L2-STF-PLA-002 v2 - Bridges Asset Class Strategy PDF

BRIDGES STRATEGY
L2-STF-PLA-002 Version: 2 Effective from: 30th November 2015
Bridges
Asset Class
Strategy
Generational Level
1 2 3 4
52
24 – 44 45 – 69 70 – 94 95 – 100
Approving Manager: Chief Engineer Approval Date: 30/11/2015 Next Review Date: 30/11/2018
PRINTOUT MAY NOT BE UP-TO-DATE; REFER TO METRO INTRANET FOR THE LATEST VERSION Page 1 of 91
BRIDGES STRATEGY
Approval
Amendment Record
Approval Date Version Description

28/10/2013 1 Initial issue under MTM
30/11/2015 2 Second issue under MTM
BRIDGES STRATEGY
Table of Contents
1. Executive Summary ................................................................................ 7

2. Introduction ........................................................................................... 10
a. Note on Purpose....................................................................................................... 10
b. Generational Level ................................................................................................... 11
c. Abbreviations and Acronyms .................................................................................... 12
d. Definitions ................................................................................................................. 13
e. Relevant Standards .................................................................................................. 15
f. Relevant Legislation and Regulations ...................................................................... 15
g. Related Documents .................................................................................................. 15
3. Asset Class Information ....................................................................... 17

a. Asset Class Description ........................................................................................... 17
b. Asset Class Function ................................................................................................ 19
c. Asset Class Interfaces .............................................................................................. 20
d. Asset Base ............................................................................................................... 22
e. Asset Information Hierarchy ..................................................................................... 28
4. Objectives and Other Measures ........................................................... 30

a. Asset Class Objectives ............................................................................................. 30
b. Group Requirements ................................................................................................ 32
c. Level of Service and Other Key Metrics ................................................................... 33
5. Asset and Network Criticality ............................................................... 34

a. Asset Criticality ......................................................................................................... 34
b. Network Criticality ..................................................................................................... 36
c. Combined Criticality.................................................................................................. 37
6. Asset Profile and Historical Analysis .................................................. 41

a. Asset Age and Service Life ...................................................................................... 41
b. Asset Condition ........................................................................................................ 42
c. Asset Health ............................................................................................................. 51
d. Asset Utilisation ........................................................................................................ 52
e. Failure History .......................................................................................................... 52
f. Performance History ................................................................................................. 54
g. Maintenance Expenditure ......................................................................................... 55
h. Renewal and Enhancement Expenditure ................................................................. 56
i. Asset Information Sources ....................................................................................... 58
7. Asset Deterioration and Consequences ............................................. 60

a. Failure Modes & Consequences .............................................................................. 60
8. Risk......................................................................................................... 66
a. Enterprise Risks ....................................................................................................... 66
Identified Risks & Proposed Controls ....................................................................... 66
b. Asset Management System Target Risks ................................................................ 69
BRIDGES STRATEGY
9. Planning and Costing Scenarios ......................................................... 70

a. Existing Reliability Improvement and Growth Plans ................................................. 71
b. Scenario 1: Lowest Cycle Cost ................................................................................ 71
i. Description ........................................................................................................ 71
ii. Outcomes ......................................................................................................... 71
iii. Benefits ............................................................................................................. 71
iv. Consequences .................................................................................................. 72
c. Scenario 2: Constrained Maintenance and Renewals Budget ................................. 72
i. Description ........................................................................................................ 72
ii. Outcomes ......................................................................................................... 73
iii. Benefits ............................................................................................................. 73
iv. Consequences .................................................................................................. 73
d. Scenario 3: Enhanced Renewals Budget ................................................................. 73
i. Description ........................................................................................................ 73
ii. Outcomes ......................................................................................................... 74
iii. Benefits ............................................................................................................. 74
iv. Consequences .................................................................................................. 74
10. Proposed Improvement Actions .......................................................... 75

11. Proposed Strategy Selection ............................................................... 77
a. Approach .................................................................................................................. 77
b. Bridges Strategy & Tactics ....................................................................................... 78
c. Critical Bridges Strategy & Tactics ........................................................................... 81
12. References ............................................................................................. 87

13. Appendices ............................................................................................ 88
a. Gross Tonnage Report 2014 – 2015 ........................................................................ 88
b. Risk Profile Examples............................................................................................... 89
c. Determination of Asset Condition ............................................................................. 91
d. Crash Beams Without Fall Protection ...................................................................... 92
BRIDGES STRATEGY
List of Tables
Table 1 - Bridge Structure Types .......................................................................................................... 17

Table 2 - Bridge System Key Components ........................................................................................... 18
Table 3 - Asset Class Interfaces ........................................................................................................... 21
Table 4 - Bridge Substructure & Superstructure Type .......................................................................... 26
Table 5 - Bridge Asset Components ..................................................................................................... 28
Table 6 - Critical Line Sections .............................................................................................................. 32
Table 7 - Bridges Metrics....................................................................................................................... 33
Table 8 - Asset Condition Index ............................................................................................................ 34
Table 9 - Route Criticality Rankings ...................................................................................................... 36
Table 10 - High Critical Route Sections ................................................................................................ 36
Table 11 - MTM Critical Bridges ............................................................................................................ 37
Table 12 - Major Project Bridges ........................................................................................................... 39
Table 13 – Bridges Service Life by Line ................................................................................................ 41
Table 14 - Bridges Condition Summary by Line .................................................................................... 45
Table 15 - Crash Beam Renewal Prioritisation ..................................................................................... 49
Table 16 - Most Frequently Struck Bridges/Crash Beams .................................................................... 50
Table 17 - Proposed Condition Rating Levels ....................................................................................... 53
Table 18 - Bridge Maintenance Expenditure ......................................................................................... 55
Table 19 - Bridge Renewals Expenditure .............................................................................................. 56
Table 20 - Bridge Failure Modes & Consequences .............................................................................. 60
Table 21 - Bridges Risks & Proposed Controls ..................................................................................... 67
Table 22 - Bridge Asset Risks to Asset Management System .............................................................. 69
Table 23 - Improvement Actions ........................................................................................................... 75
Table 24 - Maintenance & Renewals Constraints ................................................................................. 77
Table 25 - Short Term Bridge Works..................................................................................................... 78
Table 26 - Medium Term Bridge Works ................................................................................................ 80
Table 27 - Long Term Bridge Works ..................................................................................................... 81
BRIDGES STRATEGY
List of Figures
Figure 1 - Bridge Asset Management Framework ................................................................................ 16
Figure 2 - Metro Asset Management Document Structure .................................................................... 16
Figure 3 - Underbridge .......................................................................................................................... 17
Figure 4 - Overbridge ............................................................................................................................ 17
Figure 5 - Footbridge ............................................................................................................................. 17
Figure 6 - Subway ................................................................................................................................. 17
Figure 7 - Flyover .................................................................................................................................. 17
Figure 8 - Bridge Deck ........................................................................................................................... 18
Figure 9 - Girder .................................................................................................................................... 18
Figure 10 - Pier ...................................................................................................................................... 18
Figure 11 - Wing Wall ............................................................................................................................ 18
Figure 12 - Bearings .............................................................................................................................. 18
Figure 13 - Abutment ............................................................................................................................. 18
Figure 14 - Paint .................................................................................................................................... 19
Figure 15 - Crash Beam ........................................................................................................................ 19
Figure 16 - Functional Block Diagram ................................................................................................... 20
Figure 17 - Maintenance Responsibility Owner .................................................................................... 23
Figure 18 - MTM Bridge Types - Detailed ............................................................................................. 23
Figure 19 - MTM Bridge Types - Simplified ........................................................................................... 24
Figure 20 - Bridge Type by Network Group........................................................................................... 25
Figure 21 - Substructure Type by Group ............................................................................................... 27
Figure 22 - Superstructure Type by Group ............................................................................................ 27
Figure 23 - Ellipse Asset Hierarchy ....................................................................................................... 28
Figure 24 - Structures & Facilities Asset Conditions ............................................................................. 42
Figure 25 - Bridges Asset Condition Index Summary - Network Wide ................................................. 43
Figure 26 - Average ACI Degradation ................................................................................................... 44
Figure 27 - Bridges Asset Condition Index - Network Group ................................................................ 45
Figure 28 - ESCi Average by Component ............................................................................................. 46
Figure 29 - Napier St Bridge Strikes per Year ....................................................................................... 50
Figure 30 - ACI, Hi & POF v Time ......................................................................................................... 51
Figure 31 - Tonnage Criticality Distribution by Rail Group .................................................................... 52
Figure 32 - Average Bridge ACI by Year ............................................................................................... 55
Figure 33 - Bridge Maintenance Expenditure ........................................................................................ 56
Figure 34 - Bridge Renewals Expenditure ............................................................................................. 57
Figure 35 - Structures & Facilities Retrospective Yearly Spend ........................................................... 58
Figure 36 - Risk Profile over Time ......................................................................................................... 72
BRIDGES STRATEGY
1. Executive Summary
Asset Class Bridges
Generational
2
Level
Summary of  Assess all bridges individually by applying life cycle cost
Strategy modelling, choosing a renewals approach that constitutes
the best value for money
 Complete life cycle cost modelling for all bridge assets on
the network
 Where superstructure renewal is recommended,
consideration is to be given to improvements in
clearances and track quality (eg. increased ballast depth,
road clearance and overhead heights)
 Gradual and continued installation of secondary fall
protection on crash beams lacking such a prevention
system
 In the medium term, improvements in bridge condition
data are to be sought through the use of load capacity
assessments on critical bridges
Business Impact S&F account for 1.2% of Infrastructure PWMs.
None of these PWMs were recorded against Bridge Assets.

When bridges are closed due to vehicular impact or natural
disasters, these are not recorded against the bridge asset, as
these incidents are not attributed as they are not controllable
by MTM. However, while the nature of bridge assets is that
failures are rare, the consequences can be enormous for
safety, operations and cost.
Population 521 Bridges

(Subclasses)
o 247 Underbridges
o 105 Subways
o 72 Footbridges
o 67 Overbridges
o 8 Flyovers
o 22 Other/Unknown
Replacement Total replacement cost of $1,101,427,802

Cost
(as per valuation in June 2015)
Total remaining depreciated bridge value is $564,939,913
Life Expectancy 100 Years

(Design Life as defined in AS5100 Bridge Design Code)
BRIDGES STRATEGY
Percent Life Zero (as per valuation in June 2015). Approximately 10% of
Expired bridges are nominally life expired, as they are over 100 years
old, however these bridges have been life extended through
maintenance and renewals works and are still safe for
operation.
Key Risks  Structural failure leading to operational line closure

 Structural failure leading to bridge collapse under rail
traffic
 Bridge damage or collapse due to road vehicle impact
 Increased maintenance cost (or replacement cost) due to
insufficient inspections and/or failure to identify defects
 Crash beam collapse onto traffic, pedestrians or other
causing damage, injury or loss of life
 Secondary fall protection fitted to some crash beams
across the network to prevent collapse of the beams
Key Controls
 Increase training and supervision in bridge inspection &
maintenance
 Upgrade of crash beams
 Revise Bridge Impact Procedures to assist inspection and
decision making regime for supervisors post bridge impact
event
 VicRoads project to improve visibility of bridges with
advance warning signs and chevrons
 Secondary fall protection fitted to crash beams
BRIDGES STRATEGY
Key Improvement  Implement change to inspection frequencies (draft of

Actions revised Structures & Facilities Maintenance Plan already
completed – requiring sign off)
 Greater alignment between contractor managed work
orders and Ellipse work orders
 Anomalies between externally managed bridge inspection
database and MTMs Ellipse database to be rectified.
 Externally managed bridge inspection database and
MTMs Ellipse database information to align with future
condition rating definitions
 Crash beam condition to be captured as part of bridge
inspections
 Investigate creating contract for bridge inspections
 Development of a criticality list encompassing all bridge
assets across the network
 Detailed analysis of all bridges of fair condition to
understand average degradation and trends in ACI
 Development of an Asset Health Index tool
 Flinders St Viaduct life extension project to be discussed
with PTV to decide on funding, scope and strategy
 Degraves St and Elizabeth St subway replacement project
to be discussed with PTV to decide on funding, scope and
strategy
 Improvement to the scope of inspections. Clear definitions
of inspection requirements set out in revised Structures &
Facilities Maintenance Plan and additional inspections
budget to be allocated.
Obsolescence General Motors Station Footbridge has been removed from
service (still requires inspection until removal)
Current Spend -
$710,759.21 (last full lease year, Lease Year 6)
Maintenance
Current Spend –
$644,719.27 (last full lease year, Lease Year 6)
Renewals
BRIDGES STRATEGY
2. Introduction
Metro commenced its franchisee lease in November 2009. One of its key
commitments was to achieve PAS 55 (Publicly Available Specification PAS 55 2008)
accreditation by December 31st 2013. In order to achieve this goal, alignment
between the asset management policy, strategy and objectives was required to
ensure the ‘on ground’ completion of tasks could be readily achievable. This
accreditation was achieved and asset class strategies proved to be the conduit to
achieve this aim.
Asset Class Strategies (ACS’s) encompass assets of high, medium and low network
criticality. They guide prioritisation of renewal works and aid in the optimisation of
maintenance works to ensure assets perform to the required level.
The objective of this ACS is to set a strategic approach for the maintenance and
renewal of bridge assets, in order to optimise performance as a whole. It provides a
justified and evidence-based strategy that is used to forecast volumes, intervention
type and associated costs considered necessary to maintain the asset in the same
condition or better than was received at the start of the franchise.
This document sets out:
 The types and volumes of Bridge assets on the network
 The status of these assets in terms of their current and historic performance and
their criticality
 The chosen approach to managing the specific asset types including the planning
of work volumes to deliver the business objectives and levels of service for the
lowest whole life cost
 The information requirements to support current and future decision making and
plans for their development.
Upgrades to bridges are funded through capital expenditure provided by the state and
maintained by Infrastructure Delivery.
The following strategy outlines the optimum M&R approach based on current
knowledge of the asset, however it is recognised that delivering this approach is
constrained due to resourcing and other factors detailed within this document.
a. Note on Purpose
This document does not contain detailed notes to explain the purpose of each
section. For this explanation, please see the Asset Class Strategy, L1-AMS-PLA-001.
BRIDGES STRATEGY
b. Generational Level
This issue of the Bridges ACS was assessed as a 2nd Generation Asset Class
Strategy, as per the guidelines contained in the Asset Management Strategy (L1-
AMS-PLA-001).
Criteria Combined 1st 2nd 3rd 4th

Score Generation Generation Generation Generation
ACS ACS ACS ACS
Totals 52 25 18 9 0
AM Objectives
6 3 3
Linkage
Roles &
Responsibilities 4 2 2
Definition
Asset
Description,
6 2 2 2
Function and
Interfaces
Asset Hierarchy 6 2 2 2
Information
Systems & Data 6 2 2 2
Quality
Accuracy of
Condition
Assessments & 3 2 1
Fault/Defect
History
Level of Service
2 2
(LoS) Definition
Knowledge of
5 2 2 1
Criticality
Depth of Risk
3 2 1
Assessment
Group Analysis
3 2 1
Life Cycle
6 2 2 2
Modelling
Planning Period 2 2
BRIDGES STRATEGY
c. Abbreviations and Acronyms
Abbreviation and Description

