WMATA Trestle - Georgetown - 2014!06!25 - Part 1 of 3

StructuralConditionAssessment
Of
GeorgetownTrestle
Washington,DC
TaskOrder14FQ100065LAND09
Preparedby:
Structura,Inc.
111RockvillePike
Suite950
Rockville,Maryland20850
For:
AECOM
2101WilsonBoulevard
EighthFloor
Arlington,Virginia22201
And
WashingtonMetropolitanAreaTransitAuthority
600FifthStreet,NW
Washington,DC20001
June25,2014
GeorgetownTrestleConditionAssessment
June25,2014
Page1of16
TableofContents
1.0Introduction:...................................................................................................................2
2.0ProjectBackground.........................................................................................................2
3.0ProjectDescriptionandScopeofWork..........................................................................3
4.0FieldSamplingandLaboratoryTesting...........................................................................3
5.0ObservationsandComments..........................................................................................6
6.0StructuralAnalysis...........................................................................................................12
7.0ConclusionsandRecommendations...............................................................................13
8.0BudgetCostProjection....................................................................................................15
9.0Closing.............................................................................................................................16
AppendixADestructiveTestingResults
AppendixBPhotographicDocumentation
AppendixCStructuralAnalysisSummaryResults
AppendixDFieldSurveyNotes
AppendixEBudgetCostProjection
June25,2014
Page2of16
1.0
INTRODUCTION
Structura was engaged by AECOM to assess the structural soundness of a historic,

trestlebridgelocatedonpropertyownedbytheWashingtonMetropolitanAreaTransit
Authority (WMATA) near Georgetown in Washington, DC. The remains of the steel
trolleytrestlebridgearecurrentlyinastateofdisrepair.
This study seeks to assess and determine the soundness of the existing structure
through a visual examination of the framing and selective testing of structural
components.Inaddition,itisalsointendedtodeterminethelevelofeffortthatmaybe
necessary to stabilize and restore the framing to adaptively reuse the structure as a
potentialpedestriantrail.
Thisreportisbasedonavisualassessmentofaccessiblestructuralelements.Thereport
includes a project description, outline of our scope of services; a listing of our
observationsandcomments;discussionofselectivetestingresults;andourconclusions
andrecommendations.Wehavealsoincludedasappendixesdestructivetestingresults
from HillisCarnes Engineering Associates (Appendix A); numerous photographs of
observed conditions (Appendix B); structural analysis results (Appendix C); select field
surveynotes(AppendixD);andbudgetcostprojections(AppendixE)forrecommended
repairsandremedialaction.
2.0
PROJECTBACKGROUND
ThetrestlebridgestructurewasoriginallyconstructedaspartoftheWestWashington
& Glenn Echo Electric Railroad / Glen Echo Trolley Line. This trolley system served
Washington,DCfromGeorgetowntoGlenEcho,Marylandfrom1897to1962.
Running along the Potomac River, the trolley required numerous trestles to carry the
tracksoverwater.Severalofthesteeltrestlesarestillstandingbuttheyaregenerallyin
poor condition. Since closing of the trolley, the existing structure does not appear to
havebeenmaintained.
The Georgetown Trestle structure in question is located at the end of MacArthur

Boulevard, in Foundry Branch Valley Park, near the intersection of Foxhall Road and
Canal Road in Northwest Washington, DC (see Appendix B for a location plan). The
overalldimensionsofthetrestleareapproximately260feetx20feetwide.Theprimary
framingconsistsofapairofunderslungsteeltrussesspanningapproximately96feet,a
series of braced frame steel structures, concrete abutments on the far east and west
sides,andintermediateconcretepiers.Thesteelmemberspresentareacombination
ofIshapes,channels,angles,WTs,androds,withrivetedconnections.
Apedestrianpathiscurrentlylocateddirectlyunderneaththesteeltrussspan.
June25,2014
Page3of16
3.0
PROJECTDESCRIPTIONANDSCOPEOFWORK
Structuralwasengagedtoperformanevaluationoftheexistingtrolleytrestlestructure
andtoprepareareportwithobservationsandrecommendationsforremedialwork.
RepresentativesofStructuraperformedsitevisitsinduringthemonthofMarch2014to
observe accessible portions of the structure. Evidence of previous modifications,
material deterioration, deficiencies in structural members or connection, and unusual
structural features were noted. Photographs were taken with a digital camera and
descriptiveinformationwasrecordedinfieldnotestorecordareasofinterest.
Material testing of selective structural components was performed. HillisCarnes

