|
To most Minneapolis commuters, Wednesday, August
1, was just another day of traffic tedium. The evening rush hour
traffic was crawling at its usual glacial pace, the kind of stop-and-go
grind that urban commuters around the world face twice daily with
weary resignation. Those whose journey required traversing Minneapolis’
busiest bridge, the eight-lane I-35W across the Mississippi River,
were putting up with slower than usual traffic, thanks to repair
work that left only one lane open in each direction. Everything
seemed mind-numbingly ordinary.
Then came an unworldly deep rumbling sound. The 40-year-old bridge
swayed and buckled. And then it collapsed, much of it tumbling into
the swirling waters below, taking cars and trucks with it. Within
seconds, a frustrating midsummer’s commute turned into a catastrophe
of historic proportions, leaving 13 people dead and more than 100
injured.
The collapse of the I-35W bridge occurred just two weeks after
another deadly drama, one less epic but significant, nonetheless.
On the evening of July 18, a midtown Manhattan steam pipe that had
been laid in 1924—when Calvin Coolidge was president and Prohibition
reigned—burst open spectacularly, shooting up a 77-story plume
of smoke. The explosion killed one person, injured 30 others, nearly
buried a tow truck and rattled the nerves of New Yorkers, who feared
another terrorist attack.
Minnesota’s bridge disaster and New York’s exploding
steam pipe both bring into sharp focus a major public safety and
economic dilemma facing America: the decaying condition of much
of its aging infrastructure. Political neglect and lack of adequate
funding have combined to jeopardize the massive transportation and
utilities framework upon which this country’s economic well-being
rests.
Not only does the current perilous situation place lives at risk—an
estimated one third of the 40,000 highway deaths a year are caused
by bad roadway conditions—it also threatens America’s
competitiveness. Says Patrick J. Natale, executive director of American
Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE): “We believe that a strong
infrastructure supports a strong economy, and that a weak infrastructure
can’t support it.” The Urban Land Institute (ULI) reports
that the U.S. transportation system alone faces an emerging crisis.
In a recent survey, the institute queried 30 state transportation
planning directors, 83 percent of whom say that America’s
transportation infrastructure won’t hold up to demand within
a decade.
A list of what is usually included within the infrastructure rubric
demonstrates the vastness of the problem: airports, roadways, bridges,
subways, railways, electric power systems, flood-control levees,
dams, tunnels, and pipes for water, sewage, natural gas and steam.
No section of the country’s infrastructure is performing well.
America’s interstate highway system, all 46,000 miles of it,
was largely built in the 1950s and ’60s, and the ASCE says
34 percent of it is in mediocre to poor shape.
The ULI report concurred, stating that the postponement of so much
highway maintenance each year has created a problem “so gargantuan
nobody knows where to begin.” Of the approximately 600,000
bridges in the U.S., 27 percent are structurally deficient, while
deteriorating tracks contribute to ongoing train derailment across
the country. There have been 29 recent dam failures over the past
two years, and in California alone, 1,600 miles of levees are in
worse shape than those that flooded New Orleans during Hurricane
Katrina. And let’s not forget the massive power outage in
2003 that darkened much of the Northeast. Two years ago, the ASCE
gave America’s infrastructure an overall grade of “D,”
and the low marks were spread across the board.
Moreover, much of the problem—particularly that of pipelines—is
out of sight, and so, out of mind. It’s buried deep beneath
city streets and sidewalks, in what Zimmerman calls the “hostile
environment” of a damp subterranean world that is a tangle
of pipes and cables. Water lines are riven with leaks, and huge
amounts of drinking water just trickle away, says William C. Miller,
a Temple University civil engineer. “But they only fix them
when [the problem] comes to the surface.”
Too little money, poorly allocated
Underfunding is a main culprit for the state of disrepair. It is
not that money is not allocated, it’s that the amounts are
usually too small. According to ASCE, an investment of $1.6 trillion
is needed to address the problem. In 2005, Congress approved a $283
billion highway bill and proclaimed it the largest in history. But
it was still $67 billion shy of what the U.S. Department of Transportation
(USDOT) had requested. It’s also not unusual for states to
re-direct money allocated for bridge and highway repairs to help
balance budgets if they get into a fiscal jam. Because Washington
lawmakers are averse to raising the federal gas tax, the purchasing
power of the Highway Trust Fund, which pays for much of the nation’s
road construction and repairs, has eroded by half over the last
40 years.