Acronym
ACS Asset Class Strategy
AMM Asset Management Manual
AIS Asset Information Strategy
AMP Asset Management Plan
AWP Annual Works Plan
AS Australian Standard
ARO Accredited Rail Operator
Computerised Maintenance Management System
CMMS
(MTM use Ellipse)
DDA Disability Discrimination Act
ESCI Elemental Structural Condition Index
FRACAS Fault Reporting, Analysis and Corrective Action System
LLC Life Cycle Cost
MTM Metro Trains Melbourne
M&RRG Maintenance and Renewal Review Group
MST Maintenance Scheduled Task
M&MRRG Maintenance and Renewal Review Group
MTMI Metro Track Maintenance Instruction
NAM Network Asset Management
NPV Net Present Value
OHLE Overhead Line Equipment
OTM On Track Machine
PTV Public Transport Victoria
PWM Passenger Weighted Minutes
RFD Rail Flaw Defect
SRS Strategic Route Sections
SOP Strategic Operations Plan
WLWS Whole-Life, Whole-System
TMP Technical Maintenance Plan
TSV Transport Safety Victoria
BRIDGES STRATEGY
d. Definitions
Definition Description
Bridges, properties, buildings, vehicles and other items
that have a distinct value to the organisation. Inclusive of
Asset
any software code that is critical to the delivery of the
function of the asset
An ACS Generation is a classification assigned by good
asset management practice that identifies the maturity of
an asset class strategy. Early Generation strategies (e.g.
Generation 1) are immature and typically reflect a strategy
Asset Class that is guided by non-rigorous or incomplete asset
Strategy condition and performance data. Later Generation
strategies (e.g. 2 to 5) are improvements on earlier
Generation Generations as asset data is fed back in to the strategy.
Generation 1 strategies are integral in guiding asset
managers in identifying gaps in current asset management
practice.
Head of Network Asset Management or their delegated
Asset Custodian
representative
A list of assets that are to be managed and
Asset Register
maintained
The status of an element when compared to as new
Condition condition due to weathering and wear and tear items such
as corrosion, shrinkage
Horizontal structural member protecting a bridge from the
Crash Beams
impact of vehicles
MTM’s chosen enterprise resource planning system for
Ellipse managing infrastructure maintenance scheduling, fault
recording, finance reporting and asset database.
Flyover Bridge that carries railway traffic over a railway line
Footbridge A bridge that carries pedestrians over the railway line
Area bounded by Up ends of North Melbourne, Richmond
Inner Suburban Area
and Jolimont station platforms.
A surveillance task to determine the condition of an
asset. The data collected may be qualitative and
quantitative dependant on the level of inspection. When
performed as a scheduled maintenance task a condition
Inspection
rating is required to provide a record of the structures
condition and to identify whether the asset should continue
to perform satisfactorily until the next scheduled
inspection
The joint MTM and PTV panel that conducts monthly
Maintenance and
meetings to discuss and review MTM’s maintenance and
Renewal Review
review performance including claims. The M&RRG is also
Group
a forum for proposing and approving changes to the AMP
BRIDGES STRATEGY
Definition Description
Section closure granting sole occupancy of the line/s for
Occupation maintenance or construction purposes and requiring
suspension of train services.
Overbridge A bridge that carries road traffic over the railway line
Computer based GIS detailing Victorian train and tram
infrastructure assets and condition. Used for displaying
PASS Assets
and managing DOT controlled assets and linked to
Ellipse for transfer of asset configuration details.
Preventive, surveillance or event-initiated maintenance
Preventive
performed at predetermined intervals. The scope and
Maintenance
frequency of the scheduled task is predetermined
Work performed in response to a defect or deficiency in
an asset that requires an action outside of those covered
Reactive
by scheduled maintenance. The scope and frequency
Maintenance
varies depending on the nature of the defects or
deficiencies identified as requiring action
The right of way set aside for the construction, operation
Reserve
and maintenance access of the operating railway
A quantitative based assessment to determine the strength
and suitability of an asset in its current state and condition,
Structural
as defined by inspection. Assumptions and qualitative
Assessment
assessment may be included by the structural engineer
where data is insufficient
A subway carries pedestrian traffic under the railway
Subway
track
Technical Maintenance Plan sets out the preventive
TMP maintenance policy for assets in regards to the inspection,
assessment and maintenance tasks
A tabulation of the scheduled maintenance requirements
TMP Schedule for each asset class or system. The TMP Schedule is an
attachment to this document
A bridge that carries rail traffic over an obstacle,
Underbridge
waterway, road, railway or path
A specific task to be performed by either an Inspector or
Work Order
Foreman generated from Ellipse.
BRIDGES STRATEGY
e. Relevant Standards
A number of specifications and procedures have been published that relate to various
aspects of bridge maintenance and renewal activities. A summary table of the various
components of track and their related specifications is available on request from the
asset development team.
Standard Number Standard Title

MCPR 010201-01 Structures Inspection Procedure
L0-SQE-PRO-031 Enterprise Risk Management Procedure
AS 7636: 2013 RISSB Railway Structures
AS5100-2004 Australian Standard – Bridge Design
VRIOGS 011.1 General Rail Bridge Requirements (Draft)
Vic Roads Road Structures Inspection Manual (June 2014)
f. Relevant Legislation and Regulations
Legislation/Regulation Summary of Requirements

L0-SQE-MAN-002 Safety Management System Manual
Safety and Environmental Requirements for Contractors
L0-SQE-PRO-014
Working on MTM Premises
g. Related Documents
Document Number Document Title

L0-CEO-POL-025 Asset Management Policy
L1-AMS-PLA-009 Asset Management Objectives
L1-AMS-PLA-001 Asset Management Strategy
L1-NAM-PRO-011 Asset Management Planning Process
MCMP 000000-01 Structures & Facilities Technical Maintenance Plan
The Bridges ACS sets the high level strategy for the maintenance and renewals of
Bridges across the network. Renewals are nominated through the ACS then fed into
the Renewals Prioritisation Tool (RPT) for prioritisation of funding allocation. Bridge
maintenance activities are carried out in accordance with the Structures TMP, as well
as associated standards, procedures and specifications, as detailed in Figure 1:
BRIDGES STRATEGY
Figure 1 - Bridge Asset Management Framework
This Asset Class Strategy forms part of a suite of related Metro asset management
documents as detailed in Figure 2:
Figure 2 - Metro Asset Management Document Structure
BRIDGES STRATEGY
3. Asset Class Information
a. Asset Class Description

The Bridge Asset Class Strategy presents MTM’s approach to asset management for
the following bridge structure types:
Table 1 - Bridge Structure Types
Structure
Description Photo
Type
Bridge that carries rail traffic over an

Underbridge obstacle, waterway, road, railway or
path
Figure 3 - Underbridge
Bridge that carries vehicular traffic over

Overbridge
a railway line
Figure 4 - Overbridge
Bridge that carries pedestrians over a

Footbridge
railway line
Figure 5 - Footbridge
A subway carries pedestrians

Subway
underneath a railway line
Figure 6 - Subway
Bridge that carries railway traffic over a

Flyover
railway line
Figure 7 - Flyover
Note: tunnels are covered separately in a dedicated ACS and therefore are not
included within the scope of this strategy.
BRIDGES STRATEGY
Bridge System components

The key components of a bridge asset for the purposes of this Asset Class Strategy
are described below in Table 2:
Table 2 - Bridge System Key Components
Component Description Photo
The deck is classified as the

component that supports the
Deck track infrastructure
Further components: ballast Figure 8 - Bridge Deck

walls, handrails, walkways
Superstructure
Beams or compound
Girders structures used to carry load
between substructures
Figure 9 - Girder
An upright support for the

Piers
superstructure of the bridge
Figure 10 - Pier
Wing Retaining walls located

Walls adjacent to the abutments
Figure 11 - Wing Wall

Substructure
Connection elements
between superstructure and
Bearings substructure that provide
controlled interaction of
loads and movements
Figure 12 - Bearings
A structure built to support

the end of a bridge span and
Abutment
retain lateral earth pressure
(where required)
Figure 13 - Abutment
BRIDGES STRATEGY
Component Description Photo
Protective film applied to

bridge structure to inhibit
Paint
material degradation
Figure 14 - Paint
Horizontal structural member
positioned at the face of a
vulnerable bridge, providing
Crash Beams protection from the impact of
vehicles or their loads, which
exceed the structure’s Figure 15 - Crash Beam
vertical clearance.
Each of these components is assessed for condition when bridge inspections take
place. For an understanding of the quality of these components, please refer to
Section 5a, Asset Criticality.
There are additional components detailed in asset hierarchy; however the
components listed in Table 2 are typically the key drivers of bridge condition.
b. Asset Class Function

Bridges are key elements of the rail network, providing separation between rolling
stock and natural or other obstacles. Any failure of a bridge may limit, or severely
restrict rail and/or road traffic over a large part of the rail network and result in
economic loss to MTM, as well as the city of Melbourne. It is necessary to ensure that
all bridge assets are maintained in a safe condition with efficient use of resources.
The MTM network is approximately 830km in length with a high number of bridges at
or near 100 years old. However MTM bridges have performed well, with the current
percentage of bridges in poor or very poor condition being very low. A valuation
analysis conducted in 2015, referencing bridges, footbridges and subways; found that
93% of bridges were in Fair to Good condition, while just with 1% in Poor condition.
The analysis found that there were no bridges on the network in Very Poor condition.
Traditionally, rail authorities in Victoria have replaced superstructures leaving the
original substructure in service. In many cases, this has left a legacy of refurbished or
new superstructures, supported on substructures which were constructed at the turn
of the twentieth century.
All Bridge assets are recorded in the Ellipse database. The asset structure within
Ellipse allows for a parent linear asset and enables the association of both linear and
point assets, track features and components.
BRIDGES STRATEGY
Figure 16 - Functional Block Diagram
Currently, work-orders for faults are managed external to Ellipse using MS Excel
work-order register managed by Structures and Facilities group. NAM and
Infrastructure are working with AMS to develop Ellipse to capture scheduled
inspections and maintenance repair tasks.
c. Asset Class Interfaces

An assessment of all asset classes indicated there are more than 300 primary
interfaces between all assets.
The two main systems interfacing with bridge assets are the track asset system and
the overhead line equipment (OHLE) system. To a lesser degree, the signalling
system also interfaces with bridge assets, where signalling structures and signalling
trunking are positioned on, under or around bridges.
Interfacing assets can be further summarised in Table 3 as follows:
BRIDGES STRATEGY
Table 3 - Asset Class Interfaces

Asset Class Interface Summary
Track System Poor track geometry can lead to a decrease in the
structural integrity of the bridge asset or compromise the
track clearance. Track maintenance affects the bridge
assets interface.
OHLE The overhead line equipment may be connected to the

bridge structure. The relative position between the bridge
and OHLE system is dependent on the actual structure
type.
Signalling System Signalling structures must be positioned so that drivers are
able to see the signals. Therefore the interface between
the two is important, because the bridge asset must not
interfere with a driver’s ability to see a signal in varying
weather conditions.
Signalling trunking is connected to bridge structures and

therefore must be considered when undertaking renewal
works such as bridge superstructure replacement or deck
replacement.
Rolling Stock Rail loadings and bridge capacities are important factors
the management of bridges assets in order to ensure safe
operation of the railway. As bridges deteriorate over time,
so does the bridge capacity. This drives the requirement
for regular condition assessments to provide an
understanding of the ‘as-is’ load capacity. Similarly, any
changes to rolling stock train loadings must be assessed
by Structures & Facilities to approve the change with
regard to bridge capacity.
Drainage In many locations across the network the drainage system
is ineffective, either due to aging components, blocked and
damaged pipes, blocked culverts or debris in open drains.
This is further compounded by ballast that is both fouled
and has heavy levels of attrition, heavily affecting its ability
to perform its function.
Drainage is managed by Track Delivery.
Vegetation If vegetation is not managed it can infringe on the vehicle
gauge and structure clearances. Vegetation growing on
structures may also cause physical deterioration due to
root damage.
Vegetation control is managed by Track Delivery and
includes weed spraying and flora removal.
BRIDGES STRATEGY
External Interfaces
In addition to internal interfaces, MTM has the franchise obligation to interface with a
number of external stakeholders. These are:
 Public Transport Victoria (PTV)
 VicTrack
 Transport Safety Victoria (TSV)
 Vic Roads
 Local Government Authorities
 V/line
 Yarra Trams
 ARTC
 Other ARO’s
 Pacific National
 Queensland Rail
 Tourist & Heritage Rail Operators
These interfaces are managed in co-operation with business units within MTM. There
are regular Audits and Compliance meetings to manage this interface.
d. Asset Base
Currently there are a total of 650 bridges located around the network. However
MTM’s responsibility for the maintenance of bridges does not extend across the entire
asset base. Figure 17 shows the breakdown of bridge assets network wide, by
responsible authority:
BRIDGES STRATEGY
Figure 17 - Maintenance Responsibility Owner
As shown, MTM has the responsibility to maintain a total of 521 bridges across the
network and this number will form the basis of analysis for this asset class strategy.
These MTM managed bridges can then be broken down by bridge type:
Figure 18 - MTM Bridge Types - Detailed
BRIDGES STRATEGY
Figure 18 (above) shows that the majority bridge type across the network is the
Underbridge (rail over road, rail over waterway, service under rail), with a total of 247
bridges. The other simplified bridge types and their totals are listed in Figure 19:
Figure 19 - MTM Bridge Types - Simplified
Bridges listed as ‘other’ are non-typical bridges that are maintained by MTM.
Examples of such bridges are station concourses and passenger access ramps.
Improvement Action: Ellipse data to be refined to ensure perfect understanding

of Bridge Assets and to remove ‘other’ from asset registers as a bridge asset type
Figure 20 provides a breakdown of different bridge types by group, with the Burnley
group showing the greatest dependency on the quality of bridge assets:
BRIDGES STRATEGY
Figure 20 - Bridge Type by Network Group
The 521 bridges can be further broken down by Substructure and Superstructure
type, as seen in Table 4:
BRIDGES STRATEGY
Table 4 - Bridge Substructure & Superstructure Type
From this table, we can see that Mild Steel is easily the most represented
superstructure type, with use in over 50% of all bridges. Substructure types are a bit
more varied, with brick, concrete and reinforced concrete being the most popularly
used on the network.
Note that 105 bridges are listed in this table as N/A for substructure and
superstructure type. These assets are subways and therefore do not have separate
substructure and superstructure components.
The table also shows that 13 bridges have an unknown component. This is
something to be rectified and it represents an improvement area in asset knowledge.
Improvement Action: Ellipse data to be refined to ensure full knowledge of

bridge asset components and to remove unknowns from asset registers
Substructure and superstructure type can then be plotted across the different network
groups in Figure 21 and in Figure 22:
BRIDGES STRATEGY
Figure 21 - Substructure Type by Group
Figure 22 - Superstructure Type by Group
BRIDGES STRATEGY
e. Asset Information Hierarchy

Figure 23 outlines the bridge asset hierarchy in Ellipse:
Figure 23 - Ellipse Asset Hierarchy
In addition, the components listed in Table 5 feed into the bridges class in our asset
management system. The hierarchy is a flat structure, as these components all sit at
the same level and are linked up to their parent asset.
Table 5 - Bridge Asset Components
Comp Comp
Component Component
No. No.
S001 Abutment S045 Paintwork / Protection System
S002 Arch S047 Pier
S003 Arch Barrel / Voussoir Stones S048 Pile Waling
S004 Arch Key Stone S057 Railing/Barrier/Parapet
S005 Batter Protection S060 Ramp Wall
S006 Beam S061 Retaining Wall
S007 Bearing S062 Road
S017 Box Culvert S066 Services
S035 Box Girder S067 Signage
S008 Bracing S068 Sill Beam
S010 CB Fall Arrest System S069 Spandrel Wall
S011 CB Support S072 Stringer
S012 Cladding S076 Transom
S013 Columns or Piles S077 Transverse Beam
S015 Corbel S078 Trestle Bracing
S036 Cross Girder S079 Truss Bottom Chord
S024 Deck S080 Truss Bracing
S025 Diaphragm S081 Truss Diagonal Member
BRIDGES STRATEGY
Comp Comp
Component Component
No. No.
S030 Footbridge Roof Sheeting S082 Truss End Post
S031 Footbridge Stair Treads S083 Truss Portal
S032 Footbridge Veranda Structure S084 Truss Top Chord
S033 Footing S085 Truss Vertical Member
S039 Guard Rail S090 Walkway/Refuge
S040 Headstock / Cross Head S089 Walkway
S041 Impost S092 Waterway
S044 Kerb S093 Wearing Surface
S037 Main/Top Girder S094 Wing Wall
BRIDGES STRATEGY
4. Objectives and Other Measures
a. Asset Class Objectives

