The document discusses the development of a Bridge Management System for Logan City Council in Australia. It provides background on Logan City Council's bridge assets, which increased significantly after an amalgamation that added rural areas with 19 timber bridges. It outlines the need for a Bridge Management System to effectively manage the bridges over their lifecycles. It also discusses inspections that were conducted, load limits that were put in place for bridges, community impacts, the design and replacement of the Edwards Bridge, and funding received through the Roads Alliance to improve bridge asset management.

1. Towards Bridge Management System: Functional
Specification, Technical Requirements and Evaluation
Ashish Shah, Road Asset Management Program Leader

2. Building a bridge between
Indonesia and Australia
Funding Announced by: in April, 2012 by AusAid
• Indonesia is a long way from Marlborough in Victoria
but thanks to an AusAID funded (BRIDGE) program ,
• through the Australia-Indonesia ‘Building Relations
through Intercultural Dialogue and Growing
Engagement’ (BRIDGE) program, teachers have build
a connection (i.e. bridge) among them
• Source: http://www.ausaid.gov.au/HotTopics/Pages/Display.aspx?QID=569

3. BRIDGE GRANTS
GUIDELINES - BRIDGE PROMOTION
GRANTS by Australian Bridge
Federation
• To assist its State and Territory members
to raise the profile of bridge in Australia
and increase the number of people both
playing and learning how to play bridge.
Source: AUSTRALIAN BRIDGE FEDERATION INC website

4. Not quite right??

5. Bit closer !!!
• Bridges and major culverts in a Roads &
Transport System in Local Government
context
Definition
• A structure (with a span or diameter 1.8 m or
greater, and /or waterway area 3 sqm or greater)
carrying a road, path, railroad, or canal across a
river, ravine, road, railroad, or other obstacle

6. Bridge Management System
A Local Government with a mix Urban Rural
environment having concrete and timber bridges,
concrete and steel major culverts and even an iconic
steel bridge
– such as ours, Logan City Council

7. Logan City Council
– heart of South East Queensland
– In between Brisbane and Gold
Coast
– 6th
largest Council in Australia
– 280,000 residents
– 957 sq km

8. Logan City Council
– $4.2 billion in assets
– 2,136 kilometres of roads
(including 85 kilometres of
unsealed roads)
– 50* bridges
– 871 parks and reserves
– 110,000 rateable properties

9. Current Bridge Stock
Type No.
Timber Bridges
(Incl 3 doolan deck)
14
Other Timber
(now abandoned/closed)
4
Steel Bridge 1
Concrete Bridges 31

10. Australian context!
• Approx 40,000 bridges in Australia
• Approx. 27,000 are aging timber bridges
(most of which are in Local Government)
• An essential part of our transport
infrastructure
• most 70+ years old

11. Timber Bridges !
• Possibly designed for 18t
• Now may carry up to or 44t plus!
• Asset value in excess of $25B
• An important part of our history with social
& cultural significance

12. QLD Amalgamation
Prior March 2008
• No timber bridges or a steel bridge….
– No in-house bridge crew or expertise
– No high maintenance intensive bridges
After
– Inherited rural areas with 19 timber bridges
– A iconic Red Bridge

13. What we did?

14. What we achieved?
• Rehabilitation of priority issues in timber
bridges
• Replacement of Edward Bridge (delivered)
• Replacement of Edward O Neil and Jones
Bridge (under design/ investigation)
• Pub Lane, Scott Lane (under design/
investigation)

15. All good?
• And miles to go before I sleep
– BY Robert Frost 1874–1963
• Awake, arise and stop not until goal is
reached……..
– Swami Vivekananda 1863 – 1902
• Goal is effective * management (for whole
of life cycle)
• * Not using Asset

16. Semantics
• Even before it matures…..Asset is more
financial driven term, industry even is
pushing focus on SERVICE that “Asset” or
“Entity” provides rather.
• Financial term and hence focus and not
integrated multi disciplinary feel…..

