Repair of damage to steel bridges following vehicle impact

David Kimpton1, Nirdosha Gamage2, and Stewart Martin3

1
Team Leader – Bridge Design, 2 Structural Engineer – Bridge Design, 3Senior Steel Surveillance Officer
VicRoads Asset Services

Abstract: Steel became a common construction material for bridges, replacing timber and masonry
construction to achieve longer span crossings. These structures are still functioning well, although the
majority of them are now considered to have sub-standard capacity in the 21st Century. Steel bridge
members and components are commonly affected by chemical agents in exposed air, water, and soil.
These chemicals trigger and accelerate the corrosion of steel and the need to have more maintenance
and repairs. Vehicles impacting low clearance bridge members can cause momentous damage to these
structures.
Steel bridges, particularly those with sub-standard vertical clearance, are regularly impacted by vehicles.
This paper will investigate typical damage caused by vehicle impact and discuss examples of repair
methods, using three case studies.
1. MacRobertson Bridge in Melbourne will be used to examine the damage and repairs to a steel truss;
2. Damage to bridge girders will be explained using Point Wilson Road Bridge over Princes Highway; and
3. Heritage listed Mia Mia Iron Girder Bridge (The Redesdale Bridge) will be used to explain the need for
special care and reinstatement for restoring an historic bridge.

Keywords: Steel Bridge Repair, Sub-standard Bridges, Truss Bridges, Arch Bridges, MacRobertson
Bridge, Pt. Wilson Road Bridge, The Redesdale Bridge.

1. Background

Steel construction is usually assembled with welded joints, rivets, or high-tensile steel bolts. Fasteners are
designed for shear as individual members or may be intended to provide a clamping force to an interface
to permit the generation of frictional forces between adjacent components. The durability of the structural
iron and steel depends on the locality in which the structure is built, and on the quality and integrity of the
protective coating.
Steel bridge members and components are commonly affected by chemical agents contained in exposed
air, water, and soil that trigger and accelerate the corrosion of steel, but sudden impact loading by
vehicles impacting structural members can cause heavier damage or even sudden collapse of the entire
structure. For example, in 2013, a bridge in Washington State, USA, was hit by a truck and collapsed into
Skagit River. Although, luckily, no one was killed, the incident raised the awareness of infrastructure
management authorities about managing aging infrastructure, especially sub-standard bridges.
Bridges damaged by vehicle impact can usually be reinstated to their original status but require costly
repairs and replacement to the damaged members, as well as requiring a full investigation into the
performance and reliability of the structure. In addition to damage to the structure itself, this type of
incident could create traffic congestion, delaying commuters and loss of human lives. This paper will
examine three case studies that discuss a variety of damage that occurred from vehicles impacting
overhead sections of steel bridges in Victoria during recent times.

2. Case Study 1: MacRobertson Bridge (Grange Road over Yarra River and City Link)

The MacRobertson Bridge was originally constructed in 1934 for the Grange Road crossing of the Yarra
River from Toorak on the south bank, to Burnley in Melbourne (Figure 1). It was one of two bridges in the
world that were the first to use welded steel trusses (Heritage Victoria, 2016). Later, City Link (Monash
Freeway) was constructed to run underneath the northern span of the bridge (Figure 1). The minimum
vertical clearance over both carriageways of City Link is approximately 5.0m. As a result, Over Height
Vehicles (OHV) travelling on City Link have hit the truss several times. In 2002, vehicle impact damaged
all three bottom cords and a 2004 impact damaged the easternmost bottom cord. Following these major
incidents, and a few other minor hits by OHV, an Over Height Vehicle Detection System (OHVD) was
installed in 2005. However, in June 2015, another OHV, a crane mounted truck which was travelling on
City Link towards Melbourne city smacked and damaged the northern part of the bottom cord of the bridge
(Figure 2). The crane had initially hit the first truss and then bounced back and hit the second truss,
resulting in the most damage being caused to the second truss.

Figure 1: Elevation of the current form of the bridge

2.1 Damage to MacRobertson Bridge

The crash damaged the bottom cord of the western truss, nodes and some bracing members.
Reinstatement consisted of replacing a number of bracing members, restoring the bottom cord and
restoring several nodes. In addition, Grange Road was closed to all heavy vehicles for about eight weeks.
The Freeway was completely closed to traffic during the repair works. Metro North Western Region of
VicRoads, with assistance from VicRoads Structures team and AECOM evaluated the damage and
identified the repairs required.
A number of inspection methods were employed to investigate the magnitude of the damage, to assess
the reliability of the structure, to evaluate whether the structure posed any safety threat to commuters
travelling underneath the structure. Systematic visual inspection of each surface covering the whole
structure was undertaken to determine the extent of damage. Identifying cracks in painted or rusted
structures was difficult in some locations and required supplemental techniques to expose them. During
these inspections:

• Special attention was required to evaluate components that are highly stressed;
• Joints and welded connections were evaluated and inspected for any defects;
• Plans and drawings of the structure were reviewed; and
• Members were photographed and compared with both recent and historic inspection reports.