In
Asset Strategic Guidance Bridges
Franchise
Management Measure Target Target ACS
Strategic
Objective 2017 Dec 2024 Target
Targets
To improve Not directly
customer related, however
satisfaction bridge faults can
through cause passenger
appropriate discomfort and in
Customer
provision of 70 extreme cases,
satisfaction 75 80
assets and asset (Dec 2013) may cause the
survey score
service levels suspension of
(cleanliness, services.
asset reliability,
passenger Bridges PWM
comfort etc.) target is zero.
Provide bridge
assets in a
To reduce condition that
Preventable
preventable does not hinder
passenger
passenger track
injuries per 2.7
injuries due to 2.0 2.0 maintenance,
million (Jun 2014)
asset failures or therefore aiding
passenger
lack of ‘fit for quality of track
journeys
purpose’ assets geometry and
comfort of
passenger ride
To reduce delays Unplanned

to passengers Passenger 131,358,511 Target of zero
121,160,908 105,182,877
due to asset Weighted p.a. PWMs for bridge
p.a. p.a.
failures Minutes (Dec 2013) assets
(PWMs)
Train services
arriving within
To reduce the
4’59’ of the 92%
number of trains 95% Target of zero
daily timetable (Dec 2013) 95%
delayed beyond (Network train delays for
measured at 93% (all lines)
4’59” due to asset average) bridge assets
prescribed (Jun 2014)
failures
monitoring
points
To reduce the
Delivery of Target of zero
number of trains
train services 98.5% train
cancelled due to 99.5% 99.5%
as per daily (Jun 2014) cancellations for
asset failures
timetable bridge assets
BRIDGES STRATEGY
In
Franchise
Strategic
Targets
Maintenance
and Renewal
escrow
To deliver the
invoiced and
Infrastructure $1.877 billion LY7 – Deliver
accrued
Annual Works over the -5% 60% of the
(2017) -
Plan within period of the +0% Annual Works
allocated funding franchise Plan
Deviation of
actual spend
from agreed
budget (2024)
To deliver the
Rolling Stock
Deviation of
Preventative
actual spend
Maintenance +5% +5%
from agreed N/A
Budget and +0% +0%
budget
Reliability Growth
Plan within
allocated funding
4.5 Threshold
(Jun 2013) 4.2 Threshold 3.8
Lost Time
Infra (Infra) (Infra)
Injury N/A
Frequency
To undertake 3 Threshold Threshold 2.0
Rate (LTIFR)
asset (Jun 2013) 2.8 (Roll Stock)
management Roll Stock (Roll Stock)
activities in a
manner that 41 Threshold
increases worker (Jun 2013) 39 Threshold 35
safety. Lost Time Infra (Infra) (Infra)
Injury Severity N/A
Rate (LTISR) 90 Threshold Threshold 25
(Jun 2013) 45 (Roll Stock)
Roll Stock (Roll Stock)
Noise and
1.699 Target 17 no. in
To undertake vibration
by Dec 2013 2015
asset complaints
(5% decrease 1.384 0.966 (5% reduction
management from public
on 2012 from 2014 figure
activities in a per million
figure) of 18)
manner that passengers
reduces
environmental Soil/water 17 11 5
damage and non- contamination by Dec 2013
compliances (reported (10% 11 5 0
spills) decrease on
2012 figure)
BRIDGES STRATEGY
In
Franchise
Strategic
Targets
Achieve
Certification
certification to
to, and
PAS55 (Dec
maintenance
2013)
of, an
To gain and Maintain PAS
internationally Maintain ISO Maintain ISO Develop asset
maintain 55
recognised 55001 55001 lifecycle
certification to Certification
Asset Certification Certification modelling
internationally (Nov 2016)
Management
recognised Asset Achieve ISO
Standard or
Management 55001
Specification
Standard or Certification
Specification (Nov 2016)
Close out
Asset
improvement
Management 70% 75%
actions through
Maturity (PAS 55) (GFMAM)
completion of
ACS revision 2
To return the
assets at
completion of
franchise in a Pass Pass
Assessment Bridges asset
condition no independent independent
of asset class pass
worse than in - audit of asset audit of asset
condition independent
which they were condition condition
audit
accepted at start
of franchise
allowing for fair
wear and tear
b. Group Requirements
A number of key route sections have been highlighted as high criticality due to the
impact if they are unavailable for use as a result of infrastructure failure. The high
critical sections have been summarised in Table 6.
Table 6 - Critical Line Sections
Route
Group Route Section Impact
Strategy ID
No access to FSS for the
Burnley to Box Hill –
Burnley BYBOX majority of the Burnley
More than one track
Group.
Track 1 Jolimont to
Clifton Hill FSS01 No Alternative FSS platform
FSS
No effective access to FSS
Clifton Hill JLCHL Jolimont to Clifton Hill
for CHL group
BRIDGES STRATEGY
Route
Group Route Section Impact
Strategy ID
Caulfield Local RMJ No effective access to FSS
Dandenong CLCFD
to Caulfield for DNG group
Caulfield to No effective access to FSS

Dandenong CFDNG
Dandenong for DNG group
Northern VIA03 Viaduct Northern No effective access to FSS

Southern Cross track
Northern SSS11 No effective access to FSS
11
c. Level of Service and Other Key Metrics

Table 7 outlines some key performance indicators for bridge assets within Structures
& Facilities. These performance measures will be used to set the direction and
benchmark future improvement of the asset.
Table 7 - Bridges Metrics
Bridges Metric Calculation
Year 2012 2013 2014 2015
Passenger Weighted KPI 0 0 0 0

Minutes (PWMs) Actual 0 0 0 0
Monitor movement in = [Preventative Maintenance Spend ($) LY(x) / Total #

preventative maintenance spend Assets] /
per bridge structure asset year- [Preventative Maintenance Spend ($) LY(x-1) / Total #
on-year Assets]
Measure of fault severity per = #P1 faults for LY(x) / #P1 faults for LY(x-1)
asset type by comparing number = #P2 faults for LY(x) / #P2 faults for LY(x-1)
of faults year-on-year = #(P1+P2) faults for LY(x) / #(P1+P2) faults for LY(x-1)
% Completed corrective work = # corrective work orders closed / # corrective work

orders per annum orders open at beginning of year
% Completed maintenance
=# inspections completed / # inspections scheduled
inspections per annum
BRIDGES STRATEGY
5. Asset and Network Criticality
a. Asset Criticality
Through regular visual inspections conducted across the network on all bridge
assets, an Asset Condition Index (ACI) is calculated for all bridges. This index value,
combined with component condition assessment, forms the basis for ranking the
critical bridge assets by condition and also promotes MTM’s ability to trend asset
condition over time.
The Asset Condition Index (ACI) is an indexed score that enables each asset to be
ranked in order from very poor to very good condition. The score has been derived
using the following equation:
4
𝐹𝐸
𝐴𝐶𝐼 = ∑ 𝐸𝑆𝐶𝑖 × 𝑆𝑖 × 𝑀𝑖
𝑛
𝑖=1
Where:
 FE = Element Age Factor

 ESCi = Element Condition Index
 Si = Structural Significance Factor
 Mi = Material Vulnerability Factor
A summary of element condition index is included in Section 5a, Asset Criticality. For
further detail on how this index is compiled, as well as the other factors in the ACI
equation, see externally managed bridge ACI evaluation database.
The ACI is used as a tool for effective asset management but not necessarily used as
a ranking tool for asset renewal. A low ACI, combined with a bridge’s individual
component assessment, should be used to identify bridges requiring some level of
renewal to the whole bridge or part of a bridge.
The Asset Condition Index is broken into condition classes to give the score a
tangible meaning. The classes and their descriptions are detailed in Table 8:
Table 8 - Asset Condition Index
Condition
Rating ACI Condition Description
State
Bridge is generally in ‘As new’

condition with no signs of
0 Very Good 1.00 ≥ ACI ≥ 0.90
deterioration. Continue inspection
regime to monitor bridge condition.
Bridge is in good condition with little or

1 Good 0.90 > ACI ≥ 0.75 no deterioration. Continue inspection
regime to monitor bridge condition.
BRIDGES STRATEGY
Condition
Rating ACI Condition Description
State
Bridge is showing deterioration of a

minor nature with its primary
supporting material which is the first
signs of being affected. Intervention
points for maintenance are generally
2 Fair 0.75 > ACI ≥ 0.50 minor spall, cracking of no real
concern. Steel components will have
spot rust up to 5% of element areas.
Individual components may show
more advanced deterioration requiring
need for replacement.
Bridge is showing advanced

deterioration and loss of protection to
the supporting material which is
showing deterioration and minor loss
of section. Intervention points for
3 Poor 0.50 > ACI ≥ 0.35 maintenance are generally large
spalling, medium cracking and defects
should be programmed for repair
works. The paintwork on steel
components will be completely broken
down.
Bridge shows advanced deterioration,

loss of effective section to the primary
supporting material and is acting
differently to design or is showing
signs of overstress. Intervention
4 Very Poor 0.35 > ACI ≥ 0.00
points for maintenance are severe
spalls, corrosion or heavy cracking
and defects. Paintwork is beyond
repair requiring blasting back to bright
metal.
The main factor influencing the ACI of a bridge is the Elemental Structural Condition
Index (ESCi), which is calculated for the individual components of the bridge using
the following formula:
Where:
 Qj = The Condition State Factor (condition definitions provided in Error!

eference source not found.)
 Cj = The percentage reported in given condition
BRIDGES STRATEGY
 FA = Age Factor for the given element

A detailed analysis of both ACI values across all bridge assets and a summary of
ESCi for bridge components can be found in Section 6b, Asset Condition.
b. Network Criticality
Early in 2015, the Network Strategy team developed a route section criticality ranking.
This ranking was a detailed iteration of the strategic route sections (SRS) developed
as a part of the Renewals Prioritisation Tool version 1(RPT1). This ranking defines
locations that represent the highest risk to the performance of the network if failure
occurs.
The criticality ranking is presented with the intent to be used as a practical guide for
day to day maintenance decision making when prioritising fault rectification. Route
sections across the network have been assessed and the impact of disruption to
these sections has been ranked 0 - 4 with the consequence detailed in Table 9 (Note:
TPH = trains per hour).
Table 9 - Route Criticality Rankings
Rating Impact
0 No Impact
1 Single route blocked less than 4 TPH or restricted routing
2 Single route blocked greater than 4 TPH includes loop
3 No effective service some routes
4 No effective service entire/majority of group
Table 10 outlines the high critical route sections for each of the five rail groups. These
route criticalities should be considered when prioritising maintenance activities.
Criticality ranking for all route sections across the network is available on request
from the asset development team.
Table 10 - High Critical Route Sections
Group Route Section Rating
More than one track Burnley to Box Hill 4

Burnley Box Hill to Ringwood 3
Burnley to Darling 3
Jolimont to Clifton Hill 4
Clifton Hill Clifton Hill to Keon Park 3
Clifton Hill to Greensborough 3
Through suburban SKN to NPT 4
Cross City Caulfield through to RMJ to Caulfield 3
Sandringham line RMJ to Elsternwick 3
BRIDGES STRATEGY
Group Route Section Rating
More than 1 track Caulfield to Moorabbin 3

Moorabbin to Mordialloc 3
Caulfield Local RMJ to Caulfield 4
Dandenong
Caulfield to Dandenong 4
Viaduct Northern 4
Southern Cross track 11 4
East Suburban NME to KEN 3
Northern
Main Suburban SKN to WGS 3
Kensington to Broadmeadows 3
North Melbourne to Coburg 3
c. Combined Criticality
Using ACI values, combined with criticality of network location; and by conducting a
review of the condition and criticality of defects on the worst performing bridge assets,
a list of the most critical bridges on the network has been compiled. Table 11 shows a
list of the 20 most critical bridges on the network based on these criteria:
Table 11 - MTM Critical Bridges
Name Line Section Major Defects / Issues
 Timber Deck
Elizabeth St Flinders St to
 Significant deterioration to top flange of
Rail Bridge Hurstbridge
main girders
 Timber Deck
Johnson St Flinders St to
 Deterioration of main girders
Rail Bridge Hurstbridge
 Leaning and deformation of Abutment 1
 Bearing sill timbers in poor condition
Aitken Creek Broadmeadows  Timber deck in poor condition
Rail Bridge to Donnybrook  Significant deterioration with section loss to
top flange
Stafford St Rail Flinders St to  Significant movement and deformation of
Bridge Hurstbridge substructure
Gipps St Rail Flinders St to
 Superstructure in poor condition
Bridge Hurstbridge
General
Caulfield to
Motors  Bridge redundant and no longer used
Pakenham
Footbridge
BRIDGES STRATEGY
North
Racecourse
Melbourne -  Timber Deck
Rd Rail Bridge
Upfield
 Timber deck in poor condition
Malcolm Creek Broadmeadows
 Deterioration and section loss to top flange
Rail Bridge to Donnybrook
of main girders
Blackburn Rd Burnley to Glen
– Up Track Waverley  Deterioration and section loss to top flange
of main girders
North
Phoenix St  Timber Deck in moderate to poor condition
Melbourne to
Footbridge  Handrails and guardrails in poor condition
Upfield
Westgarth  Timber Deck in poor condition
Flinders St to
Station
Hurstbridge  Section loss and corrosion to top flange of
Footbridge main girders
Plenty River Flinders St to  Timber deck (Creek span only)

Rail Bridge Hurstbridge  Condition of underlying steelwork unknown
Yarra River
Richmond to
Bridge,  Bridge bearings in poor condition
South Yarra
Cremorne
Maribyrnong North
River Truss Melbourne to  Cross girders in poor condition
Bridge Footscray
 Significant cracking and dislocations with

Dennis Flinders St to
out of plane movement noted to abutments
Subway Hurstbridge
and ramp walls
Glenferrie Richmond to  Significant cracking and dislocation to

Subway Lilydale substructure
 Timber deck in moderate to poor condition
North  Corrosion and loss of section to steel
Brewster St
Melbourne to girders
Footbridge
Broadmeadows  Splitting and other defects noted to timber
elements
Waterway – Sydenham to
 Timber deck in poor to moderate condition
Diggers Rest Sunbury
Perry St Newport to  Significant leaning and cracking of

Subway Williamstown abutment and wing walls
Williamstown Newport to  Significant leaning and cracking of

