US 278 Cursory Bridge Inspection

Cursory Above Water and Underwater
Investigation Of
US 278 East Bound and West Bound

Over
MacKay Creek and Skull Creek

In
Hilton Head, South Carolina
Bridges over MacKay Creek
Bridges over Skull Creek
Prepared by:
1180 Sam Rittenberg Blvd, Suite 105

Charleston, South Carolina 29407
(843) 763-1576 phone
(843) 763-1582 fax
www.collinsengr.com Collins Project No. 6336-40
US 278 WBL and EBL
Over MacKay Creek and Skull Creek
Cursory Above Water and Underwater Investigation of
US 278 West Bound and US 278 East Bound Bridges

Prepared by:
Collins Engineers, Inc.
1180 Sam Rittenberg Blvd, Suite 105
Charleston, South Carolina 29407
SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT FINDINGS
Inspection Date: February 11 and 12, 2010
Significant Conditions Observed:

• US 278 West Bound over MacKay Creek
o Crack up to 3/4 in. wide and 10 ft long located on the bottom of the pile
cap at Bent 2.
o Spall measuring 18 in. by 1 ft with 1.5 in. of penetration was located on the
bottom of the pile cap at Bent 2.
o The southernmost pile at Bent 2 exhibited 1/8 in. wide cracks with rust
stains around all faces of the pile.
• US 278 East Bound over MacKay Creek
o Random cracks ranging in width from 1/8 in. up to 1/2 in. wide with rust
stains located on the piles and pile jackets.
o Minor cracks and spalls in the superstructure beams.
o A spall measuring 3 ft long by 1 ft wide with exposed reinforcing steel was
located on the bottom of Beam 6 at Span 29.
• US 278 West Bound over Skull Creek
o Approximately 5 ft of vertical undermining of the pier at the east side of the
navigation channel.
o Footing and seal exposure of the upstream nose of the pier at the west
side of the navigation channel.
o Missing section of the timber fender system at the west side of the
navigation channel.
o Cracks up to 1/4 in. wide with rust stains located on the bottom of a
majority of the pile cap footings for the approach piers.
o Light to moderate corrosion of the cross bracing between the steel plate
girders.
o Spall measuring 2 ft long by 10 in. wide with three in. of penetration
located on the top of the concrete barrier rail at east end of the bridge.
Collins Project No. 6336-40

Page 1
US 278 WBL and EBL
SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT FINDINGS (Cont.)
• US 278 East Bound over Skull Creek

o Footing and seal exposure of the pier at the east side of the navigation
channel.
o A void between the footing and seal measuring 12 in. vertical with 18 in.
penetration and one exposed H-pile on the pier at the east side of the
navigation channel.
o Cracks up to 1/4 in. wide with rust stains located on the bottom of a
majority of the pile cap footings for the approach piers.
o Light to moderate corrosion of the cross bracing between the steel plate
girders.
SUMMARY OF BRIDGE RATINGS
Bridge Deck Superstructure Substructure

MacKay Creek WBL 7 6 6
MacKay Creek EBL 7 5 5
Skull Creek WBL 7 6 5
Skull Creek EBL 7 6 5

Page 2
US 278 WBL and EBL
1.0 INTRODUCTION
SCDOT Bridge Inspection Program
According to the Federal Highway Administration a bridge is defined as ”A structure

including supports erected over a depression or an obstruction, such as water, highway,
or railway, and having a track or passageway for carrying traffic or other moving loads,
and having an opening measured along the center of the roadway of more that 20 feet
between undercopings of abutments or spring lines of arches, or extreme ends of
openings for multiple boxes; it may also include multiple pipes where the clear distance
between openings is less than half of the smaller contiguous openings.”
In accordance with Federal Highway Administration guidelines, the South Carolina

Department of Transportation inspects their bridges at intervals not to exceed 24
months for above water inspections and 60 months for underwater inspections. These
inspections are based on the Recording and Coding Guide for the Structure Inventory
and Appraisal of the Nation’s Bridges. This publication is governed by the National
Bridge Inspection Standards (NBIS).
The NBIS was created in the early 1970’s as a result of the Silver Bridge collapse in
West Virginia. Before this time, there was very little public interest in the inspection and
maintenance of our nation’s bridges. After 46 people died as a result of this collapse,
the U.S. Congress required the Secretary of Transportation to establish a National
Bridge Inspection Standard and develop a program to train bridge inspectors. These
inspections are necessary for having an effective bridge maintenance program. The
SCDOT performs five main types of inspections.
- Initial Inspections – Inspections performed to document the condition of a bridge

after construction has been completed and the inventoried.
- Routine Inspections – Inspections used to document the physical and functional
elements of bridges.

