Talk:Hurricane Deck Bridge

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Bridges and Tunnels, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of bridges and tunnels on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Bridges and TunnelsWikipedia:WikiProject Bridges and TunnelsTemplate:WikiProject Bridges and TunnelsBridge and Tunnel articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Hello: I am not a regular Wikipedia contributor, so I am sorry if I am not sending this information in the normal or correct way, but I hope it gets to somebody who maintains this page. The section in the Hurricane Deck Bridge called "Similarities and Differences to the I-35W Bridge" is extremely misleading and in some cases I believe may be factually incorrect. It is also completely without citation. Why is this bridge even being compared to the I-35W Bridge? Why not compare this bridge to the Innerbelt Bridge in Cleveland? I see no reason to even make a comparison, and I don't see the point of making the comparisons listed on the page. Other comparisons, like the strength of the steel are so general in nature they really don't mean anything to anyone. Is the steel stronger because of its grade, or because of how deteriorated it is, or fatigued? This needs to be clarified to make the statement have use.

Bridges are often pointlessly compared to I-35-W because the bridge collapsed and people are mislead into thinking other bridges that are similar in bridge type might also collapse. However, the I-35W Bridge collapsed because of a design error (ie a typo, or bad calculation on the plan sheets), the gussett plates were too thin for the connections. It actually has nothing to do with the fact that it was a deck truss, or a cantilever truss. Any truss with gussett plates too thin might have collapsed. After the collapse, bridges like the Hurricane Deck Bridge could have had their safety in this regard verified by doing an engineering analysis of the gusset plates.

And even if you did think it was appropriate to compare this bridge to the I-35W, wouldn't you want to mention that the consulting engineer Sverdrup and Parcel was the same engineer for both bridges?

Also, be careful in citing sources regarding I-35W produced by news agencies or even DOTs, especially if the sources date to soon after the collapse. There was a lot of unknowns and a lot of false assumptions and statements were made. I would limit any sources cited regarding the I-35W bridge collapse to the final official NTSB study findings after the disaster.

FYI, I am not an engineer, but have 8 years experience working with historic bridges and I am webmaster of www.historicbridges.org

Pcnate (talk) 01:26, 20 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]