Engineering Associates (HCE) Inc. was contracted to provide this testing at locations
designatedbyStructura.
Basedoninformationgatheringfromthefieldsurveys,anengineeringdesignmodelof
the existing framing was developed to analyze the theoretical load capacity of the
structure.
Drawingsoftheoriginalconstructionwerenotavailableforouruseinthisassessment.
If located, these documents may reveal other issues with the structure that may
necessitatemodificationstoourassumptionsandassessment.
4.0
FIELDSAMPLINGANDLABORATORYTESTING
Selectivetestingofstructuralmemberswasperformedtodeterminematerialproperties
of the primary structural elements. HillisCarnes Engineering Associates (HCE) was
contracted to provide this field sampling and laboratory testing. Reports with testing
resultsareincludedasAppendixA.Thefollowingisasummaryofthetestingandthe
associatedresultsobtained.
FieldTestingSummary
Steel Coupon samples from a primary and secondary framing member were
takentodeterminematerialpropertiesoftheexistingsteel.
Coupons are physical samples removed from existing steel members for
laboratory testing. This testing is in accordance with applicable ASTM
standards.Twosampleswereobtained.
Concrete cores were extracted from exposed foundation piers and abutments
todeterminetheconcretecompressivestrength. Inaddition,rebound(Swiss)
hammertestsatadditionallocationswereperformed,withresultscorrelatedto
theconcretecoretestresults.
June25,2014
Page4of16
A concrete core sample is a cylindrical section of concrete removed from the

base material for laboratory testing to determine the Pounds per Square Inch
(PSI)strengthoftheexistingconcrete.ThistestingisinaccordancewithASTM
C42.Threesampleswereobtained.
A rebound hammer or Swiss hammer is a device used to measure the elastic

properties or strength of concrete. The hammer measures the rebound of a
springloaded mass impacting against the surface of the sample. The test
hammerimpacttheconcreteatadefinedenergy,anditsreboundisdependent
on the hardness of the concrete and is measured by the test equipment. By
reference to a conversion chart and/or correlated to cored concrete samples,
the rebound value can be used to determine the compressive strength of the
material.Thistestingisminimallyinvasiveandrequiresminimaltimeandsetup,
andisgenerallyusedtoobtainagreaterquantityofsamplesthanstrictlycoring.
SteelTestingResults
Steel coupons were taken from the trestle structure to determine the chemical
composition and physical properties of the material. At the time of the original
construction(circa1890),thesteelfabricationprocesswasnotascontrolledasinlater
years and many impurities are generally found in the chemical composition. The
principal information sought with these samples is the Yield Strength and the carbon
equivalency/weldability.
TheYieldStrengthisthestressatwhichamaterialbeginstodeformplastically.
Priortotheyieldpointthematerialwilldeformelasticallyandwillreturntoits
originalshapewhentheappliedstressisremoved.Withoutfieldtestingofthe
existing material, the American Institute of Steel Construction (AISC)
recommendsacapacityof24KipsperSquareInch(KSI)forsteelofthisage.
Based on the laboratory test results, the Yield Strength of the existing steel
(primary and secondary framing members) is 40 KSI, which is high for steel of
thisage.
Theequivalentcarboncontent(CE)isusedtounderstandhowdifferentalloying
elementsaffecthardnessofthesteel beingwelded. Thisisdirectlyrelatedto
hydrogeninduced cold cracking, which is the most common weld defect for
steel,andis thusmostcommonlyusedtodeterminesteelweldability. Higher
concentrations of carbon and other alloying elements such as manganese,
chromium,silicon,molybdenum,vanadium,copper,andnickeltendtoincrease
thehardnessandinverselydecreaseweldability.
CarbonEquivalence(CE)
Weldability
Upto0.35
Excellent
0.360.40
Verygood
0.410.45
Good
June25,2014
Page5of16
0.460.50
Fair
Over0.50
Poor
ThesteelsamplestestedwerefoundtohaveCEvaluesof0.16and0.18,which
wouldgenerallyindicatethatthematerialisweldable.
Another factor that affects the weldability is the maximum sulfur and
phosphoruscontent.Thetypicalmaximumis0.05%andweldabilitydecreases
withincreasingpercentages.Highsulfurandphosphorusvaluescancausethe
material to crack and it promotes weld metal porosity. This steel was
determinedtohave10%and10.6%ofthesematerials.Basedonthechemical
composition,weldingofthissteelisnotadvisable.
ConcreteTestingResults
Concreteiscomposedofacombinationoffineandcoarseaggregates,Portlandcement,
andwater.TheuseofsteelreinforcedconcreteintheUnitedStatesdatesbackto1860,
wherepriortothisthemajoritywasmassconcretewithnointernalreinforcement.The
useofconcretereinforcementdidnotcomeintopracticalapplicationuntilafter1880.
Ingeneral,thequalityofconcreteisdependentontheratioofwatertocement,well
gradedaggregates,compactionduringmaterialplacement,andpropercuring.Concrete
of this era utilized locally available materials, including large stone, course aggregate
fromthePotomacRiver,commonlyreferredtoasriverstone,whichvaryinsizeandcan
be up to four inches in dimension. These large aggregates significantly affect the
concretestrength,withthefailureplanebeingthecementbondtotheaggregate,and
thestrengthofthistypeofconcretenoticeablyvaries.Fieldsamplingandtestingofthe
existing material is the most reliable method of determining the existing concrete
strength.
Three core drilled concrete samples were taken from the existing structure.
Two samples from piers and one from an abutment. The results of the
compressiblestrengthtestswere4620,3830,and5520PSIrespectively
Rebound hammer tests were also performed at and concrete strength at the
samplelocationswasdeterminedtobe4150,5000,and4850PSIrespectively.
June25,2014
Page6of16
5.0
OBSERVATIONSANDCOMMENTS
Structura performed site visits to visually survey and review existing structural
components of the trestle structure. See attached Appendix B for photographic
documentationofobservedconditions.
Thefollowingnarrativessummarizeourobservations.
1. ConcretePierDeterioration.Eachofthetrestlesteelcolumnsaresupportedby
concrete piers that measure approximately 48 x 48 in plan. There are ten
piers on the east side and twelve on the west. All of the piers observed are
experiencing deterioration in the form of concrete spalls and cracks, with the
mostsignificantconditionsoccurringontheeastside.Anumberofpiershave
concretespallstoadepthupto6.
Aswithallstructuralsystems,protection(i.e.waterproofingsystems,concrete
coveroverreinforcement,etc.)mustbeevaluatedtoensureastructuralsystem
is not compromised by environmental factors. Exterior exposed structures in
particular are subject to a number of detrimental conditions. Within a
reinforced concrete section, concrete cover acts as a protective layer for the
reinforcement.Whencracksforminconcrete,failureoftheprotectionsystem
occurs,howeveritshouldbenotedthatsomecrackingisnotunusualandmay
becausedbyconcreteshrinkageandmovementofthestructure.
Spalling is the most common problem created by moisture infiltration in