17. Semantics
• Even our friendly industry peers from
Information Technology or Business
Analysts
• tries to tag them to enterprise wide Asset
system talking finance as a main
consideration rather than suiting the
business of infrastructure life cycle mgmt

18. Why Bridge Mgmt System
• Internal review (2010)
– Dropped the concept, not too many bridges,
not a priority
• Re-focus through Regional Roads Group
(Road Alliance funding for advancing the
bridge inspections, training and bridge
management system)

19. Bridge Management System
Justifying Bridge (including Major Culverts)
Management System - benefits vs costs
– Functional specification - system features
– Technical requirements - asset management
aspects
– Evaluation, key considerations and
advanced/desired features

20. Getting IT along on journey
• Recent Bridge Asset Management System
Discussion
• Fresh Business Analyst: Why not you consider
our XYZ financial asset system, it has most of
our assets?
– Does not meet our business needs, it needs…….
• It is good to have integration with finance
system, single point of truth…blah blah blah…

21. Simple ISS analogy
• Explained him technical requirements,
which I believe was outside his norms
• A simple analogy strike, let me use his
language…..
• Please do not tag all assets, under
umbrella “asset”, they are different

22. Simple ISS analogy
• How many systems do we have?
– GIS system, Payroll/finance system, contract
management system, record/document management
system, ISS helpdesk system, Microsoft office
applications
• Okay lets take Office applications
– Can you write a letter in excel? Yes
– Can you develop a power point in Word? Yes
– Can you make table to do some in Word? Yes
• Would you?? No…
• Why??.... Same logic applies to management of
distinguish assets, one can make them fit but it
will be ineffective

23. Learnings (from others) and
Continuous Improvement
• Exploring safety, technical and life cycle
management (Inspections - inconsistency,
lack of skills and escalation)

24. Information Standards
• Understanding information standard and
systems to enable seamless, transparent
and integrated state/national approach
•

25. Innovative methods
/processes
• Delivering preservation outcomes through
proven/ innovative methods
• Innovation = positive change, not invention

26. Inspections
– Queensland Rail managers 'falsified' rail bridge safety inspections
on Central West line
• TWO Queensland Rail managers are facing a misconduct probe for
allegedly falsifying bridge inspection records, sparking the shutdown of a
major rural line amid safety concerns.
• QR is now urgently assessing more than 70 wooden bridges along the
Central West rail line amid fears they may have been dangerously neglected.
• Timber piers on one bridge have already failed under the weight of a ballast
train, causing a derailment in February at the Darr River crossing, near
Longreach. No one was injured but the incident sparked a wider investigation,
which indicated routine underwater inspections had not been done, despite
being signed off up to 18 months ago.
• Two Central West bridge maintenance managers have now been referred to
the Crime and Misconduct Commission, which ordered QR to investigate the
possibility of misconduct. The state's rail safety regulator will also investigate.
One manager has resigned but will still be investigated. The other has been
stood down.
– Queensland Bridges Unsafe After Bogus Inspections

27. QLD Amalgamation
Prior March 2008
• No timber bridges…. Bingo!!!!
– No in-house bridge crew or expertise
– No highly maintenance intensive bridges
After
– Inherited rural areas with 19 timber bridges

28. Inspections
– On Aug. 1, 2007, rush-hour traffic moved along the
Interstate 35 West bridge in Minneapolis. Suddenly,
most of the bridge broke off and fell into the Mississippi
River, killing 13 people and injuring 145. It was one of
the worst bridge disasters in U.S. history.
The bridge had passed federal inspections for years,
the National Transportation Safety Board found.