Impacted Area

Figure 2: Impact points in 2015 damage

The damage was significant and required replacement of nodes, bracing and, straightening and
reinstating of members (Figure 2). There were numerous defects observed during the investigations
consisting of bent and distorted members, overstrained fastenings, cracks and nicks. These defects could
have propagated to larger cracks and defects in future if not addressed, and resulted in significant
reduction of structural capacity.
The damage described above, mainly occurred to the bottom cord and bracing near the highlighted area
in Figure 2. Figure 3 shows the defects requiring rehabilitation and maintenance including replacement of
nodes and bracing. These defects included:
• Displacement of bottom cord members: batten plates, bracings, connections;
• Bending and displacement of bracing and bracing connections (Figure 4a);
• Flattened connections (Figure 4b);
• Twisted and flattened connections; and
• Cracking of a number of welded connections.
Steel bracing 1, 2 and 12-15 had been left with heavy bends and fine cracks due to localised stresses
(Figure 4). These members required replacement. Bracing 23 was reinstated to its original status after
repair. The node connecting these braces had been severely damaged and required extra assemblage to
restore the node, preventing the cracks in the steel plate from progressing further.

Figure 3: Defects found in the bottom cord

a: Damage to Bracing b: Welded Connections c. Twisted/ bent connection

Figure 4: Defects found in the bottom cord
2.2 Reinstatement of bracing
Bracing 1, 2, 12-15, including redundant stubs and connections, were removed and replaced. Prior to
restoration of damaged Truss 3, it was tied and harnessed to Central Truss 2 (Figure 5). Two 6-tonne
Tirfor winches with chains were tied to the central truss. The members on Truss 3 were heated and
straightened using four targeted heat treatments to achieve various points of deflection. The bottom cord
members were straightened to approximately 5-10mm lateral displacement over a 2m length, which is
marginally outside the tolerances stated in AS5100.6 (2004). A variety of welding methods were used as
the major connection method as well as heating and straightening bent members. Reinstatement work
consisted of:
• prepare and make good, connection surfaces prior to installation of replacement bracing;
• weld new bracing connection gusset plates to existing cord members’ webs; and
• install and weld new bracing members.

Subsequently, the top side batten plates were connected back to the side faces of the central plate.

a. Harnessed for straightening b. Welded connection c. New bracing and connections

Figure 5: Truss 3
Moreover, Bracing 23 was repaired by cutting out damaged areas and restoring it by fabricating sections
to fit the cut profile and making good with partial penetration butt welds between the UC and web plate.

Figure 6: Details of the repair to bottom batten plate

Sections of the top and bottom batten plate had been badly damaged. Removal and replacement of part
of these members were required (Figures 6 and 7). The top and bottom batten plates between new
bracing channels were removed and replaced and the remaining splice and bridging plates were installed
to reinstate Brace 23. Figure 8 shows some of the repairs to the bracing and the node.
 Figure 7: Restoring the batten plate by replacing damaged sections with new welded sections

a Damaged and bent bracing b. Restored bracing c. Repaired connection with bracing
Figure 8: Repairs to the bracing

2.3 Risks and Limitations

1. Most of the older steel constructions are generally finished with lead based paints which are
currently not in use due to identified health risk to workers. In this case the risk was recognised
and contractors used appropriate risk mitigation techniques.
2. The bent members were reinstated by heating and straightening them to their original shape. Heat
extended zones were identified and the work was undertaken in a controlled, confined area so
that the heat would not adversely affect workers.
3. Mechanical forces used for straightening were controlled by calibrated equipment and monitored
so that forces are relieved as straightening occurs during cooling. Forces were controlled so that
the maximum bending moment was kept below 50% of the plastic moment capacity of the
member as a precaution to prevent failure of the steel.
4. The straightening tolerance was set to < 10 mm over a 2000mm length for the straightened
members according to AS 5100.6 (2004)
5. After straightening, a check was undertaken to ensure that there was no additional damage or
cracking.
6. Construction required traffic management and the closure of City Link. Work was undertaken at
night to minimise disruption to the travelling public.