At the same time, unless $50 billion is invested in America’s
power grid over the next five years, lights are going to go out,
ASCE warns. And it’s not just the inadequate sums that worry
experts. Money allocated to infrastructure—particularly Congressional
earmarks—is usually for construction of new facilities, not
repairs. “They’d rather cut ribbons,” says Pablo
L. Durango-Cohen, an assistant professor of civil engineering at
Northwestern University. He adds that decisions of such importance
shouldn’t be based on public opinion, but often they are.
And in such a climate, repairs lose out because, as Natale notes,
“they are not sexy.”
The monumental size of America’s infrastructure challenges—and
the staggering sums required to mend things—also works against
financing, Miller says. “It’s mind-numbing. The public
just zones out.” To be sure, horrific events like the collapse
of I-35W focus public attention for a while, but as the stories
slip off the front pages, the urgency of the dilemma ebbs, as well.
Says Natale: “Our mentality is patch and pray. Is that wise?”
Definitely not, says Professor Samer Madanat, head of the Institute
of Transportation Studies at the University of California, Berkeley.
He stresses that a smarter way to tackle the problem and make use
of scarce funds can be found by dividing infrastructure management
into three categories: inspections, predictions, and decision-making.
Inspections, which include increased use of faster, automated, more
comprehensive high-tech sensors and detectors, allow engineers to
know the current status of any given system. “It’s a
lot more cost effective when you know where to dig,” explains
Anil Kumar Agrawal, a civil engineer at the City University of New
York. “Emergency repairs are always more costly.” Predictions
are made from advanced statistical models that calculate the probable
state of a system under different, future scenarios. And decision-making
“is juggling a lot of interests and resources,” Madanat
says, incorporating math-based optimization techniques to give planners
the tools to make the tradeoffs necessitated by tight budgets.
New technology
 |
| . |
The task of fixing the country’s decrepit infrastructure
systems is enormous. But academic engineers at schools around the
country are working on technologies to improve all three areas of
inspections, predictions, and decision-making. Ranging from high-tech
monitors to complex mathematical models to brand-new composite materials,
they are coming up with solutions that could not only make the job
easier but also improve future construction, maintenance, and repair.
For example, researchers are working on monitoring technologies
that will collect more data on a continuing, daily basis, such as
microsensors embedded in paints that change colors when trouble
is detected, and sensors that that will literally “phone home,”
calling engineers’ phones to report dangerous changes. It’s
expected that future sensors will also have the ability not only
to collect data, but analyze it and offer diagnoses. Research by
two Drexel University civil engineers shows that the existing technology
of a falling-weight deflectometer could be further developed to
help inspectors determine safe load capacities for aging concrete
bridges.
Meanwhile, University of Michigan engineers have developed a nanotechnology
“skin” that can be sprayed onto structures like a permanent
coating of paint. The skin is actually several layers of polymer,
each containing a network of nanotubes that measure something different:
pH levels and cracking at a minute scale, for instance. The skin’s
electrodes are connected to a microprocessor, and once it is activated
by an electric charge, it spits out a two-dimensional map that displays
underlying corrosion or cracking too small for humans to see.
The use of high-tech monitoring devices, including sensors that
utilize ultrasonics, acoustics and strain-monitoring to measure
corrosion, temperature changes, fatigue and erosion is a still-developing
area. But according to a recent study of monitoring technologies
by Iowa State University’s Bridge Engineering Center, most
monitors still rely on visual assessments, and need to be fitted
where damage is already known or expected to appear, which limits
their effectiveness.
If Minneapolis’ I-35W had been wired with a system to monitor
its condition, the data might have warned engineers in time to avert
the disaster. No one can say so with certainty, because a monitoring
system could have been hooked to parts of the bridge that didn’t
fail or show signs of potential failure. That said, Durango-Cohen
adds, “There are a few documented cases where sensors alerted
engineers that failure was about to occur before any signs would
have been detected with visual inspections.” Given that this
technology is still in its infancy, that’s encouraging.
While many of these technologies are being developed for bridges
and other above-ground structures, some could be adapted to pipelines.
And work on detection devices expressly for pipes is continuing
as well. At Carnegie-Mellon University’s Robotics Institute,
researchers have created a 5-foot-long, 4-inch-wide worm-shaped
robot intended to check for leaks and pools of seepage water. Fitted
with sensors and video cameras, the self-propelled Explorer can
scuttle through natural-gas pipelines, even making 90-degree turns,
inspecting whichever route it’s sent by wireless remote control.