29. What have we got?
What have we inherited and its health to drive
Drilling Surveys
• Undertaken by Scenic Rim Regional Council’s bridge crew as
contractor
• Determined the extent of sound timber remaining
Lvl 3 - Structural Condition Inspections
• Undertaken by NJA Consulting Pty Ltd - the structural engineers
who had historical knowledge and experience
• Considered all the previously documented information
• Assessed the field performance of components and connections

30. Condition Inspections
Lvl 3 inspections, outcome
• Defects and extent of sound timber
remaining
• Medium term replacement and
rehabilitation funding requirements
• Prioritisation of treatment options – short
term and,
• Avoid further damage, keep it safe and
functional by introducing Load Limits!!!!!

31. Seeking funding
Sought $10 over 5 yrs
• Confirm $2m each for first 2 yrs
• Indicative for the next 3
• Prioritisation
– Short term vs long term
• Traffic with % heavy,
• Condition, Load limit
• Lvl 3 report treatments suggested and verified
• Whole of life cycle costs
• Future growth

32. Load Limit Categories
Maximum Mass Limit = 15 tonnes
6 Axle Semi-Trailer (42.5t) 3 Axle Rigid Truck with 3
Axle Dog Trailer (42.5t)
2 Axle Rigid Truck & School Bus 3 Axle Rigid Truck & Bus (22.5t)
Maximum Mass Limit = 25 tonnes
Maximum Mass Limit = 43 tonnes (No Restriction)

33. NS Challenge II – load limits
Name Limit
recommended
Teese 43T
Tully 22T
Woodhill Rail 30T
Wilbraham 20T
Woollaman 6T
Millers 8T
Name Limit
recommended
Chardon Bridge 20T
Darcy Edmonds
Bridge
25T
Edwards O’Neill 22T
Edwards 15T
Freeman 43T
Heck 36T
Jones 25T

34. NS Challenge II – load limits
Name Limit
recommended
Teese 43T
Tully 22T
Woodhill Rail 30T
Wilbraham 20T
Woollaman 6T
Millers 8T
Name Limit
recommended
Chardon Bridge 20T
Darcy Edmonds
Bridge
25T
Edwards O’Neill 22T
Edwards 15T
Freeman 43T
Heck 36T
Jones 25T

37. Edwards Bridge
• 20 m, 2 span
• 2 lane
• 6.3m wide
• Built some time
during the last
century

39. Edwards Bridge
• Single access
point east
• School
• Shops
• Approx 10,000
vpd with a 13 %
of commercial
vehicles

40. Edwards Bridge
• Nov 2007 repair work carried out by BSC over 2
weekends causing major community disquiet

41. May 2010
• Keep it safe n
functional

42. 15T load limit

43. 15T load limit
What it means for a group of Community
• Money
– $1.9 Toll through Logan Mwy
• Travel
– Ison Rd to Brisbane
• Extra 14.5 km
– Ison Rd to Beaudesert/Gold Coast
• Extra 32.5 km
– Ipswich to Beaudesert/Gold Coast
• Extra 11 km

50. Temporary bypass Link
• What it means for Community
– No consultation or impact study
– No opportunity to object
– Other 3 small bridges in the route
– Another alternate
– Future use (wont be temp)
– Curfew time (6pm to 6am)

51. Temporary bypass Link
• What it means for Community
– Noise
– Safety for kids/wildlife/pets
– Safety of house in a tight curve
– Paid for residential quite area now will have
commercial trucks
– Level of usage
– Speed
– Extra damage to roads, guarantee us repairs
– Property prices

52. Ongoing Consultation
• Monthly report on progress to Council
• Bi-weekly visual inspection
• Regular media releases on updates
• Monthly traffic data collection (first few
months) - Link
– Letters back with findings
• Traffic data - Bridge
– Compliance

53. Design and replacement
• Criteria
– Expedite the work
– Short term (15-20 yrs life) - another criteria
due to future re-alignment / development/
growth
• In ULDA corridor (of Flagstone/Yaarabilba)
– Possibility /flexibility of re-use
• Light weight/ low cost
– GFC/ Floods/ Natural disaster
• Availability of contractors