3. Case Study 2: Point Wilson Road Overpass

Point Wilson Road Bridge over Princes Highway near Geelong is a steel beam bridge which was
damaged by a moving truck on Princes Highway toward Melbourne in 2010.

3.1 Damage to Structure

The crash left the bridge with a number of bent beams, localised defects and fractures mainly to girders 1,
2, 4 and 5 on the east bound carriageway. Flame straightening to all of the above four (4) girders,
damaged web-plates and damaged flanges was necessary as part of the rehabilitation. In addition to
visually identified defects, there can be invisible defects and cracks. Magnetic particle examination (MT)
was performed to examine and find out any undetected minor cracks adjacent to major cracks and
defective areas after cleaning the surface.
 Flux lea
aks out due to crrack

a. MT method b. M
MT Field test

Figure 9
9: Magnetic Pa
article Field Test
T
MT is a p popular non-d destructive e examination o of ferromagnetic material. Once the m magnetic field is created,
the magn netic flux willl leak out of the material (Figure 9a) if the disconntinuity is gen
nerally perpeendicular to
its flow, ccracks paralllel to the fluxx will not be detected. Thherefore the test is normaally undertakken at least
twice perrpendicular to o each otherr to detect eve ery possible crack.

3.2 Re
epair and R
Reinstatement
Deformations and fraactures in all tthe girders 1, 2, 4 and 5 on
o both carriageways weere cleaned in
n readiness
for the fla
ame heat ap
pplications an nd the additional X-brace e diaphragmss. The affectted areas we
ere cleaned
by using removal blassting.

a. break apart annd deep b. bre

eak apart and deep c. 95
5mm Fracture
impact on gird
ders im
mpact on girde
ers
Figure 10: Impact afffected defec
cts
There was a 95mm long crack in Girder 2 and MT was undertaken around the crack to id dentify any
invisible cracks prior to the weld rrepair proced
dure. Cracks were ground d back to sou
und material including a
coping hole through the web afte er the magne etic particle in
nspection to expose bothh faces of the
e flange for
repair weelding. Full S
Strength Buttt Welding wa as used to re epair the botttom flange o
of Girders 1 a
and 2 to fix
cracks up p to 160mm long in some e places.

Permanent X bracing
Temp
porary bracing
& strengthe
ening plates
a. Tem
mporary bracin
ng b. Bracin
ng diaphragm c. Die grind
der weld prepa
aration
Figure 11: Temporary
T and Restoration
n works
Tempora ary bracing w
was installed at predetermmined areas prior to hydrraulic and Tirrfor loading applications
a
to eliminate additionaal strains to already dammaged memb bers (Figure 11). Flame heating of up to 600oC
was applied in variou us predeterm mined locations in order tto minimise stress
s conce
entration and to prevent
further sttrain or dam
mage. As a part of the prrotective mea asure, flame heat plate d deflecting sh
heeting was
tack-weldded to the o outer flange edge of Girder 1 to prrevent heat damage to electrical co onduits and
cabling.
The placement of a temporary backing plate (20 mm to 25 mm) welded to the under-face of the flange
crack-repaired area and temporary X-bracing was used before attempting flame heat straightening (Figure
11 a). The intention was to assist in the straightening techniques used as well as to prevent further
development of existing cracks or new cracks in both the flange, and the web.
3.3 Risks and Limitations
In order to minimise further strain on already damaged sections, the repair was undertaken in steps, firstly
to Girder 2 and then to Girder 3. The procedure included:
• weld repairs and temporary bracing to Girder. 2;
• straightening to Girder 2 and flame straightening;
• placed temporary X-bracing at the undamaged Girder 3;
• flame straightening to impact damaged Girder 4;
• place and weld web-stiffeners for the fitment of the permanent angle X-Brace diaphragm (between
Girders 3 and 4);
• flame straightening to the weld-repaired Girder 2; and
• flame straightening procedures, the strengthening of the bottom flanges.
The placement of the permanent X-brace diaphragm between Girder 3 and 4 was to sustain the flame and
jacking procedures necessary for completing the repairs to all other girders. After completion of the flame
straightening and weld repairs which included fitting of the web stiffening plates and welding of the X-
bracing diaphragms, plate strengthening to the selected areas of the bottom flanges was undertaken.