Page 3
US 278 WBL and EBL
- In-depth Inspections – Close up (arms length or hands on) inspections used to

document the condition of the structure. Underwater inspections are typically
considered in-depth inspections.
- Scour – The channel is inspected below the waterline to determine the level or
extent of scour or channel migration.
- Fracture Critical – Inspection of critical tension members on a bridge structure.
Fracture critical members are considered a member in tension that if failure
occurs could result in partial or total failure of the structure.
- Special Inspections – These inspections are performed after repair, rehabilitation,
replacement or after significant natural events like flooding, storms or seismic
events.
Typically all of these inspection levels are coordinated through the SCDOT Bridge
Maintenance Office. The responsibility of this office is to coordinate bridge maintenance
and rehabilitation activities, as well as, overseeing the SCDOT Bridge Management
System (BMS). The bridge management system is a means for managing state wide
bridge data throughout their design life. This includes collecting bridge inventory data,
performing inspections, maintenance and rehabilitation.
SCDOT Bridge Inspection Report Forms
The standard SCDOT Inspection Form used by the Office of Bridge Maintenance is
used as the primary means for inventorying and assigning condition and appraisal
ratings to bridges in South Carolina. This form lists several bridge characteristics and
their corresponding codes as listed in the Recording and Coding Guide. Some aspects
of the form will be presented in the following sections. For a complete view of the
information contained in this form, please refer to Appendix C.
- General Bridge Data: This section lists the Bridge Identification Number, and
general location with respect to route or waterway crossed. It also lists the year

Page 4
US 278 WBL and EBL
it was built or reconditioned, the overall length, number of spans, and the type of
structure.
- Geometric Data: This section lists all pertinent bridge geometry such as:
waterway navigation clearance, under clearances, vertical clearances, structure
width, horizontal clearances, number of lanes, and sidewalk dimensions.
- Condition Ratings: This section lists the inventory and operating rating, the last
paint application date (if applicable), and the condition ratings of the deck,
superstructure, and substructure.
- Critical Inspection Data: This section lists the last inspection date, the inspection
frequency, and gives an indication if special, fracture critical, or underwater
inspections have been or need to be performed.
- Appraisal Ratings: This section lists the overall appraisal of the structure, the
deck geometry, under clearance, bridge posting, and waterway adequacy. Many
of these ratings are not assigned by the actual inspector but are calculated using
FHWA Edit/Update computer program.
Bridge Element Grout Textual Data forms are also used by the inspector during routine
bridge inspection. This form evaluates the condition of: bridge abutments, bents, piers,
bearings, girders and beams, truss members, expansion joints, decks, curbs, bridge
railings or barriers, paint systems, waterway condition, fender system, alignment of the
roadway, traffic signs, and encroachments. Under these headings in Textual Data form,
the inspector can add general or specific comments about the items listed above and
their corresponding NBIS rating. An example of this form is presented in Appendix C.
NBI ratings typically cover the deck, superstructure, and substructure in the overall
bridge rating. The PONTIS system described in the following paragraph is an element
based inspection that inventories and rates every element on the bridge. This includes
but is not limited to the deck, beams, piles, bearings, railing, joints, etc. The different
elements rated are according to the material used. For instance, a bare concrete deck
and a concrete deck with asphalt overlay are considered different elements.

Page 5
US 278 WBL and EBL
The SCDOT PONTIS BMS Element Data Form is a form that lists the Commonly
Recognized (CoRe) Structural Elements for bridges. PONTIS is owned by the
American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials. The system is
used to store bridge inventory and inspection data using the NBIS guidelines and also
assigns condition states to each bridge element. With this system, each element
corresponds to an element number in the PONTIS System. The total quantity of each
element is then calculated. This quantity is then recorded as percentage of distribution
in each corresponding condition state. Condition states are listed from Condition 1 (little
or no deterioration) to Condition 5 (advanced deterioration). Each condition state is
described for each element and any feasible actions are also presented. For example:
If a bridge has 120 reinforced concrete piles this corresponds to Element 205 according
to the CoRe Elements, and 20 of these piles have deterioration, 17 percent of these
piles would be listed under Condition State 4 and the remaining 83 percent would be
listed under Condition State 1. For the Condition State 4 rating, there are three feasible
actions that can be performed on the 20 piles showing deterioration: do nothing,
rehabilitate the piles, or replace the piles. PONTIS BMS give a more quantitative
assessment of every structural element versus the general assessment given for the
deck, superstructure, and substructure given in the NBI. The SCDOT PONTIS BMS
Element Data Form is presented in Appendix C.
Bridge Inspector Certifications
The training and qualifications of an NBIS bridge inspector are presented in the Code of
Federal Regulations 650C. The following excerpt is from the FHWA Bridge Inspectors
Reference Manual:
“A program manager must, at a minimum:
- Be a registered professional engineer, or have ten years bridge inspection

experience; and have successfully completed a Federal Highway Administration
(FHWA) approved comprehensive bridge inspection training course.

Page 6
US 278 WBL and EBL
A NBIS bridge inspection team leader can qualify in five ways.