concrete. Rust on reinforcing steel expands around the bars and creates
expansive forces that act on the surrounding concrete, creating material
delaminationorspalling.Thistypeofcorrosionmayhavesignificanteffectson
thestructuralintegrityofamember.Inadditiontocausingsectionlossandloss
ofsteelprotection,reinforcingbarssubjecttocorrosionmaynolongerpossess
theabilitytocarrydesigntensionforcesrequiredofthestructuralelement.As
aresult,additionaltensionforcestransferredtotheconcretecancausefurther
crackingandspallingduetooverstressing.
Fromfieldobservationsoftheexistingpiers,wecouldnotdetermineiftheyare
reinforced.Nondestructivetestingwasutilizedontheconcretesurfaceanddid
not locate embedded reinforcement bars. Concrete spalls are also generally
accompanied by the presence of rust staining and this discoloration was not
observed. Some delaminated material was removed and reinforcement bars
werenotobservedunderneaththespalls.
Torepairtheexistingconcretepiers,werecommendthatallconcretespallsand
unsound material be removed and new cementitious material, castinplace
concreteoraconcreterepairmortarbeappliedtorestorethepiers.Allcracks
shouldbegroutinjected.
June25,2014
Page7of16
2. Concrete Pier Base.Theelevationofeachconcretepiervariesandtheywere

typically constructed to match existing grades. This concrete was cast in two
pours with a horizontal construction joint at the profile change. This joint is
crackedand thereappearstohavebeensomelateralmovementbetweenthe
concrete pours. It is not clear how the concrete components were originally
reinforced but we did not observe surface staining from reinforcement bar
deterioration/rusting.
Over time, environmental factors have caused soil erosion around some piers
andothershavebeenburiedbeneathsoil.Theerosionpresentappearscaused
by inadequate drainage. At the base of some piers, this erosion has partially
exposed concrete that was originally below grade. Test pits were not dug to
locatethebottomelevationofthepiers.Atonelocationobserved,thebottom
offoundationwaspartiallyundermined.
Approximatelyhalfthepiersarepresentlyconcealedandburiedbeneathsoil.It
is apparent that they were not originally constructed below grade. As such,
thereisstructuralsteelframingthatiscurrentlyindirectcontactwithsoil(see
observation 6 for additional commentary regarding this steel). We could not
observe the condition of these piers but it is our assumption that similar
concretedeteriorationasnotedinobservation1ispresent.
Werecommendthatthehorizontalconcreteconstructionjointbegroutinjected
to prevent longterm water inflitration into the pier, which can cause further
deterioration.
Adrainagesystemshouldbeinstalledaroundthefoundationsandtheareare
gradedtobettercontrolwater.Thepiersthatareburiedshouldbeexposedand
areas of soil erosion should be restored to avoid potentially undermining the
foundationsinthefuture.Thepierthatispresentlypartiallyunderminedshould
beunderpinnedpriortoregrading.
3. ConcreteAbutmentCondition.Thefareastandwestsidesofthestructureare
supported by concrete abutments. These structures serve as both retaining
wallsandgravitysupportofsteelbeamsalongthetopofthetrestle.Significant
signs of concrete deterioration were not observed. A number of cracks and
smallconcretespallsarepresent.Waterinflitrationintotheconcretestructure
and surface staining from reinforcement deterioration/rusting did not appear
present.
Topreventpossiblewaterinflitrationintotheconcretestructure,werecommend
that theobservedcracksberoutedandcaulked.Anycrackslargerthan1/16
shouldbegroutinjected.Theconcretespallsshouldberepairedbyremovalof
deterioratedconcreteandinstallationofaconcreterepairmortar.
June25,2014
Page8of16
4. VegetationGrowth.Thelackofregularmaintenanceofthetrestlehasallowed
significant vegetation growth in and around the structure. Vegetation is
intertwinedwithstructuralcomponents.Atthebaseoftheframing,thisgrowth
appearstohaveaccelerateddeteriorationofsomesteelcomponents.
Priortoimplementingrestorationofthetrestle,excessivevegetationgrowthwill
havetoberemovedforaccesstothestructure.
5. GeneralSteelObservation.Steelcorrosionwasfoundinamultitudeofstages
inalloftheframingobserved.Alloftheexistingsteelispresentlyexposedto
theenvironmentalfactors.Thevastmajorityofthesteelprotectivecoatingis
nolongerpresent.
The condition of each steel member varies and both primary (columns and
beams) and secondary (angles braces and diagonals and tie rods) framing
members will require some form of replacement or reinforcement. We
measured the level of deterioration of a representative number of members.
Mostofthesteelcorrosionobservedisbeyondsurfacerustingandispresentin
theformofminorpitting;moderatecorrosion(sectionlossof15%to25%with
flakingscale);andmajorcorrosion(materiallossof50to100%).
It should be noted that small pieces of delaminated steel is present on the