4. Mia Mia Iron Girder Bridge (Riversdale Bridge)

The single span, 46m long, Mia Mia iron girder bridge was originally constructed in 1867 and consists of
three (3) wrought iron lattice style through truss girders. The bridge had been damaged by OHV several
times in recent years. Following a similar incident in the late nineties, an extra 400mm bracing section had
been inserted between the arch section and the bracing to create extra clearance for traffic whilst
maintaining the original shape of the structure (Figure 13). A high load impacted the arch-shaped bracing
over the Heathcote-bound lane closer to the Redesdale abutment again in 2014, bending and damaging
the arch (Figure 12.a). The following section will discuss the damage of, and repairs to, the structure after
this recent incident.

4.1 Damage to the Structure

The top of the bracing was displaced approximately 150mm due to the impact. The impact resulted in
fractures of approximately 85% of the bracing cross-section that opened up about 30mm at the joint closer
to the base of the bracing (Figure 12.b and 12.c). One rivet at the start of the arch had completely failed
while the other survived with fractures, needing replacement to both. As a consequence of this fracture
and displacement, the arch became unstable and reduced the compression capacity of the structure.
Therefore, an immediate rehabilitation was required.
 Damaged connection and rivets
a. view of the bridge b. Damaged arch c. Damaged connection
Figure 12: Damage to the structure
4.2 Repair and Reinstatement
Repair and rehabilitation to this structure was challenging due to:
• number and spacing of bracing and their effect on the lateral restraint of the compression cord
• effects of the damaged member on the bridge capacity and buckling capacity of the top truss cord
• the structure is a heritage bridge and only special materials and treatment methods were allowed
for restoration.
Following the vehicle impact, the damage was assessed by a VicRoads team of technical experts. After
the initial assessment, it was decided that one lane of the bridge would be closed until the repair work was
completed to reduce live loads on the structure. As part of concept design for the restoration, VicRoads
liaised with Heritage Victoria to identify limitations for repairing techniques and material. The historic
structure was required to be fixed with the same or similar material using identical types of connections.
Riveted connections were recommended instead of a bolt arrangement to maintain an unchanged visual
appearance. Hence, a number of damaged steel sections were removed from the arch at the workshop,
and either repaired or replaced using riveted connections as required by Heritage Victoria (Figure 14 and
15). All the members were inspected and repaired as part of reinstatement. In addition, the timber deck
was replaced with a new timber deck as part of the repairs.

4.3 Risks and Limitations

• It was identified that the removal of the top arch section for repair would destabilise the bridge
laterally. Temporary cross bracing was required for maintaining lateral stability of the structure
during the works (Figure 13).
• Rivet connections to match existing rivets were used for restored connections in place of bolted
connections to maintain the visual appearance of the structure, and preserve the heritage
properties of the bridge.
 An addition to increase the
height of the bridge arch

Figure 13: The cross section of the arch with the inserted section

Figure 14: Repairing existing members in the workshop

 Figure 15: Details of the repair

5. Summary

This paper demonstrates typical damage to steel bridges, particularly for bridges with sub-standard
vertical clearance, caused by over height vehicle impacts. Three case studies were used to discuss the
typical damage to these structure and various structural members (trusses, beams and overhead bracing),
using examples of repair methods to a variety of members.
A truss example was discussed using MacRobertson Bridge and the damage to the lower members and
the method for replacement and strengthening to better resist impact.
Damage to Point Wilson Road overpass bridge beam demonstrates typical damage to girder beams and
strengthening of the deformed bottom flange and web with carefully applied heat and force. Cross bracing
and welded plates to the bottom flange was the strengthening treatment used in this case.
Damage to overhead bracing and treatments for a heritage listed structure was discussed using the
example of Mia Mia Girder Bridge. Damage caused to overhead riveted wrought iron bracing for a trough
girder bridge was required to be reinstated after removing and repairing some sections in a workshop
before reassembling the structure on site. Riveted joints were used instead of a typical bolt arrangement
to maintain the same appearance.

6. Acknowledgements
The authors would like to acknowledge and, sincerely thank, a number of their colleagues at VicRoads
who were happy to share useful information and reports on these case studies, particularly Mr. Hai Luong,
Mr.Gary Noyes- Brown, Mr. Glenn Bodilly and Mr. Doug Baring
7. References

Standards Australia, “Australian Standard for Bridge Design Part 6 (AS5100.6), Committee BD-090
for Bridge Design, 2004, Sydney NSW Australia
Heritage Victoria, “ Mia Mia Iron Girder Bridge (The Redesdale Bridge)-Greater Bendigo City,2010