- Have the qualifications for program manager as presented above.
- Have five years bridge inspection experience and have successfully completed
an FHWA approved comprehensive bridge inspection training course.
- Be certified as a Level III or IV Bridge Safety Inspector under the National
Society of Professional Engineer's program for National Certification in
Engineering Technologies (NICET) and have successfully completed an FHWA
approved comprehensive bridge inspection training course, or:
- Have all of the following:
- A bachelor's degree in engineering from a college or university accredited by or
determined as substantially equivalent by the Accreditation Board for
Engineering and Technology;
- Successfully passed the National Council of Examiners for Engineering and
Surveying Fundamentals of Engineering examination;
- Two years of bridge inspection experience
- Successfully completed an FHWA approved comprehensive bridge inspection
training course.
- Have all of the following:
- An associate's degree in engineering or engineering technology from a college or
university accredited by or determined as substantially equivalent by the
Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology;
- Four years of bridge inspection experience; and
- Successfully completed an FHWA approved comprehensive bridge inspection
training course.
- The individual charged with the overall responsibility for load rating bridges must
be a registered professional engineer.
- An underwater bridge inspection diver must complete an FHWA approved
comprehensive bridge inspection training course or other FHWA approved
underwater diver bridge inspection training course.”

Page 7
US 278 WBL and EBL
All of the inspectors for this cursory bridge inspection meet or exceed the requirements
as presented above.
Long Term Expectation of Bridge Life and Maintenance
The current AASHTO LRFD code calls for bridges to be designed for a Design
Life of 75 years (Section 1.2). What the actual in-service life of a structure may be is
dependent on the owner’s desires and expectations coupled with the effects of things
like the bridge’s exposure to environmental elements, quality of materials, construction
type and practices used and the level of maintenance. The US 278 Bridges were built
in the following years; 1982 for the two structures over Skull Creek, 1983 for the
Westbound lane over MacKay Creek and 1956 for the one Eastbound lane over
MacKay Creek. This means that they were most likely designed using a Design Life of
50 years, which was common at that time. Therefore, the Eastbound lane over MacKay
Creek has already exceeded it’s intended Design Life and the others are nearing year
30 of their Design Life. This does not mean that they are no longer functional or safe as
the ability of a structure to survive and perform well beyond its Design Life has been
well documented and is mostly dependent on the environment it resides in and the
maintenance attention it has received.
Many modern structures are now being designed with a Design Life of 100 years,
such as the new Ravenel (Cooper River) Bridge in Charleston, SC. The new Oakland
Bay Bridge in San Francisco has been designed for a Design Life of 150 years. Even
though these structures are designed to last longer, whether they do or not will be
greatly dependent on the factors already mentioned.
Of the several factors that play a role in the reduction of a bridge’s service life.
Two of the harshest and one that is present at the US 278 bridges, are the coastal
environment and heavy traffic use. In this location, these structures are subjected to
high wave and wind forces as well as being constantly inundated in the corrosive salt

Page 8
US 278 WBL and EBL
water environment. This applies to the superstructure as well as the substructure

because of the chloride laden air, and our high humidity, transports that corrosive
element to the bridges girders and concrete deck.
The result of this long term exposure to a salt laden air and water environment is
corrosion. Corrosion affects the life of both steel structures and reinforced concrete
bridges. For steel structures, there are very visual signs of coating failure and
accumulation of rust on the structural steel members. With concrete structures, the
deterioration is usually not evident until it has reached advanced stages. This is
because corrosion attacks the reinforcing steel buried within the concrete and only
becomes visible once it has caused cracks and fractures (spalls) in the concrete surface
and rust staining is then seen.
The other factor mentioned was traffic volume. As the main bridges in and out of
Hilton Head, these structures see not only large volumes of traffic, but heavy usage by
truck traffic, which puts additional strain on the structure over time. Again, the
maintenance of the structure plays the biggest role in preventing deterioration due to
increase traffic volumes and loads. According to the Average Daily Traffic (ADT)
volume obtained from the SCDOT for the 2008 period, US 278 traffic volumes within the
area of investigation range from 44,300 to 57,800. A comparison of this ADT with other
locations indicates that this volume is the highest in Beaufort County.
For your reference, some other bridges that were constructed during the 1950’s
and are located in similar coastal environments are listed below. These bridges are still
open to traffic although we are not aware of the current condition of the structures.
Little River Intracoastal Waterway Bridge (Horry County, South Carolina), Built
1935; rehabilitated 1980, Warren through truss swing bridge over Intracoastal
Waterway on S-26-20 (formerly US 17) in Little River

Page 9
US 278 WBL and EBL
Ben Sawyer Intracoastal Waterway Bridge (Charleston County, South Carolina),

Built 1945, rehabilitated 2010, Swing bridge over Intracoastal Waterway on SC
703 in Charleston
Intracoastal Waterway Bridge (New Hanover County, North Carolina), Built 1956,
Bascule bridge over Intracoastal Waterway on US 74/US 76 in Wrightsville
Beach
Intracoastal Waterway Bridge (Carteret County, North Carolina), Built 1935,

Swing bridge over Intracoastal Waterway on NC 101
Surf City Bridge (Pender County, North Carolina), Built 1955, Swing bridge over
Intracoastal Waterway on NC50/NC210 in Surf City
Intracoastal Waterway Bridge (Palm Beach County, Florida), Built 1938