54. Neighbourhood stakeholder

55. Design and replacement
• Sept 2010
– Specification nutted out
• Oct 2010
– Decided for light weight steel frame system,
details being finalised
– Army got involved , design changed to T44 or
SM1600

56. Design and replacement
• Nov 2010
– Contract details being ironed out
– Professional Indemnity Insurance issue
– Project specific bridge insurance sought
• Jan 2011
– Bridge contractor withdrew
• Feb 2011
– Back to Council to resolve for expression of
interest – Design and Construct – whole of life
cycle costs consideration

57. Design and replacement
• April 2011
– Expression of interest in papers
– 15T reaffirmed with suggested minor
treatments
• May/June 2011
– NDT testing and possible repairs
• June 2012
– Optimistic opening of replacement bridge

58. 15T for next 12 months
• 15T reiterated in April 2011 with suggested
treatments required
• Traffic data - Bridge
– A few illegal pass overs
– Help from Police
• Occasional watch, no penalties yet
– Legal advise on enforcement through local law
• NDT testing and temp strengthening repairs –
June 2012
– To keep safe and 15T for next 12 months

59. Other points
• Insurance and flooding risks
– Replacement cost (timber or modern concrete
bridge) vs construction cost of say 60 yr old
timber bridge
– New height/ alignment/higher load capacity
– Safety improvements
• Seeking insurance quote currently, will the
premium reasonable/affordable or good to
self insure?

60. Inspections
• Exploring safety, technical and life
cycle management (Inspections -
inconsistency, lack of skills and
escalation)

61. Do we need "the belt and
suspenders,"

62. Insurance of Bridges

63. Red Bridge - Proactive

64. Drivers – Bridge Info standards
• Roads Alliance Toolkit 2003
• Asset Management System Service
2008
• Road Alliance Board Funding 2012
for Bridge AM System (rather BMS!!)

65. Asset
Information Standards
Asset Management Systems
• The systems tender pre-qualifies asset management system suppliers who meet the
Roads
• Alliance specifications, are able to link to financial systems, address all asset classes
and export
• data in a format suitable for upload into the Roads Alliance Hub. The following
providers have been
• appointed to supply asset management systems to councils.
• • ARRB Group
• • Asset Lifecycle Management Pty Ltd
• • Assetic Australia Pty Ltd
• • Assetta Australia Pty Ltd
• • Civica Pty Ltd
• • Jeff Roorda & Associates
• • Snowy Mountains Engineering
• Corporation (SMEC)
• • TechnologyOne Limited
• • Tolerro Pty Ltd

66. BAM through Roads Alliance
• In December 2011, the Roads Alliance
Board supported funding from the State
wide Capability Development Fund for
RRGs to improve their Bridge Asset
Management.
• The Transport and Main Roads (TMR)
Bridge Inventory System (BIS), which is
used to manage TMR’s bridge and
significant structural assets and provides
the basis to manage heavy freight tasks,

67. Funding for
• This funding is to predominately be used
for:
· specialist structural inspections,
· training and/or
· to purchase a BAM system.

68. • Structural inspections
These investigations can include load rating of bridges, fatigue studies and remaining life
estimation, particularly with regard to heavy vehicle usage.
Training
Types of training include:
· Routine maintenance inspections (Level 1)
· Detailed component condition inspection (Level 2)
· Preparation of a bridge works program
· Bridge asset management, for example, Austroads “Guide to Asset Management Part 6: Bridge
Performance”.
BAM system
The Roads Alliance has not pre-approved or endorsed any BAM systems. A specification is being
developed for RRGs to select an appropriate BAM system. The specification will set out the
minimum data set of general inventory information items for bridge structures, inspection and
maintenance information and a standard set of reports that the system should be able to
generate. The specification will be sent to all RRGs by mid March.