groundunderneaththestructure.
Reuseoftheexistingtrestlewillrequirereplacementandreinforcingofmanyof
themembersduetothelevelofdeteriorationpresent.Eachmembershouldbe
evaluatedindividuallywithfieldverifiedmeasurementsofsteelsectionlossand
determination of the required capacity for both its present condition and
proposed new use. See following narratives for additional information on the
steelframingconditions.
Asaminimum,allmemberswithrustingshouldbecleanedtobaremetalandbe
reprimedandrepaintedtoprotectthesteelfromtheenvironment.
Intheinterim,priortoarestorationproject,looseanddeterioratedsectionsof
steelarepotentialoverheadhazards.
6. SteelColumnBase.Alongthelengthofthetrestle,thesteelcolumnsizesand
sections vary based on the member length and spacing of steel angle bracing.
Fromshortesttotallest,columnsectionspresentare7wideflanges,10wide
flanges,anddouble10channellatticecolumns.
Rustingispresentofallsteelcolumnsobserved,withthemajoritybeingsurface
rusting along the column height. The most significant deterioration is at the
column bases at the connection to the concrete piers, which is likely due to
June25,2014
Page9of16
longtermwatersittingontopoftheconcrete.Majorcorrosionandsectionloss
ispresentandthecolumnconnectionsnolongerappeareffective.
We could not observe the bases that are currently below grade due to soil
erosion.Withthesebasesindirectcontactwithsoil,itisourassumptionthat
theyarealsosignificantlydeterioratedandarelikelyinworsecondition.
The significant deterioration at the column bases is an immediate structural

concern. The present condition of the bases significantly affects the structural
stabilityofthetrestleassembly.
The column bases will require replacement of the deteriorated framing. The
numberofbracingmembersthatframeintothesteelcolumnbasescomplicate
this condition. It was recommended through material testing that welding of
the steel not be performed. As such, members will require bolted splices or
sistering with new steel. Detailing of a repair will vary and be specific to the
existing framing condition. It should be noted that repair of this framing
conditionwillrequiretemporaryshoringofthesteelframe.
Any column bases that are not significantly deteriorated and do not require
reinforcingorreplacement,shouldstill besupplementedwithnewanchorrods
drilledintotheconcretefoundation.
7. Steel Column Deterioration. As noted in observation 6, the existing column

sizes vary from 7 deep, 10 deep, and double channel members. Above the
bases,thelevelofsteeldeteriorationissignificantlyless.
Eachmembershouldbeevaluatedindividuallyalongitsfullheight.Remaining
members should be cleaned to bare metal and be reprimed and repainted to
protect the steel from the environment. Members that have excessive section
lossshouldbereplacedorreinforcedasrequired.
8. SteelAngles.Singleanddoubleangleframingispresentthroughoutthetrestle
intheformofdiagonalandhorizontalbracingmembers.Themembersizesvary
depending on the length and orientation of the framing. The majority of the
anglesobservedhavesignificantdeteriorationandanumberarefullycorroded
andarenolongerfunctioning.
Splicingofnewangleframingtosupplementexistingcorrodedmemberswillbe
difficult.Itisourrecommendationthatdeterioratedsteelanglesbereplacedfull
length with new members to match. Each member should be evaluated
individuallyalongitsfullheight.Remainingmembersshouldbecleanedtobare
metal and be reprimed and repainted to protect the steel from the
environment.
June25,2014
Page10of16
9. TopElevationSteelBeams.Typicalsteelbeamsalongthetopelevationofthe
trestle structure are 10 deep Ibeams in the EastWest direction, spanning
between the steel frames; 16 deep Ibeams in the NorthSouth direction and
intermittently spaced along the full length of trestle; and 14 deep double
channels.
From the ground level, the beams do not appear to be significantly

deteriorated.Closeobservationindicatesnotablescalingandsteelsectionloss
ontheflangesandwebsofallofthemembers,andapproximately35%lossof
material.Anumberofthe16deepbeamswereobservedtohavefullsection
lossthroughthewebs.Fullsectionlossoftheflangeswasnotobserved.
Each steel beam should be evaluated individually to determine the level of