Beach Subway Williamstown abutment and wing walls
BRIDGES STRATEGY
These bridges are considered to be the highest priority on the network and have
therefore been subjected to a more comprehensive analysis of the different options
available. This analysis includes:
 Establishment of the structural condition of each structure (ACI)
 Determination of the asset risk profile, based on observed defects and the
probability of failure versus the consequence of the event (example provided in
Appendix B, otherwise found in detail in Sterling Group Bridge Report: J15-
313_RPT_V0.1 Life Cycle Cost Analysis)
 Assessment of alternative engineering options for the remediation of each
structure (found in Sterling Group Bridge Report: J15-313_RPT_V0.1 Life Cycle
Cost Analysis)
 Completion of a Life Cycle Cost analysis for each of these options (Section 9,
Planning and Costing Scenarios)
 Recommendations based on the outcomes of the analysis (Section 11c, Critical
Bridges Strategy & Tactics)
In addition to the 20 locations listed above, there is a selection of examples of bridge
assets on the network for which the maintenance and/or renewal of the structure is on
such a scale that they require large scale investment and input from the PTV. These
assets are as follows:
Table 12 - Major Project Bridges
 U-frame struts in poor condition
 Paint protection system requires
Old Viaduct Inner City reinstatement
 Girders and deck members identified
to be nearing the end of fatigue life
 Significant structural defects
Degraves & Elizabeth
 Ground water penetration
St Subways, Inner City
Flinders St Station  Significant cracking in the subway
walls
 Ballast depth below standard

Clifton Hill to  Rail joints staggered, resulting in cyclic
Eltham Timber Bridge
Hurstbridge loading during train running
 Bridge most frequently struck by road

traffic on the network
 Safety concern for road traffic,
pedestrian traffic and the passage of
Napier St Bridge, Footscray to
Footscray Newport trains
(For additional condition information on

Napier St Bridge, see Section 6b, Asset
Condition)
BRIDGES STRATEGY
Therefore, each of the assets listed above in Table 12 require a dedicated strategy.
These strategies are defined in Section 11c, Critical Bridges Strategy & Tactics.
In future, MTM plan to produce a criticality list for all bridge assets on the network.
This represents a key improvement and is recommended to assess each bridge
regarding consequence of failure, network location, bridge length, condition, etc.
Improvement Action: Development of a criticality list encompassing all bridge

assets across the network
BRIDGES STRATEGY
6. Asset Profile and Historical Analysis
a. Asset Age and Service Life

Completed as part of a valuation analysis undertaken in June 2015, Table 13 shows
the average remaining life of the bridges in the defined sections, based on a life
expectancy of 100 years for each structure. An average of total remaining value is
also provided as a summary of each section.
Table 13 – Bridges Service Life by Line
Average Total
Total Total Remaining
Line Remaining Life
Bridges Value
Life Expired
Altona Junct. - Laverton Junct. 5 40 $ 3,873,999.25 0
Broadmeadows - Donnybrook 3 56 $ 5,232,575.21 0
Burnley - Glen Waverley 27 43 $ 12,941,788.21 0
Camberwell - Alamein 5 38 $ 2,153,651.45 0
Caulfield - Frankston 27 54 $ 15,371,449.72 0
Caulfield - Pakenham 64 51 $ 24,383,100.08 0
Clifton Hill - Epping 14 51 $ 6,612,184.85 0
Dandenong - Cranbourne 2 75 $ 884,972.94 0
Flinders St - Hurstbridge 65 46 $ 39,286,081.22 0
Flinders St - South Yarra 9 48 $ 71,282,776.50 0
Footscray - Newport 10 48 $ 7,425,101.98 0
Footscray - Sydenham 13 62 $ 18,797,966.04 0
Frankston - Stony Point 1 100 $ 1,714,993.30 0
Newmarket - Racecourse 2 44 $ 948,446.40 0
Newport - Werribee 31 53 $ 8,738,064.67 0
Newport - Williamstown 7 31 $ 1,357,273.39 0
North Melb - Broadmeadows 35 46 $ 11,362,476.61 0
North Melb - Footscray 10 56 $ 28,652,595.12 0
North Melbourne - Upfield 14 52 $ 12,417,526.71 0
Richmond - Lilydale 64 47 $ 26,443,683.16 0
Ringwood - Belgrave 15 47 $ 7,726,539.44 0
South Yarra - Caulfield 18 46 $ 12,730,931.61 0
South Yarra - Sandringham 35 46 $ 19,408,440.09 0
Southern Cross - Flinders St 7 59 $ 214,081,803.12 0
Southern Cross – North Melb 1 75 $ 2,954,294.13 0
Sydenham - Sunbury 9 42 $ 8,157,198.64 0
Total 493 52 $ 564,939,913 0
BRIDGES STRATEGY
As this summary shows, as of June 2015, there are zero life expired bridges on the
network. While approximately 10% of bridges are nominally life expired, as they are
over 100 years old, these bridges have been life extended through maintenance and
renewals works, and are still safe for operation.
As an average across the network, remaining bridge life in years is 52. The Stony
Point line is in the best condition, as it has just one bridge which is new; while the
Newport to Williamstown line has the lowest average quality of bridge asset. With the
exception of the Stony Point line, bridge assets across the network have an average
remaining life of between 31 and 75 years.
b. Asset Condition
Figure 24 provides us with an initial understanding of bridge condition in comparison
with other Structures and Facilities assets:
Figure 24 - Structures & Facilities Asset Conditions
In comparison with the other main assets managed by the S&F department, bridges
are in relatively good condition, with culvert, retaining walls and overhead structures
showing the lowest levels of overall condition. This goes some way to explaining
recent trends in reduced budgets for bridge maintenance and renewal. For further
detail on maintenance and renewals expenditure for bridges, see Sections 6g and 6h.
BRIDGES STRATEGY
With an understanding of bridge condition against only key S&F asset classes,
condition of bridges can now be put under further scrutiny. Through calculating a
value for ACI (as detailed in Section 5a) and by conducting a frequency based
inspection regime of bridge assets, MTM has a clear picture of the condition of
bridges across the network.
Figure 25 summarises asset condition index of bridge assets network wide from, as
per the condition descriptions in Table 8.
Figure 25 - Bridges Asset Condition Index Summary - Network Wide
The overwhelming majority of bridge assets are in a fair condition, while almost 20%
of bridges are currently in good condition. Just 1% of bridges listed as being in poor
condition and zero bridges on the network receiving a very poor index. The bridges of
poor condition are listed in Section 5a, addressing asset criticality and again in
Section 11, which covers the strategy to manage these critical bridges.
Using these values of ACI, it’s possible to show a depiction of expected average
degradation of bridges for their nominal 100 year life against ACI. As can be seen in
Figure 26, Bridge assets experience fast and slow exponential decay. Slow decay is
experienced in the earlier stages of asset life where as rapid deterioration occurs later
in the asset’s life. This is also called a double exponential decay model (y= abx + cdx).
BRIDGES STRATEGY
Current System Average
Figure 26 - Average ACI Degradation
The ACI range curve is based on a theoretical optimum alignment of degradation of

ACI against life expectancy. The current averaged location of the Metro bridge asset
base can be seen on the degradation curve. It is observed that bridges are nearing
accelerated rapid deterioration, with an average ‘effective’ age of 80 years.
In the medium term there needs to be a detailed analysis of all bridges of fair
condition to understand more detailed degradation and trends in ACI. This will be an
important step in ensuring that MTM’s focus is preventative maintenance of bridges,
rather than reactive maintenance.
Improvement Action: Detailed analysis of all bridges of fair condition to

understand average degradation and trends in ACI
A more detailed understanding of bridge structural condition across the network, the
following shows the percentage of ACI condition by network group (Figure 27):
BRIDGES STRATEGY
Figure 27 - Bridges Asset Condition Index - Network Group
From this graph it is observed that only the Clifton Hill and Dandenong groups have
bridges in poor condition. However, overall asset quality of bridges is actually the
lowest on the Burnley group. Bridges on the Inner City group are a stand out for being
of the highest quality.
Table 14 provides further breakdown of bridge condition data:
Table 14 - Bridges Condition Summary by Line

Asset
Total Total Replacement
Line Condition
Bridges Cost
Index
Altona Junction - Laverton Junction 5 0.63 $ 10,286,702.78
Broadmeadows - Donnybrook 3 0.73 $ 8,793,909.50
Burnley - Glen Waverley 27 0.65 $ 30,470,798.80
Camberwell - Alamein 5 0.61 $ 5,756,963.30
Caulfield - Frankston 27 0.73 $ 32,831,011.00
Caulfield - Pakenham 64 0.71 $ 51,162,820.74
Clifton Hill - Epping 14 0.70 $ 16,491,964.11
Dandenong - Cranbourne 2 0.85 $ 1,719,878.80
Flinders St - Hurstbridge 65 0.67 $ 76,562,492.13
BRIDGES STRATEGY
Flinders St - South Yarra 9 0.69 $ 150,359,567.50

Footscray - Newport 10 0.70 $ 15,081,032.79
Footscray - Sydenham 13 0.78 $ 39,420,834.89
Frankston - Stony Point 1 1.00 $ 1,714,993.30
Newmarket - Racecourse 2 0.66 $ 2,100,767.27
Newport - Werribee 31 0.72 $ 17,648,754.39
Newport - Williamstown 7 0.55 $ 4,330,563.43
North Melb - Broadmeadows 35 0.67 $ 26,549,727.15
North Melb - Footscray 10 0.74 $ 46,907,587.30
North Melbourne - Upfield 14 0.71 $ 21,573,123.40
Richmond - Lilydale 64 0.68 $ 63,388,351.85
Ringwood - Belgrave 15 0.69 $ 16,769,518.61
South Yarra - Caulfield 18 0.67 $ 28,293,241.23
South Yarra - Sandringham 35 0.67 $ 48,307,124.83
Southern Cross - Flinders St 7 0.76 $ 362,423,066.69
Southern Cross – North Melb 1 0.84 $ 5,862,606.34
Sydenham - Sunbury 9 0.64 $ 16,620,400.44
Total 493 0.71 $ 1,101,427,802
Now, using condition information from regular bridge inspections, a breakdown of

average Elemental Structural Condition Index (ESCi) for the key bridge components
is provided in Figure 28:
Figure 28 - ESCi Average by Component

BRIDGES STRATEGY
The ESCi average for each component is also shown in the following graphs by
network group:
BRIDGES STRATEGY
BRIDGES STRATEGY
Currently crash beams are not assessed as part of frequency based inspections of
bridge assets. This is an improvement area that is to be addressed in the short term.
Improvement Action: Crash beam condition to be captured as part of frequency

driven bridge inspections
Dedicated reports have been compiled on crash beam renewal criticality though and
a summary of the ten most critical locations is shown below in Table 15. These crash
beams are to be listed for renewal and prioritised through the Renewals Prioritisation
Tool. For additional information on crash beams strategy, see Section 11.
Table 15 - Crash Beam Renewal Prioritisation
Priority Bridge Name Location
1 Lloyd St South West Melbourne

2 Warrandyte/Bedford Road Ringwood
3 Huntingdale Road , Jordanville Mount Waverley
4 Ashby Grove Ivanhoe
5 Toorak Rd Camberwell
6 Beaconsfield Avenue Beaconsfield
7 Punt Road Richmond
8 Glenferrie Road Hawthorn
9 Warrigal Road, Holmesglen Malvern East
10 Racecourse Road, Flemington Bridge North Melbourne
BRIDGES STRATEGY
A number of measures have been used to assess and rank criticality of the crash
beams. These include: the presence of secondary supports used to prevent collapse;
structural compliance to the VROIGS standard; the robustness of the substructure;
whether the beams span the entire road; and the number of bridge/crash beam
strikes on record. A summary of the most commonly struck bridges on the network
over the past nine years is shown in Table 16:
Table 16 - Most Frequently Struck Bridges/Crash Beams
Number of Strikes
Ranking Bridge Name
over 9 Years
1 Napier St, Footscray 57
2 Racecourse Rd, Newmarket 39
3 Warrigal Rd, Holmesglen 32
4 Merri Parade, Merri 31
5 Warrandyte/Bedford Road, Ringwood 25
6 Racecourse Rd, Flemington Bridge 23
7 John St, Lilydale 19
8 Spencer St & Flinders St, Melbourne 18
9 New St, Ringwood 17
10 Wantirna Rd, Ringwood 16
11 Hull Rd, Mooroolbark 14
12 Alexandra Avenue, South Yarra 13
13 Mt Alexander Rd, Essendon 13
14 Victoria St Middle, Footscray 10
Napier St Bridge in Footscray is the most commonly struck bridge on the network. In
Oct 2010 the road on the west approach was re-aligned. Prior to this re-alignment the
bridge strike rate was 3.33 per year, following the re-alignment the strike rate
increased to 9.25 per year.
Napier St Bridge Strikes

14
12
10
4
Road
2
Alignment
changed
0
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
Figure 29 - Napier St Bridge Strikes per Year
In addition to the general crash beam strategy, Napier St requires a dedicated

strategy given the risks it presents. This strategy is detailed in Section 11c.
BRIDGES STRATEGY
c. Asset Health
The bridge class uses Asset Condition Index for determining maintenance and
renewal intervention, which is consistent with other Structures Management Systems
and can is electronically maintained by inspection management (internal or external).
Figure 30 shows a simplified representation of the relationship between Asset
Condition Index, Asset Health and the Probability of Failure over Time.
Figure 30 - ACI, Hi & POF v Time
The representation demonstrates that as bridge assets slowly degrade over time
(decreasing ACI), the probability of failure increases exponentially. However, a close
understanding of network wide bridge asset health is something that to date has not
been achieved and constitutes a key improvement action.
MTM have a need to not only prioritise the renewal and/or maintenance of assets
based on condition, but to include key business factors such as network criticality and
tonnage condition, in order to have a more holistic approach to works prioritisation.
Such an approach would be managed via an Asset Health Index tool, with an
objective to prioritise maintenance and renewals activities, providing MTM with a best
for network approach that ensures infrastructure availability is maximised.
Improvement Action: Development of an Asset Health Index tool, with an

objective to prioritise maintenance and renewal activities based on a best for
network approach that ensures infrastructure availability is maximised.
BRIDGES STRATEGY
d. Asset Utilisation
Figure 31 details the tonnage distribution by rail group. It can be seen that the inner
rail suburban area has the highest tonnages with 66% being greater that 10MGT per
annum.
Figure 31 - Tonnage Criticality Distribution by Rail Group
Asset utilisation is incorporated into the prioritisation of renewals through the RPT2.
Renewals with a high tonnage are weighted higher when optimisation is carried out.
Specific tonnage distributions across the network can be viewed in Error! Reference
ource not found..
e. Failure History
Throughout the Metro franchise there have been no reports of full functional failure of
bridge assets. A full functional failure would result from the collapse of an overbridge,
underbridge, footbridge, subway or flyover.
While not constituting a full functional failure, the restricted access to specific bridge
assets prohibits effective inspection, preventative and reactive maintenance of
service critical assets. This represents a risk to Metro’s capability to maintain reliable
train operations and highlights a failure of these assets to provide safe access to
maintenance staff.
BRIDGES STRATEGY
Improvement Action: Clear definitions of improved inspection requirements to

be defined in revised Structures & Facilities Maintenance Plan and additional
inspections budget to be allocated.
For component specific failures, Structures and Facilities manages its work orders
through a spread sheet which breaks down work orders by structure type, line,
maintenance or renewal. The defects are reported in terms of P1 (highest priority),
P2, P3, P4 and P5 (lowest priority).
A monthly report details the status of work orders, which is the responsibility of the
Structures Maintenance Engineer. Currently, this report is managed through a spread
sheet and therefore work orders are not fully transparent to the business and are
difficult to track.
Improvement Action: Greater alignment between contractor managed defect

registers and Ellipse to ensure that all inspection instigated defects are raised as
a work order in Ellipse and are managed through an MTM controlled database.
In addition, MTM are moving to implement a changed condition rating as part of the
latest revision of the Structures & Facilities Technical Maintenance Plan, which is
summarised in Table 17:
Table 17 - Proposed Condition Rating Levels
Rating Rating Basis Course of action

