Got the old bridge re decked

[Silver]

It was a chore, but got it done. All new wood from the I-beam up. Treated 4 x 6 underneath, rough 3x12's on top. Tomorrow I will dig out the abutments and install some oak mats I salvaged to act as an abutment wall. Should be good for another 30 years I hope.

 

[SBMF 2015]

Nice job! Ours is a flat rail car buried across the creek and 3x12's bolted to the top

 

[Silver]

Nice job! Ours is a flat rail car buried across the creek and 3x12's bolted to the top

Always wanted to get my hands on a rail car.

 

[gcreekrch]

We used two b train trailers side by side on cement blocks. Decked with 4 inch crossways and two inch running strips to hold her together.

 

[wbvs58]

What sort of loads do you put across it Silver? Looks like a nice job.

Ken

 

[sstterry]

Nice job! Ours is a flat rail car buried across the creek and 3x12's bolted to the top

Always wanted to get my hands on a rail car.

Me too, if for no other reason than to just say I have one..

 

[Silver]

What sort of loads do you put across it Silver? Looks like a nice job.

Ken

I guess the heaviest thing to go across it regularly would be when we are hauling hay. When all the wheels of the bale mover are on the deck there could be about about 30,000 lbs on the bridge at once. The bridge is short enough that the tractor and the bale mover are not on it at the same time.
It is built such that the heavy 14" I beams run about under where the tires travel, and there are steel pilings under that.

 

[Ky cowboy]

Old guy here took a miller lite semi trailer and used it for a bridge. He said he drank enough of it in his younger years to fill the trailer up. They just use it for small tracotrs and such

 

[Dave]

This is timely. Yesterday we were discussing my bridge and when it was put in and by who. It is interesting because the bridge is put in diagonal to the flow of the river. Lots of concrete at both ends. Six big I beams. The decking is pressure treated 3 by 12 that are diagonal to the direction that you drive. It is about 8 to 10 feet above the water. The old locals say that there have been a few times during a big spring run off that the water was lapping at the bottom of the bridge.

 

[wbvs58]

What sort of loads do you put across it Silver? Looks like a nice job.

Ken

I guess the heaviest thing to go across it regularly would be when we are hauling hay. When all the wheels of the bale mover are on the deck there could be about about 30,000 lbs on the bridge at once. The bridge is short enough that the tractor and the bale mover are not on it at the same time.
It is built such that the heavy 14" I beams run about under where the tires travel, and there are steel pilings under that.

Speed has a lot to do with what they can't take too.

Ken

 

[Silver]

This is timely. Yesterday we were discussing my bridge and when it was put in and by who. It is interesting because the bridge is put in diagonal to the flow of the river. Lots of concrete at both ends. Six big I beams. The decking is pressure treated 3 by 12 that are diagonal to the direction that you drive. It is about 8 to 10 feet above the water. The old locals say that there have been a few times during a big spring run off that the water was lapping at the bottom of the bridge.

That is a peculiar way to deck a bridge for sure. I was a bridgeman for several years and never saw that before. The concrete at the ends is a great way to save the decking and take the stress off the bridge. Without the concrete the bridge approaches tend to pound out and the vehicles approaching the bridge tend to pound away at the decking and shake the bridge around.

 

[gcreekrch]

Not to hijack your post Silver but here are a couple photos of one of our bridges. No bureaucrats were disturbed in its construction.
I see a block is a little tippy.

 

[Aaron]

As I have said before, I don't really understand the bridges. Particular in such narrow and shallow channels.

Couple 36" culverts and some riprap and call it good.

 

[gcreekrch]

As I have said before, I don't really understand the bridges. Particular in such narrow and shallow channels.

Couple 36" culverts and some riprap and call it good.

For most of the year one 36 inch culvert would handle all the water this creek has. About every 7 to 10 years we get high enough runoff that we would be rebuilding the crossing. This is easier.

 

[Nesikep]

This is timely. Yesterday we were discussing my bridge and when it was put in and by who. It is interesting because the bridge is put in diagonal to the flow of the river. Lots of concrete at both ends. Six big I beams. The decking is pressure treated 3 by 12 that are diagonal to the direction that you drive. It is about 8 to 10 feet above the water. The old locals say that there have been a few times during a big spring run off that the water was lapping at the bottom of the bridge.