deterioration.Werecommendthatsignificantlycorrodedmembersbesistered
with new members or be fully replaced with new steel to match the existing
section.Remainingmembersshouldbecleanedtobaremetalandbereprimed
andrepaintedtoprotectthesteelfromtheenvironment.
10. Steel Trusses. The center portion of the trestle consists of a pair of hung
trusses, spanning in the EastWest direction approixately 90 feet. The truss
assembly is composed of double angle chords and web sections. The level of
steel deterioration present is moderate. We did not observe truss members
withfullsteelsectionloss.
Theindividualcomponentsofthetrusseswillhavetobeevaluatedindividually
to document the level of steel loss to determine which members may require
reinforcementorreplacement.Withthenatureofthisframing,reinforcementin
the form of sistering will likely be the most cost effect repair method.
Remainingmembersshouldbecleanedtobaremetalandbereprimedandre
paintedtoprotectthesteelfromtheenvironment.
11. HeavyTimberWoodenTies.Theoriginal10x10heavytimbertiesremainin
the place on the top elevation of the trestle. These members were through
boltedataregularspacingtothemainsteelframing.Uponcloseobservation,
all wood members observed were significantly deteriorated and are not
salvageableintheirpresentstate.
Atthebaseofthestructure,weobservedanumberofwoodenmembersand
smallsectionsofwoodthathavefallenfromthetopsurfaceovertime.
For the possible reuse of the existing trestle, all of the heavy timber members
will require replacement with new members. New wood installed should be
pressuretreated.
June25,2014
Page11of16
Intheinterim,priortoarestorationproject,looseanddeterioratedsectionsof
woodarepotentialoverheadhazards.
12. Existing Trail. On the west side of the trestle structure beyond the concrete
abutment,remainingsteelandwoodframingispresentatgrade,formingatrail
through the woods to Foxhall Road. A three to five feet deep depression is
present along this length and the area is overgrown with vegetation. The
remaining steel and wood members are significantly deteriorated and do not
appearsalvageable.
Asimilarassemblywasnotobservedinthewoodsontheeastsideofthetrestle
structure.
Ifthispathistobereusedasapedestriantrail,wewouldrecommendthatthe
deterioratedmembersberemovedandthedepressionbeinfilled.
June25,2014
Page12of16
STRUCTURALANALYSIS
Based on field measurements of the trestle structure geometry and member sizes,
Structura developedananalysismodeloftheexistingsteelframing.Theintentofthis
analysis was to determine the stress ratio of members under their present loading
conditionandreuseoftheframingforapedestriantrail.
Aspartoftheanalysis,weassumedthefollowingloads.
Dead load (DL) on top elevation of the trestle of 50 pounds per square foot
(PSF), for loads associated with both existing and new material required to
createapedestriantrail.
Pedestrianwalkwaywillrequirealiveload(LL)capacityof100PSF.
WindandseismicloadingbasedonASCE7,MinimumDesignLoadsforBuildings
andOtherStructures.
Ourinitialanalysisassumedmemberspresentwerewithoutsignificantsectionlossdue
to rusting and deterioration. Based on the analysis results, a number of the trestle
framingmembersaretheoreticallyoverstressed.Thesemembersincludethe7deep
steel columns; 16 deep Ibeams on top of the trestle, spanning in the NorthSouth
direction; bottom chord of the steel truss; and miscellaneous single angle diagonal
braces.SeeAppendixCforadditionalinformationfromanalysisresults.
With the exception of the steel columns and truss bottom chord, the other members
theoretically overstressed will likely require supplemental framing due to the level of
deterioration present. Framing installed to repair the members can be sized
appropriatelytoaddresstherequiredloadcapacity.
Ananalysiswasalsoperformedtodeterminetheloadcapacityofmembersundertheir
current loading condition, supporting selfweight and an estimated live load of 30 PSF
forsnowloadingconditions.Theanalysisresultsindicatethatthe16deepIbeamsand
anumberofsingleanglediagonalarepresentlyundersized.
June25,2014
Page13of16
CONCLUSIONANDRECOMMENDATIONS
Basedonourreviewoftheexistingtrestle,itisouropinionthatthestructureisinpoor
condition. The level of deterioration of many of the members present significantly
affectsthestructuralstabilityoftheassembly.Therepairstobeimplementedwillbe
dependent upontheintendeduseof thetrestleand theanticipatedtimeframeof the
proposedrepurposing.
Priortofullrestorationofthestructure,werecommendthatlimitedrepairsoccurinthe
near future to temporary stabilize the structure and to address immediate structural
concerns with the present level of deterioration. The immediate remedial actions
recommendedincludethefollowing.
Repairofdeterioratedcolumnbases,includingthosethatarepresentlyburied.
Thiscolumnbaserepaircanbeperformedinapermanentfashionbyreplacing
ofthedeterioratedmembersorinatemporarymannerbycastingnewconcrete
around each column base to encapsulate both the existing concrete pier and
deteriorated steel. An additional alternate to repairing the bases can be to
temporaryshoretheexistingframing.
Replacementoffullydeterioratedsteelanglethatarenolongeraffective.
Installation of debris netting underneath the main trusses, over the current
pedestriantrail.
It is recommended that a restoration program be implemented within the next three

