Dear Sir,

Subject: Reply Comments on Submitted Design report for Pedestrian Steel Bridge at Community
Development Center. Reconstruction & Rehabilitation of Chah-eAnjir- Gereshk Road Project, Contract No.
MPW/1592/ICB/ADB.

Reference to your letter vide number OM-RACC/0817-190, kindly find attach our reply comments

# Client’s Comment Contractor’s Reply

1 Since the pedestrian bridge is intended The section 7.2.3 of the report addresses the
exclusively …. Including the abutment requirement a per LRFD design code. Pedestrian
foundation. bridge shall be able to bear H5 equivalent of
Afghanistan. The H5 loading does not govern the
design. Owner’s Consent is required otherwise.
2 Submit a suitable …. Abutment approaches. Reduction in the sizes of bridge section will increase
the resonance due to pedestrian dynamic loading.
Although the bridge is on the verge of frequency
hazard upon witnessing the maximum load. Therefore
sizes cannot be reduced further. We request the client
to note this point and accept the sizes as it is.
Scouring depth can is fixed upon velocity of the flood
is known which is not surveyed or mentioned in the
geotechnical report or otherwise not provided.
Abutments are design combining the geotechnical
and hydrological studies together. The geotechnical
design shall be based on the recurrent shallowest
water table and consequent bearing capacity. The
immediate bearing capacity and water table may be
coupled with the historical hydrological data (not
available) to predict the los in bearing capacity or be
assumed.
3 Provide general layout ….. Abutment Contractor shall reply this comment and
approaches.
supply the requested information.
4 Provide elastomeric bearing pad … and Agreed with EB Proposal. With the same setting of
elastomeric pad). anchor bolts on both sides but just increasing the gap
between the anchor bolts respecting an elastomeric
plate (300mm*200mm*25mm) will be inserted thus
further adding 25mm in the elevation.
5 Submit shop drawings in standard format Not in our Scope. Contractor to Reply
together with … enlarge scale and proper
dimension.
6 On abutment calculation page 56… which is Page 56 of the design report shows simplified
confusing. conservative model for Analysis purpose only, on the
basis of analysis the design in figure 11.L is proposed
 7 Provide details of abutment stem showing the The clearance between the end beam with the
end beam clearance of both abutments A & B abutments A & B is 75mm. Refer Page xxxxxx,
complete with wing walls details including the
figure 11-l.
scouring protection of abutment:
The original design had wing walls but a request was
put up to change it. We than recommended other
option.
Please note that the foundation size cannot be
changed as the height of the foundation stem
depends upon the geotechnical report on the other
bank of the canal, which is not available.

_____________________________________________________________________________________

Adil & Umar: We submitted this design previously, but were requested to change the
drawing to exclude the deeper abutment with wing walls. So pick the sketch of wing wall from old
design and its design and add in the appendix of the report. Or update the sketch of the foundation and
attach the design in the appendix give its reference….this will conclude point 7.

Moreover