69. Inspection and Training
• Structural inspections
These investigations can include load rating of bridges,
fatigue studies and remaining life estimation, particularly
with regard to heavy vehicle usage.
• Training
Types of training include:
· Routine maintenance inspections (Level 1)
· Detailed component condition inspection (Level 2)
· Preparation of a bridge works program
· Bridge asset management, for example, Austroads
“Guide to Asset Management Part 6: Bridge
Performance”.

70. BAM system
The Roads Alliance has not pre-approved or endorsed
any BAM systems.
• A specification is provided for RRGs to select an
appropriate BAM system.
• The specification set out the minimum data set of
general inventory information items for bridge structures,
inspection and maintenance information and a standard
set of reports that the system should be able to
generate.

71. BAM - Spec

72. Minimum data set - Austroads

73. BAM minimum data sets

74. A bridge risk assessment tool is mandatory in a BAM system.
• TMR uses ‘WhichBridge’ Risk Based Prioritisation Methodology and
Software Tool as the basis for its BAM system.
• It is a system that was developed in conjunction with ARRB, and
uses a risk based prioritisation methodology and
• has been integrated with the department’s BIS. The software ranks
the bridge stock in descending order of risk as
• assessed by a multi-criteria quantification process of various
structural, road network, social and economic factors.
• It is not a requirement that RRGs use “WhichBridge” within their
BAM system. However, the algorithm can be made
• available to Councils on request.

75. Risk and Works program
• RRGs may wish to adopt their own risk
based prioritisation assessment based on
their types of bridge stock, environment
and traffic composition and volumes for
instance.

76. Risk and Works program
• An optional tool that Councils may include in
their BAM system is a program that examines
the variation of a bridge rating when different
maintenance options are applied. The program
helps to prioritise works order and achieve best
value for money by allocating funds and
resources to the most critical areas/components.
• This tool is considered optional for small RRGs
and highly desirable for large RRGs.

77. Minimum reports required:
• Structure listing: identification details, structure
type, materials, road number, road name,
location, etc.
• Structure details: overview, location, geometry,
environment, hydraulics, deficiencies, and
photographs
• Design loading
• Modified structure
• Inspection summary (Including bridge element
inventory and condition data)
• Condition rating

78. Minimum reports required:
• 7. Inspections program and overdue inspections
• 8. Listing of structures with no inspection data
• 9. Components in poor condition
• 10. Completed inspections
• 11. Maintenance activities detail listing (bridge or
job)
• 12. Details of all level 1, 2 and 3 inspections

79. Minimum reports required:
Various inspection reports, including:
• structure condition inspection report,
• defective components report
• standard procedure exceptions report
• photographic and sketches record
• timber drilling survey reports.

80. Optional, based on
RRG requirements
The following reports are :
• Trends in inspection
• Progress of the bridge and culvert
inspection program
• Trends in bridge condition
• Bridge and culvert inspection status
• Mapping of the bridge data

81. Further considerations
in assessing BAM systems
• Training of staff to use BAM system
including inspector training and
inputting/updating data (if inspectors are to
enter data directly into BAM system)
• Palm pilot/iPad style technology for data
input on site
• The cost of software and ongoing
maintenance

82. Further considerations
• The significant cost of data collection and
input which will generally be more than
current requirements
• RRG may want to include financial
management i.e. remaining useful life of
structures, bridge deterioration modelling
for planning future capital replacements
and revaluations.
• Some Councils may wish to include gantry
structures in their BAM system

83. Funding approved
• Details on the funds available for each of
your Group’s BAM proposals are listed in
the table below.
RRG Nature of request Estimated costs ($) Subsidy ($)
Southern
Level 2 training $ 2,470.00 $ 1,235.00
Level 3 inspections $ 20,863.00 $ 10,431.50
BAM software $116,667.00 $ 58,333.50
Total
$ 70,000.00

84. Thanks
Contacts:
• Ashish Shah, Program Leader, Road Asset Management
– AshishShah@logan.qld.gov.au
– Ph: 07 3412 4930