yearstoaddressnotedstructuralconcernsandtomaintainthestabilityoftheframing
systemandlimitfurtherdeterioration.Thisrestorationcanincludedesignnecessaryin
preparationforconvertingtheframingtoapedestrianwalkway.Untilimplementation
ofarestorationprogram,thestructureshouldberegularlymonitoredforanychanges
fromitspresentcondition.
AqualifiedProfessionalEngineershouldbecontractedtoprepareadesignpackageto
address all of the identified repair work, which should include a more detailed field
survey and structural analysis; appropriate plans, details, and notes; and a written
specification fortherepairs.Thelevelofrepairsincludedcanbelimited to extending
theservicelifeofthestructureorbetorepurposethestructure.Recommendeditems
for repair include the following. See observation and structural analysis sections for
additionaldetailonrecommendedremedialwork.
Regularlymonitorthestructure.
Repair concrete deterioration in the form of cracks and spalls in the piers and
foundations.
Regradingofsoilaroundpiersandfoundations.
Removalofexcessvegetation.
Cleanallsteeltobaremetalandreprimedandrepainted.
Repairofdeterioratedcolumnbasesifnotpreviouslyaddressed.
Repairand/orreinforcedeterioratedsteelcolumns
June25,2014
Page14of16
Replacealldeterioratedsteelangles.
Replaceorrepairandreinforcedeterioratedsteelbeams.
Repairand/orreinforcedeterioratedtrussframing.
Inadditiontoitemsnotedabove,thescopeofworkforrepurposingthetrestlestructure
foruseasapedestrianwalkwaywouldalsoincludethefollowing.
Newwoodframedwalkingsurface.
Handrailsandguardrails.
Infillofgradedepressiononwestsideoftrestle.
Aroughbudgetcostprojectionisincludedaspartofthenextsectionofthisassessment.
Amoreaccuratecostprojectcanbeobtainedfromaqualifiedrestorationcontractor.
June25,2014
Page15of16
BUDGETCOSTPROJECTION
The following opinions of probable costs are provided below for rough budgeting
purposesonly.
ItshouldbenotedthatStructuraisnotaprofessionalcostestimatorandassuchthese
numbersshouldnotberelieduponasnottoexceedorlumpsumcosts.Theunitprices
utilized in the cost projection are based on comparable repairs. We believe the best
waytoobtainmoreaccuratecostestimatesistosolicitpricesfromqualifiedrestoration
contractors using a detailed specification. In addition, these costs do not include all
prices and fees that may be necessary for project contingencies, permits, bonds,
engineering/consulting,constructionmonitoring,orotheradministrativeservices.
Based on estimated quantities and unit prices, we would estimate a construction cost
fortheproposedworktobefollows.
FullRestoration.
$2,040,000
TemporaryStabilizationRepairsteelcolumnbases.
$369,000
TemporaryStabilizationEncapsulatepierbasesinconcrete. $346,000
SeeAppendixEforadditionalinformation.
Roughbudgetcostprojectionsnotes.
1. Quantities that are more accurate should be obtained from a detailed field
survey performed prior to the bidding process or prior to the contract award
sincequantitiesaresubjecttochangeovertime.
2. UnitpricesarebasedontheContractorperformingtheworkonalargeportion
of the repair and restoration work at one time. Multiple project phases and
smallerworkareaswillinflatetheactualconstructioncost.
3. Construction monitoring and administration fee estimates for Engineering

Servicesaretypicallybasedontheconstructioncostprovidedbytherestoration
contractor and typically range between 5% to 15% of the construction cost,
depending upon the level of services requested, complexity of the work, and
anticipatedprojectduration.
4. Phasingoptionsareavailabletocompletetheprojectandshouldbediscussedin
moredepthrelativetorepairprioritiesandbudgetarylimitations.
June25,2014
Page16of16
CLOSING
The engineering observation and recommendations within this report are related to a
visualexaminationofexposedsurfaces,selectivetestingofthetrestlestructure,andthe
professional judgment and experience of Structura. We believe this review was
sufficientforustoformareasonableengineeringjudgmentofthegeneralconditionof
the structure. In addition, our findings regarding issues at specific locations may not
includeallinstancesofpresentsimilarconditionsthroughoutframing.
Documentationoftheoriginalconstructiondrawingsorpreviousreportsonthetrestle
were not available for our review as part of our assessment. If located, these
documents may reveal other issues with the structure that may necessitate
modificationstoourreport.
Weappreciatetheopportunitytobeofservice.Wewouldbegladtocontinuetoassist
withtheplanningandimplementationofrecommendationsnotedherein.
Please contact us if you have any questions or comments regarding the information
presentedinthisreport.
Sincerely,
cc:File
Attachements:
AppendixCStructuralAnalysisSummaryResults
AppendixDFieldSurveyNotes
AppendixEBudgetCostProjection
AppendixA
GeorgetownTrestleAssessment
DestructiveTestingResults
June25,2014
Prepared by Hillis-Carnes Engineering Asso 4/1/2014