Bascule bridge over Intracoastal Waterway on FL A1A in Palm Beach
Southern Boulevard Bridge (Palm Beach County, Florida), Built 1950, Bascule
bridge over Intracoastal Waterway on Southern Boulevard in West Palm Beach
Oakland Park Blvd. Bridge (Broward County, Florida), Built 1955, Bascule bridge
over Intracoastal Waterway on Oakland Park Blvd. in Fort Lauderdale
General Description of the Structures
Bridge 0720027840300 carries the west bound lanes of US 278 over MacKay
Creek in Hilton Head, South Carolina. The bridge consists of 54 prestressed concrete
girder spans and one steel girder span supported by prestressed square concrete pile
bents. The deck consists of stay-in-place forms and a reinforced concrete deck.
Bridge 0720027820300 carries the east bound lanes of US 278 over MacKay
Creek in Hilton Head, South Carolina. The bridge consists of 54 reinforced concrete
girder spans and one steel girder span supported by multiple reinforced concrete pile
bents. The structure originally consisted of pile bents with five octagonal concrete piles

Page 10
US 278 WBL and EBL
supporting the reinforced concrete girders. Several of the original piles had a reinforced
concrete circular jacket. When the bridge was widened, two prestressed concrete piles
were driven on each side of the bents and support two additional prestressed concrete
girders on either side of the bridge. A retrofit cap connected the widened section to the
original cap. The deck consists of reinforced concrete with an asphalt overlay.
Bridge 0720027840400 carries the west bound lanes of US 278 over Skull Creek
in Hilton Head, South Carolina. The bridge consists of 21 approach spans and five
main channel spans. The main channel piers are comprised of a reinforced concrete
hammer head piers supported by a submerged footing/seal combination founded on
multiple steel H-piles. The approach spans are supported by a reinforced concrete
hammer head pier configuration founded on a waterline pile cap footing supported by
multiple prestressed concrete piles or prestressed concrete pile bents. The
substructure units support steel plate girders with transverse steel cross bracing and a
reinforced concrete deck.
Bridge 0720027820400 carries the east bound lanes of US 278 over Skull Creek
in Hilton Head, South Carolina. The bridge is of a similar configuration to the west
bound bridge. A 22 ft research vessel was used to gain access to the superstructure
and substructure elements. Due to heavy traffic the decks were visually inspected from
the inspection vehicle.
Methods of Investigation
An inspection team consisting of engineer-divers led by a South Carolina-

registered Professional Engineer-diver conducted the above water and underwater
investigation of the four bridges leading to Hilton Head Island on February 11 and 12,
2010. Access to the bridge site was obtained from C.C. Haig Boat Landing on Pinckney
Island.

Page 11
US 278 WBL and EBL
The investigation consisted of a cursory inspection of the accessible portions of

the substructure and superstructure. The cursory inspection was performed on a
representative sample of the bridge components to detect obvious and gross bridge
conditions. Particular attention was given to any observed areas of excessive
deterioration or apparent distress, and the condition of any repairs was noted.
A cursory assessment of the waterway and channel bottom conditions in the

vicinity of the bridge was also made. The type of channel bottom material was noted, as
well as the location and extent of any observed scour, riprap, or debris.
2.0 OBSERVED CONDITIONS AND ASSESMENT
The following criteria govern the assessment ratings of the structural components of the
inspected bridges: These criteria are established from the Recording and Coding Guide
for the Structure Inventory and Appraisal of the Nation’s Bridges. Report No. FHWA-
PD-96-001. These codes also follow the SCDOT Bridge Inspection Form Ratings.
- Code 9 - Excellent Condition
- Code 8 - Very Good Condition – no problems noted.
- Code 7 - Good Condition – some minor problems but functioning as intended.
- Code 6 - Satisfactory Condition – structural elements show some minor deterioration
but are still functioning as intended.
- Code 5 - Fair Condition – all primary structural elements are sound but may have
minor section loss, cracking, or spalling.
- Code 4 - Poor Condition – advanced section loss, deterioration, or spalling.
- Code 3 - Serious Condition – loss of section, deterioration, or spalling has seriously
affected primary structural components. Local failures are possible.
- Code 2 - Critical Condition – advanced deterioration of primary structural elements.
Fatigue cracks in steel or shear cracks in concrete may be present or scour may have
removed substructure support. Unless closely monitored it may be necessary to close
the bridge until corrective action is taken.

Page 12
US 278 WBL and EBL
- Code 1 - “Imminent Failure Condition” – major deterioration or section loss is present

in critical structural components or obvious vertical or horizontal movement affecting
structural stability. Bridge is closed to traffic but corrective action may be put back in
light service.
- Code 0 - out of service – beyond corrective action.
The following narrative will briefly describe the existing conditions encountered
during the cursory inspections of US 278 WBL and EBL over MacKay and Skull Creek.
The inspections were conducted over the course of two days. The weather was
overcast with light rain and an air temperature of 40 ºF both days. The water under the
bridge flowed between 0 and 2 ft/s during the inspection. Underwater visibility was
approximately 2 ft.
Item 61 – Channel and Channel Protection
The embankments at all four bridges were found to be in very good condition
(Code 8). The banks along the waterways in the vicinity of the bridges were observed
to be in stable condition. Embankment protection in the form of riprap was observed on
the east and west banks of MacKay Creek and aquatic vegetation and oyster shells on
the east and west banks of Skull Creek. There was no sign of active erosion. The
channel bottom consisted of silty sand and oyster shells. There were no signs of heavy
accumulation of debris or drift.
US 278 West Bound over MacKay Creek
Item 58 - Deck
The concrete deck was found to be in good condition (Code 7). There were no
noticeable spalls or significant cracks in the deck or the concrete barrier. In isolated
areas, the expansion joint material had come loose along the shoulder of the roadway.