The item has normal signs of wear and
Monitor at scheduled
1 tear. It is not expected to require any
inspections
maintenance within the next 10 Years
The element has deteriorated half its
Identify condition defects
expected lifecycle. The element will
2 Monitor at scheduled
require scheduled maintenance within
inspections
the next 5 to10 Years
The element has deteriorated such that Identify condition defects
it is reaching the end of its expected Monitor at scheduled
3 lifecycle. The element will require inspections. Define expected
scheduled maintenance within the next maintenance works required
2 to 5 Years within 2 to 5 Years
The element has deteriorated such that Identify condition defects
it has reached the end of its expected Monitor at scheduled
4 lifecycle. The element will require inspections. Define expected
scheduled maintenance within the next maintenance works required
2 Years within 2 Years
BRIDGES STRATEGY
With the future implementation of these amended condition rating levels, it’s
important to also implement amendments to both the Ellipse database and the
externally managed defect reports. Both must align with the new ratings.
Improvement Action: Ensure that both the external bridge inspection database
and Ellipse condition information is amended to align with future condition rating
definitions.
f. Performance History
Bridges have performed well over the length of the MTM franchise with zero PWMs
having been recorded against all bridge assets. However, the nature of bridge assets
is that failures are rare, but the consequences are enormous for safety, operations,
cost, etc. For this reason, it’s important to have clearly defined strategy for dealing
with the most critical bridges on the network. The strategy for bridge assets as a
whole and for the most critical bridges is detailed in Section 11c, Critical Bridges
Strategy & Tactics.
For an overall understanding of bridge condition over time, we can plot the average
ACI value for all bridges on the network over recent years, in order to gain a broad
understanding of the trend of bridge condition. The graph in Figure 32 shows that
since 2012, average bridge ACI has reduced each year, meaning that degradation is
affecting bridge assets at a faster rate than MTM is improving bridge condition
through maintenance and renewals. The year 2012 is chosen as the starting point, as
prior to 2012, ACI was not calculated with the same metrics.
Figure 32 - Average Bridge ACI by Year
BRIDGES STRATEGY
In the long term, a trend in ACI like that shown above is not sustainable. The strategy
developed for this ACS attempts to show the path towards arresting the negative
trend in ACI.
g. Maintenance Expenditure
Table 18 shows the breakdown of routine maintenance costs over the last three
franchise years. The total listed on the right of the table is the total over the six
completed years of the franchise.
Table 18 - Bridge Maintenance Expenditure
Row Labels Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 6 Year Total
ROUTINE MAINTENANCE
Inspections $2,487,990 $2,254,720 $1,370,767 $11,973,041
Routine Maintenance
-$32,856 $2,280 $1,476,295
driven Renewals
Bridge Maintenance $1,024,257 $358,118 $710,759 $3,914,960
Sub-total $3,479,392 $2,615,118 $2,081,526 $17,364,296
As can be seen in this table and in Figure 33 (below), spend on maintenance has
decreased over time. This can be best explained by MTMs ‘best for network’
approach, which has led to funds being prioritised towards other Structures &
Facilities assets and for other Infrastructure disciplines.
Bridge Maintenance Expenditure

$4,500,000
$4,000,000
$3,500,000
$3,000,000
$2,500,000
$2,000,000
$1,500,000
$1,000,000
$500,000
$0
Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6
Figure 33 - Bridge Maintenance Expenditure
While the trend of the maintenance spend of bridges is relatively accurate, the total
spend on bridge maintenance (show above) is actually inflated. This is because
inspection costs are currently captured as one large project, rather than separating
out individual inspections into bridges, overhead structures, culverts, etc. A key
improvement action for the next financial year is to ensure that inspection costs can
be attributed to individual assets.
BRIDGES STRATEGY
Improvement Action: Investigate creating contract for bridge inspections to

ensure all inspections are to time, budget, standard and against relevant assets in
the Ellipse register.
h. Renewal and Enhancement Expenditure

Table 19 shows the breakdown of routine maintenance costs over the last three
franchise years. The total listed on the right of the table is the total over the six
completed years of the franchise.
Table 19 - Bridge Renewals Expenditure
Franchise
Row Labels Year 4 Year 5 Year 6
Total
RENEWALS
Footbridge Replacement $700,435 $834,995 $550 $3,124,151
Hanover St Bridge $2,812,557 $484 $2,819,656
Non-Perm Bridge
$104,701 $20,348 $546,141 $1,189,255
Substructure Replacement
Permanent Bridge
$508,277 $0 $0 $598,603
Substructure Replacement
Rail bridge / Superstructure
$5,421,393 $390,508 -$3,271 $10,365,508
Replacement
Retrofit Safety Barriers to
$385,774 $0 $100,816 $1,016,723
Bridges
Sub-total $7,120,580 $4,058,408 $644,719 $19,113,896
Figure 34 shows bridge renewals expenditure, which has followed quite a different
trajectory over the length of the franchise:
Bridge Renewals Expenditure

$8,000,000
$7,000,000
Renewals
$6,000,000
$5,000,000
Maintenance
$4,000,000
$3,000,000
$2,000,000
$1,000,000
$0
Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6
Figure 34 - Bridge Renewals Expenditure
BRIDGES STRATEGY
Year four saw a large rise in the renewals budget, as maintenance expenditure was
reducing. The more recent trend is to reduced renewals budget, an outcome of MTMs
‘best for network’ approach, which has led to funds being prioritised towards other
Structures & Facilities assets and for other Infrastructure disciplines. Figure 24 in
Section 6b, Asset Condition shows a summary of condition for each of the main asset
classes within Structures & Facilities and shows provides some indication of why
funds have been prioritised away from bridges in recent years. The reduction in
bridge spend is unsurprisingly matched by the reduction in average bridge ACI shown
by Figure 32 in Section 6f, Performance History.
As an overall picture of Structures & Facilities spend, the following retrospective
spend graph (Figure 35) shows the percentage and total spend on planned renewals,
reactive works, routine maintenance and inspections.
Figure 35 - Structures & Facilities Retrospective Yearly Spend
This graph shows that as a department, Structures & Facilities has shifted in a
positive direction towards planned renewals. As a percentage of the department
budget, reactive works has reduced by around half over four years and routine
maintenance by about 10% in the last year, while planned renewals have increased
by around 15% over the same period.
Figure 35 also shows that with FY 2014 as the exception, the budget for Structures &
Facilities has remained steady while the amount spent on maintenance and renewals
for bridges has declined. Once again, this is indicative of a focus on ‘best for network’
strategy, which has reprioritised funding.
BRIDGES STRATEGY
i. Asset Information Sources

The information and data from within this strategy has been sourced from various
locations including, but not limited to:
 Asset base registers held by Infrastructure
 Asset base registers held by contractors/consultants to MTM
 Work Order registers held by infrastructure and managed with the help of
contractors/consultants.
 Financial information managed by Infrastructure Finance
The Asset Information Strategy requires all information to be migrated to Ellipse as a
single source of truth. This program is still in progress and not yet complete, therefore
various asset registers and sources of defect and fault data have been replied upon.
Improvement Action: Externally managed bridge inspection database and

Ellipse condition information to align with future condition rating definitions.
Greater alignment between contractor managed work orders and Ellipse work
orders
BRIDGES STRATEGY
7. Asset Deterioration and Consequences

MTM has identified that old heritage listed footbridges, subways and underbridges
are its most degraded bridge assets on the network due to their age, condition and
rehabilitation need. There are a number of assets due to their heritage significance
that need to be maintained. Failure to maintain these assets in operation would have
community and network consequences.
The Eltham Rail Bridge on the Hurstbridge listed under the Victorian Heritage
Register is the last timber rail bridge still in operation in Melbourne. Any rehabilitation
of this bridge needs consider the heritage significance. Replacement of the bridge is
not an acceptable option for the community of Melbourne.
Similar the Flinders St Old Viaduct has heritage significance architecture and any
rehabilitation of the structure needs to be sympathetic with the existing architecture.
The structure supports four railway tracks to the centre of Melbourne and the
consequences of not maintaining this structure are high. Any replacement of the
bridge would cause significant (and possibly unacceptable) disruptions to rail service.
The heritage significance subways like Elizabeth St and Degraves St at Flinders St
Station are important to Melbourne and the railway network. Replacement of these
bridge assets is not an option for MTM; therefore on-going monitoring of known
problems and the determination of solutions to maintain the assets in their existing
condition or better is extremely important.
Each of the bridge assets mentioned in this section are considered high criticality
locations and therefore have a dedicated section on recommended actions in Critical
Bridges Strategy & Tactics in Section 11c.
a. Failure Modes & Consequences

A detailed assessment of potential failure modes and their consequences is
summarised in Table 20.
Table 20 - Bridge Failure Modes & Consequences
Failure Mode Consequences
Failure
Element Description Worst Case Most Likely
Mode
Scenario Outcome
Collapse of up
Complete stop of all rail
to two trains.
traffic on the area
Collapse or Severe injuries affected.
practical & Loss of lives
Severe injuries / loss of
collapse of to up to 600
Abutment lives & damages to third
abutment due people.
Abutments fails or parties on areas directly
to severe
partially fails Severe below the affected span.
cracking or
bulging of disturbance to
Severe disturbance to
abutment the traffic on
the traffic on roads and
roads and public
public areas below the
areas below the
structure.
structure.
BRIDGES STRATEGY

Failure
Mode
Scenario Outcome
Collapse of up
to two trains.
traffic on the area
Severe injuries affected.
Collapse or
& Loss of Lives
practical Severe injuries / loss of
to up to 600
collapse of lives & damages to third
Pier fails or people.
Piers pier due to parties on areas directly
partially fails
severe Severe below the affected span.
cracking or disturbance to
bulging of pier Severe disturbance to
the traffic on
roads and public
areas below the
structure.
structure.
Potential
Potential to stop and
collapse of up to
significantly disrupt rail
two trains.
traffic on the area
Collapse or & Loss of Lives
Column or practical to up to 600
Columns or lives & damages to third
Piles fail or collapse of people.
Piles parties on areas directly
partially fail columns or
Severe below the affected span.
piles
disturbance to
the traffic on
the traffic on roads, rail
roads and public
and public areas below
areas below the
the structure.
structure.
Potential to stop Enforcement of

Collapse or temporary speed
Trestle and significantly
Trestle practical restrictions.
bracing fail or disrupt rail traffic
Bracing collapse of
partially fail on the area No associated injuries or
trestle bracing
affected loss of lives.
Potential to stop Enforcement of

Footing fails and significantly temporary speed
Footing cracks restrictions.
Footing or partially disrupt rail traffic
and /or fails
fails on the area No associated injuries or
affected loss of lives.
BRIDGES STRATEGY

Failure
Mode
Scenario Outcome
Collapse of up
to two trains.
traffic on the area
& Loss of Lives
to up to 600
Full collapse lives & damages to third
Main Collapse of people.
of main steel parties on areas directly
Girders main girder
girder Severe below the affected span.
disturbance to
the traffic on
roads and public
areas below the
structure.
structure.
The bearings
supporting
either end of Localised damage to
the girders other structural
have failed or elements
Failed or deformed. The Misalignment or
Enforcement of
Bearings deformed bearings are deformation of
temporary speed
bearings not performing the tracks
restrictions.
their role and
transferring No associated injuries or
the load to the loss of lives.
substructure
appropriately.
Failure of
bolted
connections Potential to stop Enforcement of
Collapse or temporary speed
and significantly
practical restrictions.
Bracing Buckling, disrupt rail traffic
collapse of
yield or on the area No associated injuries or
bracing
rupture of affected loss of lives.
bracing
members
Closure of the
Footbridge bridge until Closure of the bridge
Stair treads fail or partially fail
Stair repair/maintena until repair/maintenance
Treads nce works are works are completed.
completed.
Closure of the
Closure of the bridge
bridge until
Stringers fail or partially fail until
Stringers repairs/mainten
repairs/maintenance
ance works are
works are completed.
completed.
BRIDGES STRATEGY

Failure
Mode
Scenario Outcome
The
connection
system Failure of such
between the connection will impact
Failure of the main girders on the stability of the
connection and the main girders &
bolts crossbeams increasing the stress
Cross levels, forcing the
between the has failed due NA
Girders implementation of
main girders to excessive
and the corrosion and dynamic loads effects
cross-beams loss of section, reduction.
therefore not Implementation of speed
able to and load restrictions.
maintain its
load capacity
Collapse of up
to two trains.
traffic on the area
& Loss of Lives
to up to 600
Truss Collapse of Collapse of lives & damages to third
people.
Bottom Truss Bottom Truss Bottom parties on areas directly
Chord Chord Chord Severe below the affected span.
disturbance to
the traffic on
roads and public
areas below the
structure.
structure.
Collapse of up
to two trains.
traffic on the area
& Loss of Lives
to up to 600
Collapse of Collapse of lives & damages to third
Truss Top people.
Truss Top Truss Top parties on areas directly
Chord
Chord Chord Severe below the affected span.
disturbance to
the traffic on
roads and public
areas below the
structure.
structure.
BRIDGES STRATEGY

Failure
Mode
Scenario Outcome
Collapse of up
to two trains.
traffic on the area
& Loss of Lives
Collapse of Severe injuries / loss of
Collapse of to up to 600
Truss Truss lives & damages to third
Truss people.
Diagonal Diagonal parties on areas directly
Diagonal
Member Member Severe below the affected span.
Member Chord
Chord disturbance to
the traffic on
roads and public
areas below the
structure.
structure.
Collapse of up
to two trains.
traffic on the area
& Loss of Lives
Collapse of to up to 600
Truss Collapse of lives & damages to third
Truss people.
Vertical Truss Vertical parties on areas directly
Vertical
Member Member Severe below the affected span.
Member
disturbance to
the traffic on
roads and public
areas below the
structure.
structure.
Severe injury or
loss of life
Failure of the walkways Closure of the walkway
Walkway/ Damages to
including wearing surface, until repair/maintenance
Refuge third party
connections or beams works are completed.
properties (road
vehicles).

Failure or partial failure of Deformation of until repair/maintenance
Timber timber deck timbers due to tracks causing works are completed or
Deck poor condition train possible significant speed
derailment restriction placed on
bridge.

