I found this series on YouTube about the construction of the Cypress Freeway (I-880) in Oakland. This is the most complete views I have ever seen of what it actually looked like before it collapsed. The link is the last of the five with the most "complete" videos. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kZNBzfTAbFw
Check out the CREEPY tapered columns on the upper deck and how much those crazy things were holding up. Those tapered columns tell me why the Embarcadero (built with normal columns in 1961) did not collapse while this one did. It is amazing it didn't collapse BEFORE the earthquake with its incredibly shoddy design, which is described in detail all the way through. I would love to hear any mtr engineers commentary on what in all was wrong with this design. What I knew that stood out was the shallow columns, weak columns on upper structure and the reinforcement even looked poor.
> Check out the CREEPY tapered columns on the upper deck and how much > those crazy things were holding up. Those tapered columns tell me why > the Embarcadero (built with normal columns in 1961) did not collapse > while this one did. It is amazing it didn't collapse BEFORE the > earthquake with its incredibly shoddy design, which is described in > detail all the way through. I would love to hear any mtr engineers > commentary on what in all was wrong with this design. What I knew > that stood out was the shallow columns, weak columns on upper > structure and the reinforcement even looked poor.
Tapered columns have nothing to do with why the Cypress Viaduct collapsed. Look at all the freeways built today (including in earthquake-prone zones) with column shafts which taper from top to bottom.
Basically, the Cypress Viaduct collapsed because its design, which was finalized in 1953 and was considered to have three times the strength it needed to handle the seismic loadings then accepted for design, did not take into account the amplified ground motions which resulted from the poorly consolidated soils in that part of Oakland.
The Cypress was also built without shear keys connecting the lower deck to the columns and the upper deck. Shear keys are basically lengths of reinforced concrete which are designed to oppose shearing stresses. In the case of the Cypress during the Loma Prieta earthquake, the shearing stresses came from the lower deck responding to seismic loading by moving in one direction, while the columns holding the upper deck tried to stay in the same place due to inertia. Because there was no steel reinforcement to resist the shear stresses at the column bases, there was just unreinforced concrete in those locations to oppose the cyclic loading caused by the earthquake.
Concrete is very strong in compression but very weak in tension, which is why steel reinforcement has to be provided whenever concrete is likely to be in tension. Thus, after a suitable number of cycles of alternating tension and compression, the concrete just crumbled and that in turn caused the columns to fail and the upper deck to come pancaking down.
There were localized areas of the viaduct which collapsed in a different way due to other mechanisms which came into play because of different local ground conditions. But, as a generalization, the majority of the viaduct came down because of the missing shear keys. They simply were not provided at the time of design in 1953 because they were not considered to be necessary.
On Jul 4, 8:51 am, XOZ <garoadwarrio...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> I found this series on YouTube about the construction of the Cypress > Freeway (I-880) in Oakland. This is the most complete views I have > ever seen of what it actually looked like before it collapsed. The > link is the last of the five with the most "complete" videos.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kZNBzfTAbFw
> Check out the CREEPY tapered columns on the upper deck and how much > those crazy things were holding up. Those tapered columns tell me why > the Embarcadero (built with normal columns in 1961) did not collapse > while this one did. It is amazing it didn't collapse BEFORE the > earthquake with its incredibly shoddy design, which is described in > detail all the way through. I would love to hear any mtr engineers > commentary on what in all was wrong with this design. What I knew > that stood out was the shallow columns, weak columns on upper > structure and the reinforcement even looked poor.
freeway...@bellsouth.net wrote: > On Jul 4, 8:51 am, XOZ <garoadwarrio...@yahoo.com> wrote: >> I found this series on YouTube about the construction of the Cypress >> Freeway (I-880) in Oakland. This is the most complete views I have
I mlived in the Bay Area for many years, ending,it turns out, in 1989.
At no time did I ever hear the Nimitz Freeway (I880) referred to as the Cypress Freeway.
There was a Cypress Street Viaduct, I think.
-- Requiescas in pace o email Two identifying characteristics of System Administrators: Ex turpi causa non oritur actio Infallibility, and the ability to learn from their mistakes. Eppure si rinfresca
> > Check out the CREEPY tapered columns on the upper deck and how much > > those crazy things were holding up. Those tapered columns tell me why > > the Embarcadero (built with normal columns in 1961) did not collapse > > while this one did. It is amazing it didn't collapse BEFORE the > > earthquake with its incredibly shoddy design, which is described in > > detail all the way through. I would love to hear any mtr engineers > > commentary on what in all was wrong with this design. What I knew > > that stood out was the shallow columns, weak columns on upper > > structure and the reinforcement even looked poor.
> Tapered columns have nothing to do with why the Cypress Viaduct > collapsed. Look at all the freeways built today (including in > earthquake-prone zones) with column shafts which taper from top to bottom.
> Basically, the Cypress Viaduct collapsed because its design, which was > finalized in 1953 and was considered to have three times the strength it > needed to handle the seismic loadings then accepted for design, did not > take into account the amplified ground motions which resulted from the > poorly consolidated soils in that part of Oakland.
> The Cypress was also built without shear keys connecting the lower deck > to the columns and the upper deck. Shear keys are basically lengths of > reinforced concrete which are designed to oppose shearing stresses. In > the case of the Cypress during the Loma Prieta earthquake, the shearing > stresses came from the lower deck responding to seismic loading by > moving in one direction, while the columns holding the upper deck tried > to stay in the same place due to inertia. Because there was no steel > reinforcement to resist the shear stresses at the column bases, there > was just unreinforced concrete in those locations to oppose the cyclic > loading caused by the earthquake.
> Concrete is very strong in compression but very weak in tension, which > is why steel reinforcement has to be provided whenever concrete is > likely to be in tension. Thus, after a suitable number of cycles of > alternating tension and compression, the concrete just crumbled and that > in turn caused the columns to fail and the upper deck to come pancaking > down.
> There were localized areas of the viaduct which collapsed in a different > way due to other mechanisms which came into play because of different > local ground conditions. But, as a generalization, the majority of the > viaduct came down because of the missing shear keys. They simply were > not provided at the time of design in 1953 because they were not > considered to be necessary.
Did the Embarcadero have shear keys? Is this why it did NOT collapse? If it did not, then it would stand reason the columns were still an issue. If it did, then that makes sense. I have always heard they were near identical in design, and the only difference I saw was that the top deck on the Embarcadero carried far less weight (two lanes opposed to four) and the columns were equal lengthwise and widthwise top to bottom.
> Did the Embarcadero have shear keys? Is this why it did NOT > collapse? If it did not, then it would stand reason the columns were > still an issue. If it did, then that makes sense. I have always > heard they were near identical in design, and the only difference I > saw was that the top deck on the Embarcadero carried far less weight > (two lanes opposed to four) and the columns were equal lengthwise and > widthwise top to bottom.
I don't know if the Embarcadero had shear keys; the construction plans for it have not been put on the Web and I am not aware of any publicly available studies of its structural design. (In contradistinction, there are a number of reports online dealing with the reasons for the Cypress Viaduct's collapse--see links below.) While the reasons you describe would have played a role, I think the Embarcadero was saved by different ground conditions.
The overriding point is that all of the double-decker freeways in the Bay Area that did not collapse had a narrow escape. This is why they have since all been substantially modified or demolished. Part of the Century Freeway lost its second story while the tail end was demolished, the entire Embarcadero was demolished, the Bay Bridge west approach viaduct is being reconstructed and seismically retrofitted, the Bay Bridge east span is being replaced, etc.
Some research reports on the Cypress Viaduct collapse can be found here: