Defect in Second Hawkesbury River Bridge ?

 
  electrax Assistant Commissioner

Recently tenders were called for repairs to be made to one of the piers of the 1946-built Hawkesbury River Bridge, built as a replacement for the 1889 structure at this location. Has anyone seen any information about this matter?

Sponsored advertisement

  M636C Minister for Railways

These are the details from the NSW Government Website

"Sydney Trains is seeking tenders from suitably qualified companies for the concrete repairs to pier 2 at Hawkesbury River Bridge. The works consist of installation of coffer dam, de-watering site, repairs concrete spalling and reinforcement to Pier 2.
A Site Meeting will be held on 20 May 2014 commencing at 10am. Tenderers to meet Sydney Train Representatives at Hawkesbury River Station."

Pier 2 would be the pier under the second and third spans from the south end.

"Spalling" refers to the surface breaking away leaving a roughened face underneath.

Pier 2 would be the closest pier to the failed pier on the 1889 bridge if I recall correctly.
This may be a coincidence.

M636C
  electrax Assistant Commissioner

These are the details from the NSW Government Website

"Sydney Trains is seeking tenders from suitably qualified companies for the concrete repairs to pier 2 at Hawkesbury River Bridge. The works consist of installation of coffer dam, de-watering site, repairs concrete spalling and reinforcement to Pier 2.
A Site Meeting will be held on 20 May 2014 commencing at 10am. Tenderers to meet Sydney Train Representatives at Hawkesbury River Station."

Pier 2 would be the pier under the second and third spans from the south end.

"Spalling" refers to the surface breaking away leaving a roughened face underneath.

Pier 2 would be the closest pier to the failed pier on the 1889 bridge if I recall correctly.
This may be a coincidence.

M636C
M636C

thanks, Peter. I think that it is mentioned in John Gunn's book, "Along Parallel Lines", that the piers supporting the original structure averaged about 135 - 150 feet below the high water mark and that those supporting the present structure are around 175 feet in the same dimension.
  br30453 Chief Train Controller

thanks, Peter. I think that it is mentioned in John Gunn's book, "Along Parallel Lines", that the piers supporting the original structure averaged about 135 - 150 feet below the high water mark and that those supporting the present structure are around 175 feet in the same dimension.
electrax

Pier 2 is founded on solid rock whereas the failed pier of the 1889 bridge was not based on rock but on caissons in the sand bed of the river.

It would seem that the repairs are maintenance work and the stability of the bridge is not compromised.
  electrax Assistant Commissioner

Pier 2 is founded on solid rock whereas the failed pier of the 1889 bridge was not based on rock on caissons in the sand bed of the river.

It would seem that the repairs are maintenance work and the stability of the bridge is not compromised.
br30453

thanks.

Sponsored advertisement

Subscribers: br30453, Raichase

Display from:   

Quick Reply

We've disabled Quick Reply for this thread as it was last updated more than six months ago.