Deformation of until repair/maintenance
Failure or partial failure of deck tracks causing works are completed or
Steel Deck
train possible significant speed
bridge.
BRIDGES STRATEGY

Failure
Mode
Scenario Outcome
Deformation of until repair/maintenance
Concrete Failure or partial failure of deck tracks causing works are completed or
Deck train possible significant speed
bridge.
Potential for loss

of ballast due to
failed kerbs.
Place speed restriction
Kerb Failure of kerbs Potential for on bridge
ballast to fall on
passing vehicles
beneath bridge.
A connection Severe injury to

of the cast-iron up to 1 member
Corrosion & decorative of the public. Closure of the bridge
Railing/ failure of the section has
Damages to until
Barrier/ decorative failed and this
third party repairs/maintenance
Parapet cast iron section has
properties (road works are completed.
elements collapsed on
the public area or lightweight
below. vehicles).
BRIDGES STRATEGY
8. Risk
a. Enterprise Risks
Risks are identified and assessed within Metro in accordance with Metro’s Enterprise
Risk Management Procedure (L0-SQE-PRO-031). A summary of this process,
including monitoring and review after completion of the risk assessment, is as follows:
 Risk assessments are undertaken to determine whether there are any further
controls that can or should be applied to reduce an identified risk
 Risks controls are identified and assessed in the workshop as being: a)
recommend to adopt; b) explore further; and/or c) reject
 The workshop documentation (register and report, if one is needed) are sent to
corporate risk department within the Safety, Environment and Risk (SER) division
of Metro (risk@metrotrains.com.au)
 The SER risk department reviews the risk assessment and determines the level
of escalation of risks to relevant committees based on the risk score
There are about 112 bridges built pre-1930 with 47 bridges constructed before 1912.
This is a significant number of bridges that were constructed between 1912 and 1930
around the time when the rail network was electrified and expanded. The 47 bridges
with an age in excess of 100 years will remain in operation into the foreseeable
future, which is acceptable given MTM continues to monitor the asset condition and
there is no foreseeable risks. Continuing asset condition monitoring will identify any
bridge requiring renewal or rehabilitation in the future.
The risks associated with Bridge Assets are mitigated through the specification of
tolerances which are captured in the MTM Structures Maintenance Instructions. In
principle the inspection and maintenance regimes mean that Bridge Assets are
maintained within tolerances that mitigate risks in advance of any safety and
performance related incidents occurring.
The key longer-term risks associated with Bridge Assets therefore relate to the overall
degradation of the asset to the point at which the specified maintenance and
inspection regimes cannot be applied cost effectively and the asset needs to be
replaced.
Identified Risks & Proposed Controls

The following risks outlined in Table 21 have been established as key risks to the
bridges on the MTM network, as identified through risk workshops. Key strategies
and proposed controls have been developed to target these risks.
BRIDGES STRATEGY
Table 21 - Bridges Risks & Proposed Controls

Risk Proposed / Possible
Current Controls / Treatments
Description Controls
 Inspection regime per TMP  Upgrade of crash beams

 Fault reporting and response  Revise Bridge Impact
protocols Procedures to assist
 Maintenance personnel training & inspection and decision
competence making regime for
supervisors post bridge
Structural  Renewals per AWP
impact event
failure  Maintained according to TMP
 VicRoads project to
leading to  Signage with telephone numbers
improve visibility of
operational to advise of bridge strike
bridges with advance
line closure  Crash beams installed to protect warning signs and
bridge from strikes chevrons
 Advance warning signs for road  Increase training and
traffic supervision in bridge
 Bridges built post 1974 designed inspection &
for impact loading (AS5100) maintenance
 Inspection regime per TMP  Upgrade of crash beams
 Fault reporting and response  Revise Bridge Impact
protocols Procedures to assist
Bridges -
 Maintenance personnel training & inspection and decision
Underbridge
competence making regime for
Structural
supervisors post bridge
failure  Renewals per AWP
impact event
leading to  Maintained according to TMP
 VicRoads project to
Bridge  Signage with telephone numbers
improve visibility of
collapse to advise of bridge strike
bridges with advance
under rail  Crash beams installed to protect warning signs and
traffic, train bridge from strikes chevrons
falls onto  Advance warning signs for road  Increase training and
road below. traffic supervision in bridge
 Bridges built post 1974 designed inspection &
for impact loading (AS5100) maintenance
 Inspection regime per TMP
 Fault reporting and response
protocols
 Maintenance personnel training &
Bridges -
competence
Overbridges  Increase training and
 Maintained according to TMP
Structural supervision in bridge
failure  Bridges built post 1974 designed inspection &
for impact loading (AS5100)
leading to maintenance
Bridge  VRIOG Standards for structural  Renewal of service
collapse onto clearances around rolling stock
expired bridges
rail traffic kinematic envelope
 ROA plate A (Victorian rolling
stock kinematic envelope)
 Leica trolley clearance structural
clearance inspections
BRIDGES STRATEGY

 Inspection regime per TMP
 Fault reporting and response
protocols
 Maintenance personnel training &  Renewal of service
Bridges -
competence expired bridges
Footbridges
 Maintained according to TMP  Increase training and
Structural
failure  Bridges built post 1974 designed supervision in bridge
for impact loading (AS5100) inspection &
leading to
Bridge  VRIOG Standards for structural maintenance
collapse onto clearances around rolling stock  Engineering
rail traffic kinematic envelope investigations of
 ROA plate A (Victorian rolling footbridge load rating
stock kinematic envelope)
 Leica trolley clearance structural
clearance inspections
Bridges -  Inspection regime per TMP

Subways  Fault reporting and response
protocols  Divert runoff from 3rd
Structural
party drainage
failure  Maintenance personnel training &
leading to competence  Increase training and
supervision in bridge
Subway  Renewals per AWP
inspection &
collapse  Maintained according to TMP
maintenance
under rail  Inspection and maintenance of
traffic drains
 Installation of low bridge

 Installed crash beam protection
height warning systems
Bridge for low height bridges
(road based – 3rd party
damage or  Detailed bridge inspections
installation)
collapse due conducted to certify bridge for
 Remote monitoring
to road use after bridge strike
systems to be installed
vehicle  Signage with telephone numbers
on critical bridges which
impact to advise of bridge strike
receive high numbers of
strikes
Crash beam
is struck and
 Secondary fall protection
collapses
to be fitted to all crash
onto traffic,  Secondary fall protection fitted to
beams
pedestrians some crash beams across the
 Installation of low bridge
or other network to prevent collapse of the
height warning systems
causing beams
(road based – 3rd party
damage,
injury or loss installation)
of life
BRIDGES STRATEGY

Increased
 Changes to frequencies
maintenance
to ensure critical bridges
cost (or  Frequency based inspection
are inspected with
replacement regimes used to ensure all
greater frequency
cost) due to bridges are inspected within a
 Load capacity
insufficient minimum period of time
assessments to be
inspections  Detailed bridge condition reports
and/or failure conducted to greater
completed for critical bridges
understand bridge
to identify
defects condition
b. Asset Management System Target Risks

The following key risks to the delivery of the Asset Management Strategy and
Objectives were identified and reviewed in association with the Bridges Asset Class:
Table 22 - Bridge Asset Risks to Asset Management System

AMS
Risk Description Proposed Controls
Risk No.
Information Accessibility Ensure adequate management of change
(changes in system and 23 when introducing Ellipse as the ‘single
software) source of truth’ asset management tool
Improvement actions to be identified
Continuous Improvement through this ACS and added to Asset
(complacency in the need 24 Management Improvement Action register
to continuously improve) with dates for actions to be implemented
and tracked
BRIDGES STRATEGY
9. Planning and Costing Scenarios

To form an understanding of which of the engineering solutions represents a best for
network solution, it is necessary to get an understanding of the costs associated with
the implementation of the available options. The three scenarios to be considered are
as follows:
 Do Nothing (Reactive Maintenance Approach)
 Refurbish (Life Extend)
 Renewal
This section summarises an analysis of the costs for each of the options listed above,
as well as a Life Cycle Costing Analysis, providing insight on the long-term costs for
the different strategic approaches. The analysis has been applied to the nineteen
most critical bridge assets identified through the criticality analysis in Section 5.
An estimate of the Real Costs for each engineering solution has been completed
based on available cost information and best knowledge of the engineering solution,
as well as Metro Trains Melbourne usual practices with regards to projects delivery.
The following general assumptions have been made in the development of the whole
of life asset cost estimates:
 Estimates based on relevant available information and in some cases are
provided to demonstrate relative costs
 A nominal annual general maintenance figure has been assumed for each
structure. The nominal annual maintenance cost increases or reduces according
to each intervention option as follows:
o Do Nothing – Annual maintenance costs assumed to increase by 0.2% year
on year as the structure continues to deteriorate over time creating more
reactive faults
o Refurbish – Annual maintenance costs reduced by 75% at time of intervention
after which 0.2% annual escalation is applied
o Renewal – Annual maintenance cost is reduced by 95% at the time of
intervention after which 0.2% annual escalation is applied
 Capital costs have also had additional overheads applied at a rate of 10% to the
capital expense. This is to cater for design, project management, administration,
etc.
 Net Present Value (NPV) of the whole of Life costs has been used to provide
objective comparison of the accumulated costs as follows:
Where: RC = Real Costs

WACCRate = “Weighted Average Cost of Capitals” Rate (7.5%)
Y = Year of Implementation Since Start of Analysis
Using the assumptions outlined above and following an assessment of the capital and
operating expenditure requirements based on engineering inputs (i.e., reports,
inspections etc.) as well as the assessment of the risk profile costs can be allocated
to each option accordingly.
BRIDGES STRATEGY
The result enables each option to be objectively assessed against each other as
providing the best value to the network.
For the scenarios provided below, a general assessment is provided as a summary
for the nineteen most critical bridges (detailed in Section 5c), as well as a specific
example from Elizabeth St Collingwood, one of the critical bridges. For detail on the
recommended strategy for each of the critical bridges, see Section 11.
a. Existing Reliability Improvement and Growth Plans

The current process by which MTM develops the rolling Annual Works Plan is in
alignment with best for network asset management principles and is defined in the
Asset Management Planning Process, L1-NAM-PRO-011.
To support this process, MTM has developed and implemented the Renewal
Prioritisation Tool (RPT) to provide supporting financial evidence in the Annual Works
Plan. The functionality of the RPT is to phase works by priority of different class of
assets and annual ESCROW funding constraints into AWP. The manual optimisation
activity reviews the outputs of the RPT for operational alignment opportunities and
effective resource planning & management on a financial basis only.
b. Scenario 1: Lowest Cycle Cost
i. Description
Do Nothing (Reactive Maintenance Approach) – This concept is generally
associated with the least direct cost and comprises of applying a reactive
maintenance approach over the remaining structure life (50 years).
ii. Outcomes
The continuation of frequent inspections and reactive maintenance type
interventions on bridges, in order to keep costs low and to limit risk from rising to
unacceptable levels.
Example: Reactive Maintenance Actions for Elizabeth St Bridge, Collingwood:
 Reactive replacement of deck timbers year on year
 Ad-hoc replenishment of ballast depth due to loss through the deteriorating
deck
 Budgeted maintenance costs of $10,000 per annum
iii. Benefits
Reduced costs and the ability to redirect budget towards other renewals is the
greatest benefit of this approach. Through the Life Cycle Cost analysis, the
average cost of implementing this scenario over a fifty year period, is calculated
at just 3% (NPV) of the cost of a renewal approach and 20% of a refurbishment
approach over the same period.
Example: Benefits of Reactive Approach for Elizabeth St Bridge, Collingwood:
 Estimated costs of just $98,000 (Net Present Value) over fifty years, compared
to costs of over $2 million for renewal of the bridge. This equates to
approximately 5% of the potential spend on the bridge.
BRIDGES STRATEGY
 The low NPV spend over fifty years on Elizabeth St allows for a strategy that
promotes minimal spend on many bridges, rather than a large spend on a
select few bridges.
iv. Consequences
The ‘Do Nothing’ scenario results in no decrease in discarded risk over the fifty
year period. Instead, the approach aims to limit the increase of risk to
unacceptable levels. On bridges where risk is already at a level of concern, this
may not be an appropriate scenario.
An example of the resulting comparison risk profile of each scenario is provided
in Figure 36 below:
Figure 36 - Risk Profile over Time
As is shown, from the point of view of risk, the ‘Do Nothing’ option is the least
attractive of the three scenarios.
c. Scenario 2: Constrained Maintenance and Renewals Budget
i. Description
Refurbish (Life Extend) – The work involved in applying this option varies for
each structure dependent on the defect(s) that are causing the poor performance
and the type of structure being refurbished. This option includes strengthening
over stressed or significantly deteriorated members, deep soil injection to arrest
settlement problems, or replacing a timber deck like for like. The refurbish option
generally achieves 25 - 50 years extra life for the structure, but requires less
capital expense to implement than renewal.
BRIDGES STRATEGY
ii. Outcomes
This scenario consists of medium level investment for renewal of bridge
components that are in poor condition, rather than renewal of the full structure.
The balance between refurbishment and maintenance will vary from asset to
asset.
Example: Refurbishment Actions for Elizabeth St Bridge:
 Budgeted refurbishment costs of $800,000 for year one
 Replace timber deck like-for-like
 Strengthen/refurbish girders (repaint, replace stiffeners/rivets, flange
strengthening plates)
 Ancillary rail works (track and overhead)
 Permits and general overhead (5% of bridge works)
iii. Benefits
On average, the refurbishment or life extension approach reduces the risk of
doing nothing by 25%. While the scenario does not reduce risk to the same
extent as a full renewal approach, costs are much lower, with estimated NPV
costs being around just 15% of the cost of completing a full renewal.
Example: Benefits of Refurbishment for Elizabeth St Bridge, Collingwood:
 Estimated costs of just $697,000 (Net Present Value) over fifty years,
compared to costs of over $2 million for renewal of the bridge. This equates to
approximately 30% of the potential spend on the bridge.
 The life extension works estimated to provide a 30% reduction in risk related
to the bridge
iv. Consequences
The average cost of the life extension approach is expected to be around five
times more expensive than managing bridge assets through reactive
maintenance. This additional costs represents reduced risk, however the
reduction in risk is not as large as can be achieved through full renewal.
Example: Consequences of Refurbishment for Elizabeth St Bridge, Collingwood:
 The costs to refurbish the Elizabeth St Bridge is expected to be around 14
times that of the estimated reactive maintenance
 The reduction in risk for completing life extension is approximated at 30%,
while full renewal is expected to achieve a reduction of 37%
d. Scenario 3: Enhanced Renewals Budget
i. Description
Renewal – This option considers the complete replacement of the asset or
significant component with another providing the same or equivalent level of
service. This includes replacing an entire superstructure of a given bridge but
maintaining existing substructure, or the replacement or an entire structure.
BRIDGES STRATEGY
ii. Outcomes
This option should always achieve the minimum new design life of 100 years but
generally requires significantly more capital than “do nothing” or refurbish
options.
Example: Renewal Actions for Elizabeth St Bridge, Collingwood:
 Estimated renewal costs of $2.5 million in year one
 Replace superstructure, including deck (new structure compliant to AS5100)
 Replace bluestone imposts
 Ancillary rail works (Track & Overhead)
 Permits and general
iii. Benefits
Purely considering risk reduction, the best performing approach is renewal. On
average, renewing one of the critical bridges will reduce risk to a level from which
it will take more than 40 years of service for the asset return to a similar level of
risk as is carried by the structure today.
Example: Benefits of Renewal for Elizabeth St Bridge, Collingwood:
 Renewal of this bridge is expected to reduce risk by 37% over a fifty year
period
 By renewing the asset in the short term, frequencies of inspection can be
reduced allowing for more frequent assessments of other critical bridges
iv. Consequences
The short term capital costs required to implement this scenario are very high in
comparison to the other scenarios analysed. On average, a full renewal approach
is approximately six times as expensive as refurbishment and over thirty times as
expensive as the ‘Do Nothing’ reactive maintenance approach.
Example: Consequences of Renewal for Elizabeth St Bridge, Collingwood:
 The cost of full renewal of the Elizabeth St Bridge is estimated at $2.5 million,
representing a Net Present Value of $2.3 million over fifty years. Approximate
NPV for refurbishment over the same period is $697,000, while reactive
maintenance NPV is just $98,400.
 The practicality of implementing such an approach is also a concern. Only a
certain number of bridge renewals can be completed per annum, due to
constraints such as occupation availability, program management time, cash
flow and material availability.
BRIDGES STRATEGY
10. Proposed Improvement Actions

A number of improvement actions have been identified throughout the development
of this strategy. These improvement actions are detailed in Table 23.
Table 23 - Improvement Actions
Improvement Action Duration Benefit
Required frequency of visual inspections