Page 13
US 278 WBL and EBL
Item 59 – Superstructure
The superstructure was found to be in satisfactory condition (Code 6). Minor cracking
was noted in isolated locations on the prestressed concrete girders. Several areas of
concrete spall repair were noted in isolated locations. The steel girders supporting the
main span showed signs of light to moderate corrosion with no signs of significant
section loss.
Item 60 - Substructure
Overall, the substructure was also found to be in satisfactory condition (Code 6). Minor
isolated cracks were noted on the piles above the high-water mark. Areas of minor
isolated spall repair were noted in random locations. The most significant defects were
located on Bent 2. On the east face of the reinforced concrete pile cap a crack
measured up to 3/4 in. wide with rust stains. The crack measured approximately 10 ft
long. The southernmost pile at Bent 2 had cracks up to 1/8 in. wide with rust stains
around all faces of the pile and extended from the bottom of the pile cap down
approximately 3 ft. A spall was located on the bottom of the pile cap at Bent 2. The
spall measured approximately 1 ft by 18 in. with 1 in. of penetration.
The piles at Bents 40 through 43 were inspected below water and were found to be in
good condition. The piles exhibited a heavy layer of marine growth from the high-water
mark to the channel bottom. No significant conditions were noted on the below water
portions of these piles. Please refer to Photographs 1 to 12 for typical views of the
conditions encountered on this bridge.
US 278 East Bound over MacKay Creek
Item 58 - Deck
The deck was found to be in satisfactory condition (Code 6). The asphalt overlay
showed minor signs of deterioration along the joints. Minor delamination of the asphalt

Page 14
US 278 WBL and EBL
overlay up to 18 in. diameter was observed in isolated locations. There were no

significant defects located on the concrete barrier.
Overall, the superstructure was found to be in fair condition (Code 5). This condition
was based on what the inspectors could visually assess from the boat. The bridge
bearings were not accessible. The steel girders supporting the main span showed
signs of light to moderate corrosion.
Random minor cracks were noted on the bottom and sides of the reinforced concrete
beams. Evidence of previous spall repairs were noted in several locations throughout
the superstructure and appeared to be in good condition. One isolated spall measuring
3 ft horizontal by 1 ft vertical was located on the bottom of Beam 6 at Bent 29. The spall
exposed one reinforcing which exhibited some corrosion but any loss of section could
not be verified. Other random superficial spalls due to lack of sufficient cover over the
reinforcing bars were noted on the reinforced concrete diaphragms.
Several bents of different pile arrangements were inspected below water and were
found to be in fair condition (Code 5). The piles exhibited a heavy layer of marine
growth from the high-water mark to the channel bottom. Minor cracking with rust stains
was observed within the tidal zone on several of the piles. Many of the octagonal piles
have been retrofitted with concrete pile jackets. These jackets were typically located
within the tidal zone. Several jackets exhibited minor cracking between 1/8 in. and 1/2
in. wide with rust stains; however, no significant deterioration such as: large spalls or
section loss was noted on the inspected piles. Please refer to Photographs 13 to 26 for
typical views of the conditions encountered on this bridge.

Page 15
US 278 WBL and EBL
US 278 West Bound over Skull Creek
Item 58 - Deck
Overall the concrete deck was found to be in good condition (Code 7). There were no
noticeable spalls or significant cracks in the deck. In areas, the expansion joint material
had come loose in isolated locations along the shoulder of the roadway. A spall
measuring approximately 2 ft long by 10 in. wide with no exposed reinforcing steel was
found on the top of the concrete barrier rail at the east end of the bridge.
The superstructure was visually inspected from the ground and the inspection boat and
was found to be in satisfactory condition (Code 6). The steel plate girders exhibited
minor loss of protective coating and showed no appreciable corrosion. Most of the
transverse steel cross bracing had more moderate loss of protective coating with some
minor corrosion. The corrosion was more pronounced where the steel cross bracing
was connected to the steel plate girders. Due to the height of the structure any loss of
section could not be verified.
The inspections of the selected substructure elements revealed the most significant
deterioration and were rated as fair condition (Code 5). The inspected substructure
units exhibited a heavy layer of marine growth from the high-water mark to the channel
bottom. The east channel pier exhibited complete footing and seal exposure with
undermining of the seal at the upstream nose of the pier. The area of undermining
measured up to 5 ft vertical. The footing of the pier located at the west side of the
navigation channel was completely exposed and had approximately 4 ft of seal
exposure. No undermining of the seal was detected at this pier. Cracks up to 1/4 in.
wide with rust stains were located on the bottom of a majority of the pile cap footings for

