Union Culvert Spray Lining Hydraulic Engineering Conference - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Union Culvert Spray Lining Hydraulic Engineering Conference September 8, 2011 Anthony C. Turowski, E.I.

Overview Purpose & Need of Project • Scoping & Funding • Plan Development • Construction • Comparison w/ Field Paving •

Purpose & Need US 33 corrugated metal pipes • corroding Repair needed to maintain • lifespan This section built in 1986 • All sites are less than 10’ span. •

Scoping o D6 Bridge Inspectors tasked with finding locations o Location Criteria : o Surficial Rust Present, but Structurally Sound o Little dewatering and MOT required o No additional r/w or complex waterway permits required o Project Scoped: 2/5/10 o File Date: 3/1/10

Funding Originally planned as part of the • “Stimulus 2” group of projects Lack of funding delayed the • project for over a year. The project was later programmed • with district funding.

Plan Development The plan has minimal notes and detail, similar to a resurfacing project. • Permitting was the most critical part of the process. Jurisdictional • determinations were required for each site, and an RGP was obtained for two of nine sites on the project. Although the liner itself is not considered to be fill below the OHWM (the pipe is • an existing improvement), the temporary work outside the limits of the pipe IS fill below the OHWM. This is an important distinction for jurisdictional waterways. The Cost estimate was largely provided by material manufacturers. •

Construction Began in August 2011, is currently in progress. • Plan was bid at $817,370 vs. the Engineer’s Estimate of $1,175,000.00 (70%). • E.B. Miller of Cincinnati was awarded contract. • D.A. Van Dam & Associates is the Resin Supplier • Don Violet & Jill Kirby are the ODOT project supervisors. •

Equipment

Cleaning the Pipe Powerwashing and wire brushing are the primary cleaning methods used. • Ditch checks are placed downstream of the pipe to contain solids washed out • of the pipe. The contractor had issues with keeping material out of the pipe after cleaning • but before the spray application. These sites were selected specifically so they could be constructed in a dry • condition, with minimal dewatering, but there were still issues. Future plans should probably include cofferdams as a pay item, and should be • permitted to allow the use of more intrusive dewatering activities.

Mixing the Material

Ventilation

Ventilation

Spray Application

Testing the Thickness Coating Thickness Gage • Retails for $500 - $1000. Calculating yields from the spray • application is contractor’s preferred method of measurement.

Field Paving VS Spray Lining Field Paving with Concrete Spray Lining Avg. Awd of $130/LF • Avg. Awd of ~$350/LF • Structural Repair • Current Spec is for non- • Changes hydraulic • structural repairs. opening (3” fill in bottom Does not change • of pipe). hydraulic opening.

Cost Data Disqualifiers ∗ Both the spray lining and field paving unit prices were taken from single projects. I encourage you to contact the manufacturer to verify unit prices for a given site. ∗ District Six has 3 field paving projects scoped for FY 12 through FY 14, additional data will be available after the sale of those projects.

Questions/Discussion?