Implement change to to be reduced to yearly. This will allow
inspection frequencies time for more frequent completion of
(draft of revised Structures detailed or special inspections of bridges
3 months
& Facilities Maintenance where condition is poor or very poor. A
Plan already completed – change to frequency requirements means
requiring sign off) that inspections can be more regularly
conducted based on condition.
Alignment between Ensures that all inspection instigated

contractor managed work defects are raised as a work order in
6 months
orders and Ellipse work Ellipse and are managed through an MTM
orders controlled database.
Currently there is a difference in the total

number of bridge assets reported in the
Anomalies between externally managed bridge inspection
externally managed bridge database and MTM’s asset management
inspection database and system, Ellipse. Differences can be
MTMs Ellipse database to 6 months attributed to the way different assets are
be rectified. True number defined. For example, Oakleigh subway
of bridge assets to be has two asset numbers in Ellipse, while
defined. the inspection database uses one.
Alignment of these two registers is a key
improvement.
Externally managed
bridge inspection
Ensures that all inspection instigated
database and MTMs
defects are raised as a work order in
Ellipse database 6 months
Ellipse and are managed in alignment with
information to align with
stipulated frequencies.
future condition rating
definitions
Crash beam condition to
be captured as part of Increased data and understanding relating
6 months
frequency driven bridge to crash beam condition.
inspections
Investigate creating Ensures all inspections are to time,

contract for bridge 1 year budget, standard and against relevant
inspections assets in the Ellipse register.
BRIDGES STRATEGY
Improvement Action Duration Benefit
Development of a Allows for prioritisation of maintenance

criticality list and renewal funds; appropriate frequency
1 year
encompassing all bridge of inspections and prioritisation of detailed
assets across the network analyses.
Detailed analysis of all

Where the budget allows, this ensures that
bridges of fair condition to
MTM’s focus is on the preventative
understand average 1 year
maintenance of bridges, rather than
degradation and trends in
reactive maintenance.
ACI
AHI tool is required in order to better

Development of an Asset prioritise maintenance and renewals
1 year
Health Index tool activities based on a best for network
approach.
Viaduct life extension

The funding and scope of this project is
project to be discussed
beyond completion within maintenance
with PTV to decide on 1 year
and renewals budgets. PTV involvement is
funding, scope and
required to create a dedicated project.
strategy
Degraves St and Elizabeth

St subway replacement The funding and scope of this project is
project to be discussed beyond completion within maintenance
1 year
with PTV to decide on and renewals budgets. PTV involvement is
funding, scope and required to create a dedicated project.
strategy
Improvement to the type
and scope of the
inspections. Clear
The existing scope of the inspections
definitions of inspection
covers only visual elements. Components
requirements to be
1 year that are underwater, below ground (timber
defined in revised
components) or hidden by concrete/timber
Structures & Facilities
are not inspected.
Maintenance Plan and
additional inspections
budget to be allocated.
BRIDGES STRATEGY
11. Proposed Strategy Selection
a. Approach
In order to provide a robust approach to the track system asset class, a number of
variables (outlined throughout the earlier sections of this report) need to be
considered:
 Asset management objectives
 Group requirements including network criticality, as stipulated by Network
Development
 Age of the assets
 Condition of the assets
 Expenditure analysis
 Utilisation and failure history
 Asset deterioration and Consequences
 Risks and proposed controls
The approach to this strategy has been to recommend actions (both specific and
general) over the short, medium and long term. As a rule of thumb: short term is
considered to be the next two years; medium term is between two and five years; and
long term is beyond the next five years.
There are a number of constraints that are envisaged to prevent bridge assets being
maintained at an optimum capacity. These constraints are detailed in Table 24:
Table 24 - Maintenance & Renewals Constraints

Constraint Impact
Limited track access Due to increased services across the network, track time
for inspections during days is limited between trains.
Impact of ‘Night With the introduction of 24 hour running, 2 days a week in

Network’ initiative on 2016, track access during hours of non-train running will
the availability of on become more difficult and weekend occupations are to
track maintenance become a rarity. As major bridge renewals will require full
and associated weekend occupations, this will have a major impact on the
occupations ability to replace bridges prioritised for renewal.
Due to limited opportunity to access occupations to conduct
inspections, it is rare that overhead power will be turned off
Live Overhead
during bridge inspections. This has the effect that close
Power
inspections often cannot be conducted on bridge
components close to the overhead wires.
An unlimited budget would allow an optimal system to be

Limited funding for
operated, however as bridges do not traditionally cause
packages of
PWM’s the business is not expected to allocate large funds
renewals
for bridge renewals.
BRIDGES STRATEGY
Constraint Impact
Limited funding for The budget for maintenance is likely to limit the ability to
maintenance implement all strategic recommendations.
b. Bridges Strategy & Tactics
Strategy
“Maintain bridge assets in a serviceable condition in order to achieve

expected life of the asset and meet future operational needs”
Key Strategy Tactics
 Assess all bridges individually by applying life cycle cost modelling, choosing a
renewals approach that constitutes the best value for money
 Complete life cycle cost modelling for all bridge assets on the network
 Where superstructure renewal is recommended, consideration is to be given to
improvements in clearances and track quality (eg. increased ballast depth, road
clearance and overhead heights)
 Gradual and continued installation of secondary fall protection on crash beams
lacking such a prevention system
 In the medium term, improvements in bridge condition data are to be sought
through the use of load capacity assessments on critical bridges
 Napier St Bridge, Footscray to be fitted with a Bridge Impact Detection and
Remote Investigation Capability system
Short Term Tactics

MTMs short-term approach to managing bridge assets is to continue to assess all
bridges individually by applying life cycle cost modelling. This method compares cost
and risk of failure for a selection of different approaches and allows MTM to choose a
renewals approach that constitutes best value for money and the smart allocation of
funds. Currently, just the bridges listed as being of high criticality have been assessed
by LLC.
Based on the detailed life cycle cost analysis of 20 critical bridges on the network,
strategy for these bridges has been defined and a number of the bridges require
intervention. Bridge assets requiring short-term works, as well as the works required
at each location are listed below in Table 25:
Table 25 - Short Term Bridge Works
Short Term
Bridge Description
Strategy
Johnson St Bridge, Life Extension Strengthen girders and substructure.
Abbotsford Works Widen central pier
Aitken Creek Bridge, Life Extension Replace deck, strengthen girders, track
Craigieburn Works and overhead renewals
Phoenix St Life Extension

Replace timber deck
Footbridge, Brunswick Works
BRIDGES STRATEGY
Short Term
Bridge Description
Strategy
Westgarth Station Life Extension Replace timber deck and strengthen
Footbridge Works girders
Williamstown Beach Life Extension

Rebuild wingwall
Station Subway Works
As can be seen from the nominated short-term works, life extension or bridge
refurbishment is generally the most cost effective and best value approach. Further
detail on each of these nominated works locations is provided in Section 11c, Critical
Bridges Strategy & Tactics. These bridges are to be nominated to the annual works
plan through the RPT process.
Where superstructure renewal is recommended, consideration is to be given to
improvements in clearances and track quality (eg. increased ballast depth, road
clearance and overhead heights).
Expansion of the life cycle cost modelling from a selection of the most critical bridges
on the network to all bridge on the network is a key short-term strategy. This will allow
for improved planning, greater visibility of required future interventions and an
understanding of when and where funding will be required.
MTM is responsible for the maintenance of 136 rail-over-road bridges (as defined in
Section 3d, Asset Base). Of these bridges, 58 are protected by crash beams,
resulting in a total of 115 individual crash beam assets across the network. The
potential consequence of a crash beam falling onto the roadway following a bridge
strike has driven the need for a crash beam strategy. The short-term recommendation
is to begin requires the gradual and continued installation of secondary fall protection
on the beams lacking such a prevention system (full list available in Appendix D).
In the short term, it is recommended that Napier St Bridge in Footscray be fitted with
a Bridge Impact Detection and Remote Investigation Capability system. The system
enables remote monitoring of the bridge and would represent a significant
improvement from the current process where bridge strikes are most commonly
reported though the public. This would also represent a trial of the system and if
successful, could be rolled out to other bridges that see high numbers of bridge
strikes.
Medium Term Tactics

A list of bridge assets requiring medium term works, as well as the works required at
each location is detailed in Table 26:
BRIDGES STRATEGY
Table 26 - Medium Term Bridge Works

Medium Term
Bridge Description
Strategy
Elizabeth St Bridge, Life Extension Deck replacement and strengthening of

Collingwood Works mild steel girders
Stafford St Bridge, Replace both substructure and

Full Renewal
Abbotsford superstructure
Blackburn Rd Bridge, Life Extension Replace deck, strengthen girders, track

Syndal Works and overhead renewals
Gipps St Bridge, Life Extension Strengthen girders and repair damaged

Abbotsford Works brickwork
General Motors
Removal Remove remaining steel structure
Station Footbridge
Yarra River Bridge, Life Extension

Refurbishment of bearings
Cremorne Works
Dennis Station Life Extension Substructure refurbishment and

Subway Works strengthening works
Glenferrie Station Life Extension Deep soil injection, brickwork repairs and
Subway Works drainage improvement works
Brewster St Life Extension Replace timber deck and strengthen

Footbridge, Essendon Works girders
Waterway Bridge, Life Extension

Replace timber deck
Diggers Rest Works
Maribyrnong River
Life Extension
Bridge, South Cross girder strengthening
Works
Kensington
Further detail on each of these nominated works locations is provided in Section 11c,
Critical Bridges Strategy & Tactics.
In the medium term, improvements in bridge condition data are to be sought through
the use of load capacity assessments on critical bridges; including bridges of low
condition index and bridges in locations where tonnage changes are expected (high
capacity trains, increased freight, increased timetables). Load capacity information is
critical to understanding the bridge components requiring strengthening or
replacement and whether a bridge has capacity for all train configurations.
Progressive installation of secondary fall protection on crash beams lacking such a
prevention system is a medium term recommendation. For bridges regularly struck by
vehicles, such as Napier St in Footscray, consideration shall be given to the fitting of
seismic sensors that provide notification to structural engineers of bridge strikes and
also allow for remote inspection and assessment of the bridge’s stability.
BRIDGES STRATEGY
Long Term Tactics

A list of bridge assets requiring long-term works, as well as the works required at
each location is detailed in Table 27:
Table 27 - Long Term Bridge Works

Long Term
Bridge Description
Strategy
Malcolm Creek Life Extension Replace deck, strengthen girders, track
Bridge, Craigieburn Works and overhead renewals
Plenty River Bridge, Life Extension

Replace deck
Greensborough Works
Racecourse Road Renewal of superstructure, including

Renewal
Bridge, Newmarket deck; and ancillary rail works
Perry St Subway, Life Extension Deep soil injection, repair brickwork,

Williamstown Beach Works ground anchors and abutments.
Further detail on each of these nominated works locations is provided in Section 11c,
Critical Bridges Strategy & Tactics.
Knowledge of load capacity/structural integrity of all MTM managed bridge assets
would represent a key asset management improvement. Therefore MTM strategy
over the long term is to conduct engineering assessments on all bridges in order to
calculate a benchmark load capacity for all bridge assets.
Implementation of an Asset Health Index instigated load capacity assessment regime,
which ensures high criticality bridges are load tested at appropriate intervals.
c. Critical Bridges Strategy & Tactics

As defined previously in this strategy, a number of bridges have been prioritised as
being the most critical on the network and therefore were subjected to a life cycle cost
analysis. Recommended tactics relating to each of these prioritised bridge assets has
been summarised in this section.
Aitken Creek Timber Deck Bridge – Underbridge

The rail bridge at Aitken Creek consists of two separate timber decks on 4 RSJ steel
girders, which sit on timber sills. The timber sills consist of two timbers placed directly
on top of the bluestone abutments and piers. Recent inspections have identified
defects to the asset, including severe corrosion to the top flange of the girders and rot
to the lower sill timber at the abutments.
Refurbishment of this bridge is recommended which is to include the replacement of
the timber deck with steel troughing, the refurbishment of girders and steelwork; and
includes the relay of track (sleepers, rail and ballast). With the costs of bridge life
extension and the costs to the track department, the estimated cost of completing the
Aitken Creek Bridge renewal is $1,100,000. The works are of high priority and are
required in the next two years.
BRIDGES STRATEGY
Johnson St Bridge, Abbotsford – Underbridge

Analysis of Johnson St Bridge demonstrates efficiency in the refurbish option. This
option reveals a cost of $15 per risk point discarded compared to $52 per point for
Renewal. It is therefore recommended that the Johnson St Rail Bridge be refurbished.
The life extension works are expected to include: strengthening/refurbishment of the
girders; the tie-back of wing walls and fender wall; repainting of cracked brickwork;
stitching/strengthening of cracks; and the widening of the central pier.
The LLC modelling for Johnson St suggests that this life extension work needs to be
completed in the short term, before the risk profile shows a negative change in the
risk category.
The estimated cost for such works is $400,000.
Phoenix St, Brunswick – Footbridge

The approach for the footbridge at Phoenix St is to life extend the structure by
refurbishing the timber deck at an estimated cost of $150,000. It is recommended that
the works are completed within two years.
Westgarth Station - Footbridge

The LCC analysis has shown refurbishment to be the most efficient scenario for
Westgarth Footbridge, with a unit cost of $5 per unit of risk discarded versus $15 for
renewal. The footbridge should therefore be refurbished by replacing the existing
timber deck and through the strengthening of other main components. The works are
recommended for completion within the next two years for an estimated cost of
$250,000.
Williamstown Beach Station - Subway

Refurbishment of the Williamstown Beach Station Subway is the best for network
solution, with a unit cost of $15 per unit of risk discarded compared to $42 for
renewal.
It is recommended that the up-side, up-end wingwall be rebuilt in the short term, while
the remainder of the refurbishment can be implemented within five years at an
estimated cost of $200,000.
Elizabeth St Bridge, Collingwood – Underbridge

The Elizabeth Street Railway Bridge is located at 4.077 km on the Flinders Street to
Clifton Hill rail corridor. The bridge is a simply supported single span underbridge
carrying two broad gauge tracks over Elizabeth Street, Richmond. Record data
indicates that the structure was constructed circa 1900.
Elizabeth St Bridge was load rated and the result was positive, therefore a full
renewal is not required. Analysis of the options available for the Elizabeth St Bridge
demonstrates good value in refurbishing the structure. The renewal option costs
some 4 times as much as the refurbish yet only achieves a marginal reduction in risk.
Previous recommendations for Elizabeth St from 2 separate engineering reports,
suggested taking action within the next few years.
It is therefore recommended that this structure be refurbished by replacing the
existing deck and strengthening the mild steel girders in the medium term. The
estimated cost for such works is $400,000.
BRIDGES STRATEGY
Stafford St Bridge, Abbotsford – Underbridge

The Stafford St rail bridge has significant issues with the substructure that has
resulted in cracking and rotation of the abutments. Renewal options are also limited
due to planning constraints and construction of new abutments in-front of those
existing is not possible, meaning reconstruction is recommended.
Through modelling, full renewal at Stafford St is shown to be the most efficient and
best for network solution, as it results in an approximate risk reduction of 62%, as
compared with just an 11% reduction through refurbishment. Renewal also
represents a cost of $58 per unit of risk discarded, compared to $74 through life
extension. It is therefore recommended that Stafford St Rail Bridge is replaced within
three years at an estimated cost of $2.5 million.
Blackburn Rd Bridge, Syndal - Underbridge

Refurbishment in the medium term is the recommended approach for the Blackburn
Rd Bridge, with a unit cost of $25 per unit of risk discarded versus $48 for renewal.
The estimated cost of the project is $800,000, with works to include: replacement of
the timber deck with steel troughing; bearing repair; and ancillary track and overhead
works.
Gipps St Bridge, Collingwood – Underbridge