That is a peculiar way to deck a bridge for sure. I was a bridgeman for several years and never saw that before. The concrete at the ends is a great way to save the decking and take the stress off the bridge. Without the concrete the bridge approaches tend to pound out and the vehicles approaching the bridge tend to pound away at the decking and shake the bridge around.

if you're a little short of lumber to do the deck, putting them diagonally will get you just a little further!.. lose some width though

 

[Aaron]

As I have said before, I don't really understand the bridges. Particular in such narrow and shallow channels.

Couple 36" culverts and some riprap and call it good.

For most of the year one 36 inch culvert would handle all the water this creek has. About every 7 to 10 years we get high enough runoff that we would be rebuilding the crossing. This is easier.

I think riprap on the ends and pack the entire void with clay/mud would keep in place. Force the flood water to go around each side of the bridge if it doesn't go through the culvert during flood events. I got tired of seeing my gravel crossings wash out during floods, so I switched to mud and encourage the grass to take root and sod over the entire crossing. Never a problem again.

 

[gcreekrch]

As I have said before, I don't really understand the bridges. Particular in such narrow and shallow channels.

Couple 36" culverts and some riprap and call it good.

For most of the year one 36 inch culvert would handle all the water this creek has. About every 7 to 10 years we get high enough runoff that we would be rebuilding the crossing. This is easier.

I think riprap on the ends and pack the entire void with clay/mud would keep in place. Force the flood water to go around each side of the bridge if it doesn't go through the culvert during flood events. I got tired of seeing my gravel crossings wash out during floods, so I switched to mud and encourage the grass to take root and sod over the entire crossing. Never a problem again.

Ok.

 

[BigBear56]

As I have said before, I don't really understand the bridges. Particular in such narrow and shallow channels.

Couple 36" culverts and some riprap and call it good.

I am no expert on the subject but my FIL is. He's installed culvert pipes for many years and he said there is a drastic difference in 1 pipe vs 2 or big culvert vs bridge. I experienced this at my house. Had an 18" culvert pipe in that was constantly being overflowed by the creek. So I put 2 18" culverts in. Got better but didn't solve problem. My FIL said to put in 1 36" pipe. Didn't make sense to me. But it worked. I think it has to do with with the disruption on flow when you force it thru 2 pipes vs 1 or a culvert vs bridge. I'm sure somewhere out there are some formulas for this. I know he measures the ditch size to calculate culvert size.

 

[Aaron]

As I have said before, I don't really understand the bridges. Particular in such narrow and shallow channels.

Couple 36" culverts and some riprap and call it good.

I am no expert on the subject but my FIL is. He's installed culvert pipes for many years and he said there is a drastic difference in 1 pipe vs 2 or big culvert vs bridge. I experienced this at my house. Had an 18" culvert pipe in that was constantly being overflowed by the creek. So I put 2 18" culverts in. Got better but didn't solve problem. My FIL said to put in 1 36" pipe. Didn't make sense to me. But it worked. I think it has to do with with the disruption on flow when you force it thru 2 pipes vs 1 or a culvert vs bridge. I'm sure somewhere out there are some formulas for this. I know he measures the ditch size to calculate culvert size.

Yes, there are hydraulic flow formulas and charts used in engineered drains to determine culvert size.

I just threw out a random size and quantity based on the pictures provided.

 

[gcreekrch]

As I have said before, I don't really understand the bridges. Particular in such narrow and shallow channels.

Couple 36" culverts and some riprap and call it good.

I am no expert on the subject but my FIL is. He's installed culvert pipes for many years and he said there is a drastic difference in 1 pipe vs 2 or big culvert vs bridge. I experienced this at my house. Had an 18" culvert pipe in that was constantly being overflowed by the creek. So I put 2 18" culverts in. Got better but didn't solve problem. My FIL said to put in 1 36" pipe. Didn't make sense to me. But it worked. I think it has to do with with the disruption on flow when you force it thru 2 pipes vs 1 or a culvert vs bridge. I'm sure somewhere out there are some formulas for this. I know he measures the ditch size to calculate culvert size.

Yes, there are hydraulic flow formulas and charts used in engineered drains to determine culvert size.

I just threw out a random size and quantity based on the pictures provided.

There was once a 6 ft culvert at a dry crossing on the road coming into the ranch. It washed out twice in 8 years 1983 and 1991. It was replaced with a Bailey bridge the second time and hasn't been an issue since. The road dept was going to pull the bridge and put a culvert back in a few years ago. They were convinced not to.