Page 16
US 278 WBL and EBL
the approach piers. These cracks were typically located 6 to 8 in. above the bottom of
the pile cap footings and were likely caused by corrosion of the internal reinforcing steel
due to chloride interaction from the saltwater environment.
The timber fender system on the west side of the navigation channel beneath the west
bound lane was partially missing.
US 278 East Bound over Skull Creek
Item 58 - Deck
Overall the concrete deck was found to be in good condition (Code 7). There were no
noticeable spalls or significant cracks in the deck. In areas, the expansion joint material
had come loose in isolated locations along the shoulder of the roadway.
The superstructure was visually inspected from the ground and the inspection boat and
was found to be in satisfactory condition (Code 6). The steel plate girders exhibited
minor loss of protective coating and showed no appreciable corrosion. Most of the
transverse steel cross bracing had more moderate loss of protective coating with some
minor corrosion. The corrosion was more pronounced where the steel cross bracing
was connected to the steel plate girders. Due to the height of the structure any loss of
section could not be verified.
The inspections of the selected substructure elements revealed the most deterioration
and were found to be in fair condition (Code 5). The inspected substructure units
exhibited a heavy layer of marine growth from the high-water mark to the channel
bottom. The east channel pier was found to have up to 5 ft of vertical seal exposure
along the upstream nose. In addition, a void was detected at the footing and seal

Page 17
US 278 WBL and EBL
interface. The void measured approximately 12 in. vertical with up to 18 in. of

penetration. A steel H-pile was located in this void and exhibited moderate corrosion
with no appreciable loss of section. Cracks up to 1/4 in. wide with rust stains were
located on the bottom of a majority of the pile cap footings for the approach piers.
These cracks were typically located 6 to 8 in. above the bottom of the pile cap footings
and were likely caused by corrosion of the internal reinforcing steel due to chloride
interaction from the saltwater environment.
3.0 RECOMMENDATIONS
US 278 West Bound over MacKay Creek
Item 58 - Deck
There are no repair recommendations at this time; however, the expansion joint material
should be monitored for future deterioration and may require replacement in the near
future.
It is recommended that the minor cracking of the concrete girders and the condition of
any repairs be closely monitored during future inspections. The steel girders supporting
the main span showed signs of light to moderate corrosion and should be cleaned and
coated with a protective coating suitable for marine environments.
The minor cracks located within the tidal zone should be monitored for continued
deterioration during future inspections. The 3/4 in. wide crack with rust stains located
on Bent 2 should be repaired by routing the crack and filling it with a flexible mastic
sealant. In addition, the southernmost pile at Bent 2 showed more extensive cracking
and should be repaired using a similar method.

Page 18
US 278 WBL and EBL
The spall at the bottom of the pile cap at Bent 2 should also be repaired. This would
include removing all unsound concrete and reforming the area to its original dimensions
using a non-shrink grout suitable for marine environments.
US 278 East Bound over MacKay Creek
Item 58 – Deck
There are no repair recommendations at this time; however, the expansion joint material
should be monitored for future deterioration and may require replacement in the near
future.
It is recommended that the minor cracking of the concrete girders and the condition of
any repairs be closely monitored during future inspections. The steel girders supporting
the main span showed signs of light to moderate corrosion and should be cleaned and
coated with a protective coating suitable for marine environments.
The spall located on Beam 6 of Bent 29 should be repaired. This would include
removing all unsound concrete, cleaning and coating any reinforcing steel and
reforming the area to its original dimensions using a non-shrink grout suitable for marine
environments.
There are no pile repair recommendations at this time; however, the piles and pile
jackets should be monitored for increased deterioration during subsequent inspections.

Page 19
US 278 WBL and EBL
US 278 West Bound over Skull Creek
Item 58 – Deck
The expansion joint material should be monitored for future deterioration. The 2 ft long
by 10 in. wide spall at the top of the barrier parapet is primarily cosmetic. It is also
protected from impact from the median crash barrier.
The loss of protective coating is relatively minor and should be monitored for further
deterioration.
The footing/seal exposure and undermining at the channel piers should be monitored
closely during future underwater inspections. In addition, it is recommended to perform
or review a scour analysis of these piers to determine the anticipated depth of scour and
design countermeasures as necessary.
The cracks located at the bottom of the pile cap footings that are larger that 1/4 in. wide
should be routed and sealed with a flexible mastic sealant.
The portion of the missing fender system on the west side of the navigation channel
should be replaced.
US 278 East Bound over Skull Creek
Item 58 - Deck
The expansion joint material should be monitored for future deterioration.