Project: Trolley Trusses - Washington DC
Project No: 14104A
Date Tested: 04/01/2014
Core ID Dia. in.
Length " Length Capped " Area sq. in.
L/D
C-1
3.72
4.86
5.07
Foundat.
3.72
4.86
5.07
Average
3.72
4.86
5.07
10.87
1.363
Core ID Dia. in.
Length "
Length Capped " Area sq. in.
L/D
C-2
3.72
4.19
4.4
Foundat.
3.72
4.19
4.4
Average
3.72
4.19
4.4
10.87
1.183
Core ID Dia. in.
Length "
Length Capped " Area sq. in.
L/D
C-3
3.74
4.71
4.86
Abutment 3.74
4.71
4.86
Average
3.74
4.71
4.86
10.99
1.299
Tested Per ASTM C42

Weight Unit Wt(pcf) Load lb.
PSI
Page 1
Correction Factor
Corrected Strength PSI
2003.4
Weight
144.5
Unit Wt(pcf)
53380 4911
Load lb. PSI
0.94
Correction Factor
4620
1704.1
Weight
142.6
Unit Wt(pcf)
45760 4210
Load lb. PSI
0.91
Correction Factor
3830
1984
146.1
0.94
5520
64510
5872
TEST REPORT
UPDATED: 4/14/14*
HILLIS-CARNES ENGINEERING ASSOC.

ATTENTION: CHRISTOPHER LESJAK
10975 GUILFORD ROAD, SUITE A
ANNAPOLIS JUNCTION, MD 20701
DATE:
April 3, 2014
PO No:
JOB NO. 14104A
LEHIGH No: R-5-41

Sample 1
PAGE:
1 of 1
MATERIAL:
STEEL
SAMPLE DESIGNATION: (1) SAMPLE: ANGLE 3/3.5 (SECONDARY),
JOB NO. 14104A, TROLLEY TRUSSES WASHINGTON DC
CHEMICAL ANALYSIS (%)
Carbon
0.07
Molybdenum <0.01
Sulfur
0.100
Copper
0.008
Manganese
0.52
Cobalt
0.003
Phosphorus 0.106
Vanadium
0.009
Silicon
0.006
Aluminum
0.006
Chromium <0.01
Titanium
<0.001
Nickel
<0.01
MECHANICAL PROPERTIES (Per ASTM A370-12a)
Width (inches):
0.499
Thickness (inches):
0.315
Area (square inches):
0.1572
Yield Strength (psi): 0.2% offset: 41,700
Tensile Strength (psi):
60,200
Elongation (%) in 2:
29
Reduction of Area (%):
48
CARBON EQUIVALENCY/WELDABILITY
0.16
Weld preheating and post weld heat treatment are not required for this material due to the low carbon
equivalency value. However, due to the high sulfur and phosphorus content of this material, welding of this
steel is not advisable.
Kyle D. LePore
___________________________________
Results are for information only.
Kyle D. LePore, Metallography Technician
Procedure: QA-CH-P-048 Rev 1 (Leco C&S)
QA-CH-P-124 Rev 1 (ICP)
*Updated to include statement of welding of material.
Lehigh Testing Laboratories, Inc.
Kevin M. Sexton
________________________________________
Kevin M. Sexton, Mechanical Testing Technician
Peter M. Engelgau
_______________________________
Peter M. Engelgau, Principal Chemist
This certificate of report shall not be reproduced, except in full, without written approval of Lehigh Testing Laboratories, Inc. Testing relates only to item(s) tested.
The recording of false, fictitious or fraudulent statements or entries in this document may be punishable as a felony under Federal Statutes.
Form 500
TEST REPORT
UPDATED: 4/14/14*
HILLIS-CARNES ENGINEERING ASSOC.

ATTENTION: CHRISTOPHER LESJAK
10975 GUILFORD ROAD, SUITE A
ANNAPOLIS JUNCTION, MD 20701
DATE:
April 3, 2014
PO No:
JOB NO. 14104A
LEHIGH No: R-5-41