Future versions might make repairs, too. The efficacy and logic
of robotic pipe inspections is obvious, but researchers say robots
could also be used to inspect parts of bridges that present hazards
to humans, such as the undersides of decks. NYU’s Zimmerman
cautions, however, that while sensors and robots are wonderful technologies,
they too are subject to the same harsh environments that wreak havoc
on infrastructure. “They can get mucked up, too,” she
cautions.
 |
Life’s Lessons
In the Classroom
When
engineering is in the news, it can give teachers useful
material. There are lessons to be learned from high-profile
failures like the collapse of Minneapolis’ I-35W
bridge, as well as from triumphs such as Maine’s
cutting-edge new Penobscot Narrows Bridge and Observatory.
“It
is common for engineering and science faculty to use
failures, especially highly-visible ones, to demonstrate
engineering and science principles,” explains
Jack Lohmann, editor of the Journal of Engineering Education
and vice provost for academic affairs at Georgia Tech.
And they’re on solid ground when they do. “There
is a lot of research on situated learning,” he
adds, “It basically shows, and not too surprisingly,
students learn better” when learning within a
context.
Anil
Kumar Agrawal, a City University of New York civil engineering
professor, agrees: “It is easy to get students
excited and involved in such projects, since we all
somehow connect to these events.” Moreover, “examples
of failures highlight the need to understand engineering
fundamentals.” Agrawal plans to use modeling of
I-35W in an undergraduate course on finite elements.
He also shows how engineers installed dampers to stop
the nauseating sway of London’s seven-year-old
Millennium Bridge. Engineering breakthroughs are also
useful because they focus student attention on the latest
research and industry innovations.
The
Penobscot Narrows span demonstrates the use of a new
cable system that allows for stronger stays, easier
inspection and replacement, as well as carbon-composite
strands that last longer than conventional steel strands.
While
more recent developments catch students’ attention,
some examples are so extraordinary they’ve become
classics, like the 1940 collapse of the Tacoma Narrows
Bridge in Washington, which was brought down by wind-induced
vibrations. Because the entire, stomach-churning collapse
was captured on film, it remains one of most infamous
bridge failures in the world–and one that can
keep even YouTube-generation students riveted. —TG
|
|
Prediction: Science and Art
Though planners must know the current state of structures, it’s
also helpful for them to know how things may change in the future,
depending on conditions. So prediction technology is not just crunching
numbers, says Berkeley’s Madanat. “Prediction is a combination
of science and art in many ways.” Researchers need to have
a full understanding of the materials being scrutinized, such as
concrete or asphalt, and how they’re affected by such variables
as heat, cold and chloride. “Science by itself is not sufficient,”
Madanat adds, “What you can do in a lab is not the same as
what you can do in the field, because it’s hard to replicate
the environmental factors.”
To address this issue, advanced statistical models combine physical
measurements from the lab with observations made in the field. One
leading practitioner is Ohio State University’s Rabi Mishalani,
an assistant professor of civil and environmental engineering. He’s
working on models that can, for example, predict how a road will
deteriorate over time, taking in such variables as design and construction
standards, as well as location.
Ongoing materials research is also yielding ways to improve and
expand the life of structures. For example, researchers are devising
improved composite materials. Sheets of fiber-reinforced polymer
(FRP) composites can now be epoxied onto bridge piers and pillars,
protecting them from erosion and corrosion. The sheets are akin
to wallpaper, and are epoxied onto the concrete.
As a result, says Houssam A. Toutanji, an associate professor of
civil engineering at the University of Alabama, Huntsville, the
strength of existing concrete can be rendered 50 percent stronger
than its original composition. That’s because FRPs are more
resistant to corrosion, particularly the kind created by road salt
or saline water. FRPs are so new that researchers are still testing
and modeling to determine how long they’ll last in situ. Yet
Toutanji predicts that in some cases, the sheets may endure for
25 years.
The weak link in FRP technology is the glue, so another vital area
of research comes in developing epoxies that form stronger bonds.
Beneath the concrete, yet another new technology is the use of graphite
rebars in place of steel. Not only is graphite more resistant to
salt and the elements, it’s 10 times stronger than steel and
five times lighter. But it’s also very brittle, so if cracks
appear, “it could be catastrophic,” says Huntsville
engineering professor John Gilbert. Thus, “monitoring has
to be great.”
Nonetheless, engineering researchers continue to devise technologies
that will radically change how future infrastructure is built. So-called
“smart structures” would be constructed with materials
that have sensors embedded in them, using, for example, fiber optics
technology. Another exciting possibility is self-healing concrete
that can repair itself when cracks occur by activating small capsules
containing bonding agents. “That is absolutely the future,”
Toutanji says.