Page 20
US 278 WBL and EBL
The loss of protective coating is relatively minor and should be monitored for further
deterioration.
The footing/seal exposure, as well as voids in the seal, at the channel piers should be
monitored closely during future underwater inspections. In addition, it is recommended
to perform or review a scour analysis of these piers to determine the anticipated depth
of scour and design countermeasures as necessary.
The cracks located at the bottom of the pile cap footings that are larger that 1/4 in. wide
should be routed and sealed with a flexible mastic sealant.
Overall, the four bridges are in satisfactory to fair condition. The type and amount of
deterioration observed during the cursory inspection are indicative of structures of this
age. Because the EBL Bridge over MacKay creek is older, (built in 1956), we saw more
deterioration in the superstructure and substructure. This deterioration has potentially
reduced some of the structures capacity but does not pose an immediate risk of failure.
The structure should however be scheduled for significant rehabilitation and/or
replacement in the near future.
Respectfully submitted,
COLLINS ENGINEERS, INC.
James K. O’Connor, P.E.

Project Manager
Originated by:
William Barna, P.E.

Page 21
Appendix A
References
References:
Bridge Inspector’s Reference Manual, Publication No. FHWA NHI-03-001, 2006.
Operation and Maintenance of Waterfront Facilities, Publication No. UFC-4-150-

07, 2001.
Recording and Coding Guide for the Structure Inventory and Appraisal of the
Nation’s Bridges. Publication No. FHWA-PD-96-001, 1995.
SCDOT Bridge Design Manual, 2006.
Underwater Inspection of Bridges, Publication No. FHWA-DP-80-1, 1989.
AASHTO Guide for Commonly Recognized (CoRe) Structural Elements, 1997.

Appendix B
Photographs
US 278 WBL and EBL
Over MacKay and Skull Creek
Photograph 1. View of Downstream Fascia, US 278 WBL over MacKay Creek.
Photograph 2. View of Upstream Fascia, US 278 WBL over MacKay Creek.
Collins Project No.6336-40

Appendix B
US 278 WBL and EBL
Photograph 3. View of the Main Steel Girder Span, US 278 WBL over MacKay Creek.
Photograph 4. Typical Underdeck and Prestressed Concrete Girder Condition, US 278

WBL over MacKay Creek.

Appendix B
US 278 WBL and EBL
Photograph 5. View of Crack Located on the East Face of Bent 2, US 278 WBL over
MacKay Creek.
Photograph 6. Close Up View of the Crack Located on the East Face of Bent 2, US 278
WBL over MacKay Creek.

Appendix B
US 278 WBL and EBL
Photograph 7. View of Spall Located on the Bottom of Bent 2, US 278 WBL over MacKay
Creek.
Photograph 8. View of Cracks with Rust Stains Located on the Southernmost Pile
of Bent 2, US 278 WBL over MacKay Creek.

Appendix B
US 278 WBL and EBL
Photograph 9. View of West Embankment, US 278 WBL over MacKay Creek.
Photograph 10. Typical Above Water Pile and Prestressed Concrete Girder Condition, US
278 WBL over MacKay Creek.

Appendix B
US 278 WBL and EBL
Photograph 11. Typical Prestressed Concrete Girder and Pile Cap Condition,
US 278 WBL over MacKay Creek.
Photograph 12. Typical Below Water Pile Condition Showing Heavy Marine Growth, US
278 WBL over Skull Creek.

Appendix B
US 278 WBL and EBL
Photograph 13. View of the Downstream Fascia, US 278 EBL over MacKay Creek.
Photograph 14. Typical View of Superficial Spalls due to Lack of Sufficient Concrete
Cover over the Reinforcing Steel in the Diaphragm, US 278 EBL over MacKay Creek.

Appendix B
US 278 WBL and EBL
Photograph 15. Typical Spall Repair Located on Bottom of Reinforced Concrete Beam, US
278 EBL over MacKay Creek.
Photograph 16. Typical Bent with Longitudinally Battered Piles and Concrete Pile
Jacket, US 278 EBL over MacKay Creek.

Appendix B
US 278 WBL and EBL
Photograph 17. Typical Bent with Transversely Battered Piles and Concrete Pile Jacket,
US 278 EBL over MacKay Creek.
Photograph 18. View of the Upstream Fascia, US 278 EBL over MacKay Creek.

Appendix B
US 278 WBL and EBL
Photograph 19. Typical Above Water Reinforced Concrete Pile Condition, US 278 EBL
over MacKay Creek.
Prestressed Reinforced
Concrete Beam Concrete
Girder Saddle Beam
Photograph 20. View of a Typical Retrofit Pile Cap, US 278 EBL over McKay Creek.

Appendix B
US 278 WBL and EBL
Photograph 21. Typical Concrete Encasement Condition, US 278 EBL over MacKay Creek.
Photograph 22. Typical Underdeck and Reinforced Concrete Girder Condition, US 278
EBL over MacKay Creek.

Appendix B
US 278 WBL and EBL
Photograph 23. Typical Main Span Steel Girder Condition, US 278 EBL over MacKay
Creek.
Photograph 24. Typical Cracks with Rust Stains on Reinforced Concrete Pile, US 278 EBL
over MacKay Creek.

Appendix B
US 278 WBL and EBL
Photograph 25. 3 ft by 1 ft Spall on the Bottom of the Beam 6, Span 29, US 278 EBL over
MacKay Creek.
Photograph 26. 3 ft by 1 ft Spall on the Bottom of the Beam 6, Span 29, US 278 EBL over
MacKay Creek.