Sample 2
PAGE:
1 of 1
MATERIAL:
STEEL
SAMPLE DESIGNATION: (1) SAMPLE: C10 COLUMN,
JOB NO. 14104A, TROLLEY TRUSSES WASHINGTON DC
CHEMICAL ANALYSIS (%)
Carbon
0.09
Molybdenum <0.01
Sulfur
0.115
Copper
0.008
Manganese
0.48
Cobalt
0.003
Phosphorus 0.124
Vanadium
0.01
Silicon
<0.002
Aluminum
<0.004
Chromium
<0.01
Titanium
0.001
Nickel
<0.01
MECHANICAL PROPERTIES (Per ASTM A370-12a)
Width (inches):
0.500
Thickness (inches):
0.363
Area (square inches):
0.1815
Yield Strength (psi): 0.2% offset: 42,800
Tensile Strength (psi):
65,000
Elongation (%) in 2:
32
Reduction of Area (%):
54
CARBON EQUIVALENCY/WELDABILITY
0.18
Weld preheating and post weld heat treatment are not required for this material due to the low carbon
equivalency value. However, due to the high sulfur and phosphorus content of this material, welding of this
steel is not advisable.
Kyle D. LePore
___________________________________
Results are for information only.
Kyle D. LePore, Metallography Technician
Procedure: QA-CH-P-048 Rev 1 (Leco C&S)
QA-CH-P-124 Rev 1 (ICP)
*Updated to include statement of welding of material.
Lehigh Testing Laboratories, Inc.
Kevin M. Sexton
________________________________________
Kevin M. Sexton, Mechanical Testing Technician
Peter M. Engelgau
_______________________________
Peter M. Engelgau, Principal Chemist
This certificate of report shall not be reproduced, except in full, without written approval of Lehigh Testing Laboratories, Inc. Testing relates only to item(s) tested.
The recording of false, fictitious or fraudulent statements or entries in this document may be punishable as a felony under Federal Statutes.
Form 500
June25,2014
PageIntentionallyLeftBlank
AppendixB
PhotographicDocumentation
June25,2014
June25,2014 PageB2ofB33
OriginalcarsfortheGlenEchoRailroad.
TheGeorgetownlineranpastanumberofroad
Houses.ThisistheRockSpringClubnearGlenEcholinecarbarn.
AviewoftheGeorgetownlinetracksinfrontoftheRockSpringClub.
GlenEchoElectricRailroadcarbarnandpowerhouse,
neartheintersectionofWalhondingRoadandConduitRoad.
GGeorgetownTrestleAssessment
ObservationsandCommentsPhotographs
Locationmapoftrestlestructure.
Existingtrestlestructure.
Locationmapoftrestlestructure.
Photo1a.ConcretePierDeterioration.Largespallattopofpier.
Photo1c.ConcretePierDeterioration.Largespall.
Photo1b.ConcretePierDeterioration.Crackedconcretejoint.
Photo1d.ConcretePierDeterioration.Crackanddisplacementatjoint.
Photo1e.ConcretePierDeterioration.
Photo1g.ConcretePier.FieldSampling.
Photo1f.ConcPierDeterioration.Surfacespall.Exposedaggregate.
Photo1h.ConcretePier.FieldSampling.
Photo2a.ConcretePierBasePartiallyUndermined.
Photo3a.ConcreteAbutment..
Photo2b.ConcretePierBasePartiallyUndermined.
Photo3b.ConcreteAbutment.
Photo3c.ConcreteAbutment..
Photo4a.VegetationGrowth
Photo3d.ConcreteAbutment.
Photo4b.VegetationGrowth
Photo4c.VegetationGrowth.ColumnBase.
Photo4e.VegetationGrowth.ColumnBase.
Photo4d.VegetationGrowth.ColumnBase.
Photo4f.VegetationGrowth.ColumnBase.
Photo4g.VegetationGrowth.
Photo4i.VegetationGrowth.TopofTrestle.
Photo4h.VegetationGrowth.
Photo4j.VegetationGrowth.TopofTrestle.
Photo5k.SteelFramingDeterioration.Steelsectionloss.
Photo5c.SteelFramingDeterioration.Steelsectionloss.
Photo5b.SteelFramingDeterioration.Steelsectionloss.
Photo5d.SteelFramingDeterioration.Steelsectionloss.
Photo5e.SteelFramingDeterioration.Surfacerustingoncolumn.
Photo5f.SteelFramingDeterioration.Surfacerustingoncolumn.
Photo5g.SteelFramingDeterioration.Steelsectionloss.
Photo5h.SteelFramingDeterioration.Steelsectionloss.

WMATA Trestle - Georgetown - 2014!06!25 - Part 1 of 3

Transféré par

Informations du document

Titre original

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

WMATA Trestle - Georgetown - 2014!06!25 - Part 1 of 3

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

StructuralConditionAssessment

Structura was engaged by AECOM to assess the structural soundness of a historic,

The Georgetown Trestle structure in question is located at the end of MacArthur

Material testing of selective structural components was performed. HillisCarnes

A concrete core sample is a cylindrical section of concrete removed from the

A rebound hammer or Swiss hammer is a device used to measure the elastic

Spalling is the most common problem created by moisture infiltration in

2. Concrete Pier Base.Theelevationofeachconcretepiervariesandtheywere

It should be noted that small pieces of delaminated steel is present on the

The significant deterioration at the column bases is an immediate structural

7. Steel Column Deterioration. As noted in observation 6, the existing column

From the ground level, the beams do not appear to be significantly

Each steel beam should be evaluated individually to determine the level of

It is recommended that a restoration program be implemented within the next three

3. Construction monitoring and administration fee estimates for Engineering

Prepared by Hillis-Carnes Engineering Asso 4/1/2014

Tested Per ASTM C42

Corrected Strength PSI

HILLIS-CARNES ENGINEERING ASSOC.

JOB NO. 14104A

LEHIGH No: R-5-41

Lehigh Testing Laboratories, Inc.

HILLIS-CARNES ENGINEERING ASSOC.

JOB NO. 14104A

LEHIGH No: R-5-41

Lehigh Testing Laboratories, Inc.

Vous aimerez peut-être aussi