officedweller said:
Is that bridge built in steel so it can be removed if ever there's a very tall railway load coming through on the line underneath?
(otherwise, you'd think they'd build it as a continuation of the viaduct, which appears like it will be in concrete.)
Click to expand...

There will never be a load that high, because the dimensions of every other bridge on the line limits what they need here.

But, the maintenance needs may be different, and span length will be different, and CP may have had a preference about how the bridge is built over their line.

The viaduct portion terminates there anyways, it doesn’t continue to the north.

- Paul
 
Building the span in steel means it can be lifted into place in-between CP trains, without interrupting freight operations. Doing it in concrete would mean setting up forms, rebar work, pouring, curing, tearing down forms, all of which is so much more disruptive I assume it would be a non-starter for CP.
 
I would think that the steel structure with side panels distributes the load differently (i.e. compression along the top of those side panels which are structural, not aesthetic or railing replacements) so the overall height of the rail on the bridge can be lower while maintaining the same amount of clearance. If the overpass was concrete then to get the same clearance the top of rail on the overpass would need to be higher (which means the trains and top of structure would be higher) which also means either increasing the gradient of the approaches or having longer approaches.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top