The underbridge at Gipps St has been identified as having significant defects. These
include: internal web section loss to all main girders; below standard ballast depth;
bearing stiffener section loss; cross girder top flange section loss; buckled cross
bracing; erosion to grout bearing pad; wing wall cracks; and fender wall cracks.
The analysis of the Gipps St Bridge reveals a cost of $8.50 per unit of discarded risk
through refurbishment compared with a cost of $36 per unit if renewed. It’s therefore
recommended that Gipps St Rail Bridge is refurbished within 5 years at an estimated
cost of $150,000.
General Motors Station – Footbridge

The timber deck and stair treads on the General Motors Footbridge have already
been removed, leaving the steel structure which is in a fair to poor condition. It is
recommended that the footbridge be removed as a medium term priority in the
coming 3-5 years, for an estimated cost of $50,000.
Yarra River Bridge, Cremorne – Underbridge

Refurbishment of bearings is recommended for the Yarra River Bridge. It is
recommended that these life extension works should be implemented within the next
five years at an estimated cost of $600,000.
Dennis Station – Subway

The Dennis Subway has significant substructure defects and the LLC analysis
reveals renewal of the substructure to be the approach that best represents a best for
the network solution. The renewal is estimated at a cost of $600,000 and is
recommended to take place in the medium term.
BRIDGES STRATEGY
Glenferrie Station - Subway

It is recommended that the Glenferrie Subway is refurbished through deep soil
injection and other associated repair works, including brickwork repairs and drainage
improvement works. The life extension works are estimated to cost $500,000 and are
to be implemented within five years.
Brewster St, Essendon - Footbridge

Refurbishment is recommended for Brewster St when the deck is due for
replacement. This is estimated to be required within five years at an estimated cost of
$200,000.
Waterway Bridge, Diggers Rest – Underbridge

The recent inspection data and subsequent risk profile for the structure indicate the
deck and ballast kerb to be in moderate condition, while the superstructure steelwork
is of fair condition. The refurbishment approach is therefore the more efficient and
recommended action. Work is recommended to take place within five years and for
an estimated cost of $500,000.
Maribyrnong River Truss Bridge – Underbridge

Cross girder strengthening is required to life extend the Maribyrnong River Truss
Bridge. It is recommended that these refurbishment works be implemented within the
next five years at an estimated cost of $200,000.
Malcolm Creek Bridge, Craigieburn - Underbridge

The LLC analysis recommends the refurbishment option to be the most efficient and
best for network solution for the Malcolm Creek Bridge. Works required as part of
refurbishment are: timber deck replacement with steel troughing; strengthening of the
girders; and ancillary rail works. It is recommended that the refurbishment is
conducted within five to ten years at an estimated cost of $550,000.
Plenty River Bridge, Greensborough - Underbridge

Inspection records for this structure indicate the condition of the steelwork to be fair.
This being the case it is likely the timber deck will deteriorate at a greater rate than
the steelwork, meaning that the steelwork deterioration will not be much more
advanced than its current condition.
It is therefore recommended that the bridge be refurbished at the time when the
timber deck is in poor condition. This is estimated to be required within five to ten
years at a cost of $500,000.
Racecourse Road Bridge, Newmarket – Underbridge

Life cycle cost analysis of this bridge demonstrates renewal of the superstructure to
be the most efficient option for the Racecourse Rd Bridge. However, the condition of
this bridge is relatively good and renewal is not required in the short term.
It is recommended to continue to maintain the existing structure at Racecourse Rd
over the next 5-8 years. In this time the real costs of renewal or refurbishment should
be validated to confirm the appropriate action.
BRIDGES STRATEGY
Perry Street, Williamstown Beach - Subway

Refurbishment of the Perry St Subway is the most efficient solution with a unit cost of
$15 per unit of risk discarded compared to $42 for renewal. It is therefore
recommended to implement refurbishment of the subway’s substructure within five to
ten years at an estimated cost of $200,000.
Old Viaduct, Southern Cross Station to Flinders Street Station - Underbridge

The Old Viaduct is made up of 45 spans, with spans numbered from the Southern
Cross Station end to the Flinders St Station end. Originally designed to carry two
lines, it was constructed in 1889, but was upgraded in 1915 to carry four lines,
providing for the increasing amount of traffic. Nominally, the viaduct is now life
expired.
The Old Viaduct is one of the most crucial pieces of infrastructure to the network and
for that reason MTM has invested significantly in both external and internal studies
into the maintenance and renewal of this key asset. As a result, it is understood that
viaduct spans 30 to 45 are of greatest concern and short term strategy is focused on
these spans. A summary of prioritised works required for long term durability is as
follows:
 Repair/replace all U frame struts
 Full reinstatement of paint protection system (includes sand blasting, removal of
lead based paints and repainting)
 Strengthening of girders and deck members identified to be nearing the end of
their fatigue life
These life extension priorities, in addition to required maintenance works, are
expected to cost up to $23 million. By contrast, the estimated costs of full renewal are
set at $205 million.
This is a project that is too large to be considered for listing in the RPT work bank.
Instead, this is a project that must be discussed with PTV and is therefore listed as an
improvement action to be followed up within the months following the release of the
Bridges ACS.
Flinders Street Subways (Degraves Street and Elizabeth Street)

The Degraves St. and Elizabeth St subways which connect Flinders St Station
platforms are very old assets and as a result are exhibiting significant structural
defects. The most serious of these defects is ground water penetration, which is
occurring due to build-up of water from the railway track above and is the cause of
significant cracking in the subway walls. This is quite a serious issue and requires a
complicated solution.
The cost of rectification works for the two subways is limiting to say the least. Initial
estimations to rectify the problems for both subways are up to 100 million dollars. It is
therefore recommended that given the significant costs, the subways should actually
be abandoned, gutted internally and a new elevated walkway should be built from the
Flinders St to Southbank with escalator connections to the platforms.
This is a project that is too large to be considered for listing in the RPT work bank.
Instead, this is a project that must be discussed with PTV and is therefore listed as an
improvement action to be followed up within the months following the release of the
Bridges ACS.
BRIDGES STRATEGY
Eltham Timber Bridge - Underbridge

Eltham Rail Bridge is the only timber pier bridge on the MTM network and therefore is
very much an individual case with unique challenges. Current ballast depth on the
bridge is only 75mm (well below standard) and rail joints are plated at staggered
intervals across the bridge, meaning that in many locations cyclic loading is being
applied to the bridge during train running.
The short term solution to life extension is therefore to adjust the rail joints so that
they sit directly above the bridge trestles and therefore better distribute the load.
Replacing the joints with continuously welded rail is another option. In either case,
structures and facilities will be liaising with the track department, as this is an area of
interface and the short term work is a track requirement.
In the medium to long term, this bridge will require re-decking. A proposal has been
compiled, which involves a full deck relay with a fibre composite deck and higher
ballast walls, allowing for greater ballast depth. The proposal includes the relay of
approximately 300m for an estimated total cost of $4 million and is expected to
provide the benefit of a 50% reduction in annual maintenance costs for the bridge.
Napier St, Footscray – Crash Beam Renewal

Napier Street in Footscray is the most frequently struck bridge on the network with an
average of 9.25 strikes per year. Of the container trucks that have struck the crash
beam of the bridge, the container has been knocked off the truck in 49% of incidents
and on one occasion landed on a car. On 36% of occasions the container has landed
on the footpath. While the crash beam installation at Napier Street is compliant to
standard, the configuration of the area presents a risk that needs to be mitigated.
It’s recommended that in the short term, the bridge over Napier St should be fitted
with a Bridge Impact Detection and Remote Investigation Capability system. This is a
monitoring system that includes the installation of an accelerometer and fixed camera
on both sides of the bridge. Video archive footage is compiled through images of an
impact and the MTM Operation Centre would be alerted when an over height vehicle
is detected. This system would represent a significant improvement from the current
process, where bridge strikes are most commonly reported by the public.
In addition, MTM are consulting with VicRoads regarding improved warning systems
at Napier St Bridge in order to promote bridge strike prevention. VicRoads are also
installing footpath barriers in order to increase pedestrian safety.
BRIDGES STRATEGY
12. References
1. J15-313_RPT_V0.1 Life Cycle Cost Analysis, Sterling Group Consultants, 2015
2. Bridge Life Extension Paper, Metro Trains Melbourne, 2013
3. Bridges, Footbridges, Subways & Overhead Structures – Valuation Analysis,
Sterling Group Consultants, 2015
4. Old Flinders Street Viaduct – Cost Benefit Analysis, Sterling Group Consultants,
2013
5. Metropolitan Railway Bridges Crash (Protection) Beam Compliance Investigation,
Sterling Group Consultants, 2010
BRIDGES STRATEGY
13. Appendices
a. Gross Tonnage Report 2014 – 2015
BRIDGES STRATEGY
b. Risk Profile Examples
BRIDGES STRATEGY
BRIDGES STRATEGY
c. Determination of Asset Condition

A requirement of Level 2, 3 and some Special Inspections is to rate the performance
of the asset using a system of rating the condition state of each individual element
that makes up the asset. The prescribed system uses predefined condition states, per
the table below, where the inspector uses appropriate judgement to allocate a
percentage of each asset element to the defined condition state.
Condition State Condition Description

Good Condition
Condition State 1
Component is in as new or good condition with little or no
deterioration
Fair Condition
Condition State 2 Component shows deterioration of a minor nature with
primary supporting material which is first signs of being
affected.
Poor Condition
Condition State 3 Component shows advancing deterioration and loss of
protection to the supporting material which is showing
deterioration and minor loss of section.
Very Poor Condition

Condition State 4 Component shows advanced deterioration, loss of effective
section to the primary supporting material, is acting differently
to design or is showing signs of over-stressing.
During asset inspection, the Field Inspector will record the observed condition state
for each structural component and the extent to which it exists according to the
general guidelines of the above table. The extent of each condition state affecting the
component shall be measured as a percentage of the whole component. That is, the
percentage of each condition state (1, 2, 3 and 4) must add up to 100% for each
structural component being assessed.
BRIDGES STRATEGY
d. Crash Beams Without Fall Protection

The following table details the number of crash beams on the network that do not
currently have fall protection. The number shown in brackets represents the total
within each section, as well as the total at each specific bridge.
Rail Line and Road Name

(No. of beams with no fall protection = 82)
PRINCES BRIDGE – CLIFTON HILL (7) EAST CAMBERWELL – ALAMEIN (4)

Egan Street (2) Culliton Road (2)
York Street (2) Toorak Road (2)
Bloomberg Street (1) RINGWOOD – BELGRAVE (6)
Noone Street (2) Forest Road (2)
CLIFTON HILL – EPPING (2) Burwood Highway (2)
Queens Parade (2) Main Street (Kia-Ora Avenue) (2)
CLIFTON HILL – HURSTBRIDGE (6) BURNLEY – GLEN WAVERLEY (7)
Urquhart Street (2) Warrigal Road (2)
Waterdale Road (2) Power Avenue (2)
Ashby Grove (2) Huntingdale Road (2)
RICHMOND – LILYDALE (17) Alvie Road (Up Side) (1)
Yarra Boulevard (2) RICHMOND - STH YARRA (6)
Glenferrie Road (2) Dunn Street (2)
John Street (Up Track) (1) Balmain Street (2)
William Street (2) Alexandra Avenue (2)
Henry Street (2) STH YARRA - SANDRINGHAM (2)
Auburn Road (2) Martin Street (2)
Albert Street (2) CAULFIELD - PAKENHAM (2)
Myrtle Road (2) Beaconsfield Avenue (Cardinia Ck) (2)
Canterbury Road (2) NTH MELBOURNE - UPFIELD (1)
CAULFIELD - FRANKSTON (2) Racecourse Road (Up Side) (1)
Patterson road (2) FLINDERS STREET - RICHMOND (2)
FOOTSCRAY - NEWPORT (2) Punt Road (2)
Napier Street (2) SPENCER ST - FLINDERS ST (10)
NEWPORT - WERRIBEE (2) Flinders Street Extension (2)
Derrimut Road for Standard Gauge tracks (2) Spencer Street (2)
NTH MELBOURNE - BROADMEADOWS (4) King Street (2)
Racecourse Road (2) William Street (Down Side) (1)
Ascot Vale Road (2) Market Street / Queensbridge (3)

L2-STF-PLA-002 v2 - Bridges Asset Class Strategy PDF

Încărcat de

Informații document

Descriere originală:

Titlu original

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

L2-STF-PLA-002 v2 - Bridges Asset Class Strategy PDF

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

BRIDGES STRATEGY

L2-STF-PLA-002 Version: 2 Effective from: 30th November 2015

L2-STF-PLA-002 Version: 2 Effective from: 30th November 2015

Approval Date Version Description

L2-STF-PLA-002 Version: 2 Effective from: 30th November 2015

1. Executive Summary ................................................................................ 7

3. Asset Class Information ....................................................................... 17

4. Objectives and Other Measures ........................................................... 30

5. Asset and Network Criticality ............................................................... 34

6. Asset Profile and Historical Analysis .................................................. 41

7. Asset Deterioration and Consequences ............................................. 60

L2-STF-PLA-002 Version: 2 Effective from: 30th November 2015

9. Planning and Costing Scenarios ......................................................... 70

10. Proposed Improvement Actions .......................................................... 75

12. References ............................................................................................. 87

L2-STF-PLA-002 Version: 2 Effective from: 30th November 2015

Table 1 - Bridge Structure Types .......................................................................................................... 17

L2-STF-PLA-002 Version: 2 Effective from: 30th November 2015

L2-STF-PLA-002 Version: 2 Effective from: 30th November 2015

None of these PWMs were recorded against Bridge Assets.

Population 521 Bridges

Replacement Total replacement cost of $1,101,427,802

Total remaining depreciated bridge value is $564,939,913

Life Expectancy 100 Years

L2-STF-PLA-002 Version: 2 Effective from: 30th November 2015

Key Risks  Structural failure leading to operational line closure

L2-STF-PLA-002 Version: 2 Effective from: 30th November 2015

Key Improvement  Implement change to inspection frequencies (draft of

L2-STF-PLA-002 Version: 2 Effective from: 30th November 2015

L2-STF-PLA-002 Version: 2 Effective from: 30th November 2015

Criteria Combined 1st 2nd 3rd 4th

L2-STF-PLA-002 Version: 2 Effective from: 30th November 2015

c. Abbreviations and Acronyms

Abbreviation and Description

L2-STF-PLA-002 Version: 2 Effective from: 30th November 2015

L2-STF-PLA-002 Version: 2 Effective from: 30th November 2015

L2-STF-PLA-002 Version: 2 Effective from: 30th November 2015

Standard Number Standard Title

f. Relevant Legislation and Regulations

Legislation/Regulation Summary of Requirements

Document Number Document Title

L2-STF-PLA-002 Version: 2 Effective from: 30th November 2015

Figure 1 - Bridge Asset Management Framework

Figure 2 - Metro Asset Management Document Structure

L2-STF-PLA-002 Version: 2 Effective from: 30th November 2015

3. Asset Class Information

a. Asset Class Description

Bridge that carries rail traffic over an

Bridge that carries vehicular traffic over

Bridge that carries pedestrians over a

A subway carries pedestrians

Bridge that carries railway traffic over a

L2-STF-PLA-002 Version: 2 Effective from: 30th November 2015

Bridge System components

Component Description Photo

The deck is classified as the

Further components: ballast Figure 8 - Bridge Deck

An upright support for the

Wing Retaining walls located

Figure 11 - Wing Wall

A structure built to support

L2-STF-PLA-002 Version: 2 Effective from: 30th November 2015