Appendix B
US 278 WBL and EBL
Photograph 27. View of the Upstream Fascia, US 278 WBL over Skull Creek.
Photograph 28. View of Typical Exterior Girder Condition, US 278 WBL over Skull Creek.

Appendix B
US 278 WBL and EBL
Photograph 29. View of Typical Interior Girder and Steel Cross Bracing Condition, US 278
WBL and EBL over Skull Creek.
Photograph 30. View of Typical Main Channel Pier Configuration, US 278 WBL over Skull
Creek.

Appendix B
US 278 WBL and EBL
Photograph 31. View of 2 ft long by 10 in Wide Spall Located on the East End of the
Concrete Barrier, US 278 WBL over Skull Creek.
Photograph 32. Typical Deck Joint Condition, US 278 WBL over Skull Creek.

Appendix B
US 278 WBL and EBL
Photograph 33. Typical Condition of the Intermediate Piers with Cracks at the Bottom, US
278 WBL over Skull Creek.
Photograph 34. View of the Downstream Fascia, US 278 EBL over Skull Creek.

Appendix B
US 278 WBL and EBL
Photograph 35. Typical Crack With Rust Stains Located on the Bottom of the Pile Cap
Footing for the Intermediate Piers, US 278 WBL over Skull Creek.
Photograph 36. Typical Interior Girder and Steel Cross Bracing Condition, US 278 EBL
over Skull Creek.

Appendix B
US 278 WBL and EBL
Photograph 37. Typical Deck Condition, US 278 EBL over Skull Creek.
Photograph 38. Typical Deck Joint Condition, US 278 EBL over Skull Creek.

Appendix B
US 278 WBL and EBL
Photograph 39. Typical View of Intermediate Bents, US 278 EBL over Skull Creek.
Photograph 40. Typical Shoreline Condition, US 278 WBL over Skull Creek.

Appendix B
Appendix C
SCDOT Reference Forms

US 278 Cursory Bridge Inspection

Încărcat de

Informații document

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

US 278 Cursory Bridge Inspection

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Cursory Above Water and Underwater

US 278 East Bound and West Bound

MacKay Creek and Skull Creek

Bridges over MacKay Creek

Bridges over Skull Creek

1180 Sam Rittenberg Blvd, Suite 105

Cursory Above Water and Underwater Investigation of

US 278 West Bound and US 278 East Bound Bridges

SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT FINDINGS

Inspection Date: February 11 and 12, 2010

Significant Conditions Observed:

Collins Project No. 6336-40

SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT FINDINGS (Cont.)

• US 278 East Bound over Skull Creek

SUMMARY OF BRIDGE RATINGS

Bridge Deck Superstructure Substructure

Collins Project No. 6336-40

SCDOT Bridge Inspection Program

According to the Federal Highway Administration a bridge is defined as ”A structure

In accordance with Federal Highway Administration guidelines, the South Carolina

- Initial Inspections – Inspections performed to document the condition of a bridge

Collins Project No. 6336-40

- In-depth Inspections – Close up (arms length or hands on) inspections used to

SCDOT Bridge Inspection Report Forms

Collins Project No. 6336-40

Collins Project No. 6336-40

Bridge Inspector Certifications

“A program manager must, at a minimum:

- Be a registered professional engineer, or have ten years bridge inspection

Collins Project No. 6336-40

A NBIS bridge inspection team leader can qualify in five ways.

Collins Project No. 6336-40

Long Term Expectation of Bridge Life and Maintenance

Collins Project No. 6336-40

water environment. This applies to the superstructure as well as the substructure

Collins Project No. 6336-40

Ben Sawyer Intracoastal Waterway Bridge (Charleston County, South Carolina),

Intracoastal Waterway Bridge (Carteret County, North Carolina), Built 1935,

Intracoastal Waterway Bridge (Palm Beach County, Florida), Built 1938

General Description of the Structures

Collins Project No. 6336-40

An inspection team consisting of engineer-divers led by a South Carolina-

Collins Project No. 6336-40

The investigation consisted of a cursory inspection of the accessible portions of

A cursory assessment of the waterway and channel bottom conditions in the

2.0 OBSERVED CONDITIONS AND ASSESMENT

Collins Project No. 6336-40

- Code 1 - “Imminent Failure Condition” – major deterioration or section loss is present

Item 61 – Channel and Channel Protection

US 278 West Bound over MacKay Creek

Collins Project No. 6336-40

US 278 East Bound over MacKay Creek

Collins Project No. 6336-40

overlay up to 18 in. diameter was observed in isolated locations. There were no

Collins Project No. 6336-40

US 278 West Bound over Skull Creek

Collins Project No. 6336-40

US 278 East Bound over Skull Creek

Collins Project No. 6336-40

interface. The void measured approximately 12 in. vertical with up to 18 in. of

US 278 West Bound over MacKay Creek

Collins Project No. 6336-40

US 278 East Bound over MacKay Creek

Collins Project No. 6336-40