Recent content by Meerkat 007

This confuse me. For my untrained eye looks like a PT bar but from where to where ? Can be from canopy or is just rebar ? Thank you all for response.

I'm confused by this : Thanks all for response.

If working was on upper PT bar instead lower one, probability of joint failure between member #11 and #12 as cause of collapse is significant higher. Right now I'm really more confused by this picture.

Not really. Here some spots : [glasses]

Any structural can dismiss simultaneous fail at both ends of member #11 ?

I'll recheck about PT rods as something on my working drawings not fit.

Member #11, #12, north deck and canopy position after collapse without deformation/destruction. Any find something wrong, point me about please for recheck.

I see single asymmetrical concrete truss and ABC as not the best choices for a bridge. All must be perfect designed and executed. Full collapse was half second only when bridge was looking safe and stable like a rock.

Concrete of member #12 base was pulverized before north deck end fall. You can still see skid marks of like 2 rebars on pier surface.

I searched for images with reference points and angles in same plane and mixed with a software editor capable to work with layers and transparency, GIMP in my case. Images used: Confirmation for north end of deck: No traces from end of #12 outside deck:

Member #12 damage overlap.

RetiredSE - see below... You can see more details here.

I don't get your point. Redundancy role isn't to cover design errors.

Any have a clue what role had PT anchor of member #11 into #12 from structural design point of view ?