
Farquharson, F. B. Tacoma Narrows Bridge central span twisting before collapse. Tacoma
Narrows Bridge Collection. University of Washington, Tacoma. Retrieved Jan 17, 2014,
from http://content.lib.washington.edu/u?/farquharson,36
Pinto, J. K. (2010). Project Management Achieving Competitive Advantage (Second Editon ed.).
Upper Saddle River: Pearson Education, Inc. Retrieved Dec 15, 2013
Washington State DOT. (2005). Tacoma Narrows Bridge Machine: 1940 Narrows Bridge - The
Machine. Retrieved Jan 17, 2014, from wsdot.wa.gov:
http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/TNBhistory/Machine/machine2.htm#4
Washington State DOT. (2005). Tacoma Narrows Bridge Machine: Lessons from the Failure of a
Great Machine. Retrieved Jan 17, 2014, from wsdot.wa.gov:
http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/TNBhistory/Machine/machine3.htm#2
Washington State DOT. (n.d.). Tacoma Narrows Bridge machine. Retrieved Jan 17, 2014, from
wsdot.wa.gov: http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/tnbhistory/machine/machine2.htm