The next generation of structures, particularly bridges, may also
be built from “cementitious” materials—cement
to which other materials have been added, such as lightweight aggregates,
silicon or polymers. These materials are being designed to be both
strong and impact- and bomb-resistant. “They’re more
flexible and not so brittle” as regular concrete, Toutanji
says. NYU’s Zimmerman is confident that researchers will also
come up with designs to make the inevitable repairs simpler. “We
need to build infrastructure in a way that it can be maintained
more easily going into the future.” Since so much infrastructure
needs to be underground, that means designing pipelines that aren’t
so difficult to reach. “We need easier access than jackhammering
asphalt,” she says.
The third category of Manadat’s equation of inspections,
predictions and decision-making entails determining where and how
to spend maintenance funds. And there’s nothing easy about
it. Decision-making involves many tradeoffs, since planning managers
rarely have the money to do everything that needs to be done. Juggling
work on hundreds of thousands of miles of roadways and thousands
of bridges is a complex task.
Madanat and Durango-Cohen say managers too often rely on priority
lists and do maintenance and repairs on a “worst-first”
basis. But that’s wrong way to do it. “It’s reactive
and myopic and clearly not efficient”—let alone cost-effective,
Durango-Cohen argues. Often, Madanat explains, it’s better
to spend small amounts doing maintenance on relatively young facilities.
For example, newer pavement will have relatively few cracks, and
these are usually small. But as water seeps into those tiny fissures,
they enlarge. That’s why the rate of deterioration greatly
accelerates as pavement ages. Thus, spending small sums early to
fix tiny cracks before they age, grow and become major problems
can lengthen the life of pavement and saves big bucks.
Durango-Cohen says civil engineers too often favor infrastructure
replacement over routine, preventive maintenance. Instead, the goal
should be to increase the lifespan of structures. A good analogy,
he says, is the aircraft industry, where rigorous, ongoing maintenance
keeps commercial aircraft flying safely for decades.
And that’s where advanced numerical methods of optimization
and decision-making software come in. The notion of using computers
to help manage assets goes back to the 1950s, and began being used
for highway systems in the 1980s. As the first state to apply optimization
techniques, Arizona saved hundreds of thousands of dollars a year
by spending maintenance money more wisely. Since then, the techniques
have not only been used by other states, but applied successfully
to the management of sewer lines and tunnels.
Today, researchers are busily working to improve decision-making
software—like Durango-Cohen’s adaptation of signal-processing
techniques. He stresses that the computerized help is just that:
help—a tool that can guide, but shouldn’t be expected
to replace, human managers. Nevertheless, one barrier to its more
widespread use has been a fear among managers that software programs
would make them redundant. He concludes, “It remains to be
seen if decision-makers and politicians will be willing to use these
tools.”
While engineers can’t do much about chronic underfunding,
they are developing technologies that could help cash-strapped agencies
get more done for less money. “These things hold a lot of
promise,” says Rae Zimmerman, director of the Institute for
Civil Infrastructure Systems at New York University.
While too little money may be earmarked for maintenance, there
are funds available for infrastructure research projects. “This
area is reasonably well-funded,” Madanat says, particularly
in the transportation and electrical-systems sectors. The least
funded research areas tend to be water and wastewater systems, mainly
because the money for those typically comes from municipalities,
which are often at the mercy of small, tight budgets. But many breakthroughs
developed for highway and bridge maintenance—particularly
inspection and prediction methods—are easily adapted to water
and sewage systems. “There’s a lot of cross-fertilization,”
Madanat says.
Yet Agrawal warns that, even though federal and state transportation
departments are willing to fund research, they usually pay for development
of near-term technologies, not for science, where possible applications
are 10 years down the road.
It seems likely that technologies emerging from academic labs will
ease the overwhelming goal of refurbishing America’s sagging
infrastructure. But researchers have their work cut out for them.
Despite the tremendous advances being made in research, there is
still a great deal more to done, even at the most basic level. Three
months after Minneapolis’ I-35W bridge groaned, heaved and
plunged into the Mississippi’s swift currents, it’s
still not clear what caused the structure to fail. As the threat
of the aging infrastructure increases with each passing day, researchers
must race to find answers. Otherwise, we may be on the road to more
ruin and more deadly catastrophes.
Thomas K. Grose is a freelance writer based in London.
TOPˆ
|