Using Fibre-Reinforced Polymer for pedestrian bridges isn’t new, is it?
A few minutes of googling gives me https://www.fibercore-europe.com/en/projects/, which has dozens of FRP bridges. I doubt that’s the only producer in the world. I don’t see what’s special about this one (but feel free to educate me)
That leaves the shape. I would guess the corners in the road are there to avoid having to use land that isn’t owned by the railway. If so, what’s left is the specific design. That’s nice, but other nice designs are possible.
Now, as to the idea of making a pedestrian bridge over a railway: it’s better than no pedestrian connection, but the stairs on such bridges necessarily are fairly high. Train tracks often lie above ground level, and even if they don’t, the total height to the top of the overhead line, plus some safety, plus the height of the bridge’s deck means you’re easily going two floors up and down.
In the UK pretty much all stations have bridges, so this will mainly be about being able to put them in place much more quickly when you are making changes to a station, or putting a new bridge in somewhere (i.e. there may not be one that's inside the ticket barriers on some smaller stations).
One of the key drivers for cheaper and easier footbridges is to close level crossings. In the UK we have tons of crossings - footpath, private road, and highway - dating back to Victorian times, and Network Rail would like them gone. They're one of the biggest remaining sources of injuries and deaths on the network, especially on 125mph fast lines, and are operationally awkward.
They got rid of a bunch of private farm crossings during our Foot and Mouth Disease outbreak by going door to door with desperate farmers and offering wedges of cash to give up their private crossings. They care a lot.
The white boats and yachts that you see are typically glass-fiber-reinforced epoxy, and they seem to be holding up just fine. "Carbon fiber" products are CFRP (carbon fiber reinforced plastic), where the composite matrix is fibers in epoxy, and those look fine after decades as well.
Serious question - do you really think the team of engineers who designed these bridges aren't aware of the existence of solar radiation or climate on planet earth?
It will get painted. FRP is a very common structural material, been in use for decades. It’s more expensive and tough to work with, but a great solution for difficult scenarios, like when fitting around odd shapes or when weight is a major concern. We use FRP regularly for seismic bracing of existing structures, for example, wrap an old concrete column with FRP so it will better survive an earthquake. In this case, I imagine the appeal is the extreme light weight simplifying foundation work. Pay a lot more for FRP, pay a lot less for everything else. That’s usually how we end up installing FRP.
The most necessary pedestrian bridge near me has what look like metal gutters running up and down the stairs. In fact they mean when you dismount a bicycle it becomes fairly easy to go up and down the stairs pushing your bicycle.
The at-grade crossing there is closed for up to 40 minutes per hour, because the railway carries both freight (to/ from a major port) and passenger trains. If you're in a vehicle too bad, "Long Queue. Turn Engines Off" as the signs say but if you're on foot the bridge means you don't need to care too much about that.
You might be wondering: Why isn't there a road bridge? It's an industrial estate, so any road bridge needs to carry large goods vehicles, articulated trucks and so on, which means a fairly large concrete structure with up and down ramps occupying a large footprint and there's nowhere to put that. It's also next to a tidal river, dig down and it'll flood, further into the city they just tunnelled the entire railway under the park, but that is not cheap.
Why would you expect to be able to bicycle over a footbridge? They follow footpaths. You shouldn’t be cycling on a footpath. They’re for people on foot. It’s not a bridleway or cycle path. Clue is in the names!
Network Rail had a competition in 2018 for a new footbridge design.[1] This isn't the winner. It's not even one of the entries. It is, though, much simpler and probably cheaper.
It seems the competition was for station foot crossing designs and this is a design for less urban area's in which you just need a foot crossing and no station. Which would explain why it can accommodate a longer ramp up and down and less rigid in design limitations as you would get in the urban or main stations.
So maybe cheaper, though if they was able to use this design in the more urban area's, would certainly have a larger footprint and that aspect may make it more expensive.
> These bridges are made from lightweight Fibre-Reinforced Polymer
> In just 11 months we have developed a prototype bridge that is stunning in design, environmentally friendly and will take days and not weeks to install and thereby causing less disruption for the surrounding community.”
... How exactly is this environmentally friendly?
FRPs don't tend to be recycled easily or cheaply[1], not to mention the fact that they are often derived from oil-based products and require high-temperature curing.
I'm looking at the design and living in the UK, my first thoughts are - BMX riders are going to love this.
I'd be interested in seeing it in more detail as whilst the design does seem to possibly be wheelchair accessible, it does seem to have some stepping upon the up and down slops.
Though nice design on many levels, feels like the railway foot crossings may leap out of the Victorian era designs into something a bit more tomorrow. Which if you want to see what many footbridges look like - https://www.railadvent.co.uk/2021/03/victorian-footbridge-re...
will tick many a quaint and tourist box but for daily use or those less able to climb such gradient stairs, not much fun.
> I'd be interested in seeing it in more detail as whilst the design does seem to possibly be wheelchair accessible, it does seem to have some stepping upon the up and down slops.
It looks like it's steps on either side, not sure how they're gonna make that wheelchair accessible without dramatically reducing the angle of the slope.
i'm curious what problems these bridges are trying to fix?
i guess that current pedestrian bridges are expensive.
it makes me think -- wouldn't a crossing at grade (at the ground level) be cheaper? better? allow wildlife to still cross easily? fit more nicely with 'the environment'?
i guess having a bridge could be safer. at least statistically. maybe?
Are you American? Rail in the UK isn’t like you’re probably imagining. It’s fast and frequent. Level crossings (what we call a ‘crossing at grade’) has historically been a big source of accidents.
There's zero redundancy in this design... I'd give it a hard pass. If any one of those triangles broke, it would fall, derail a train, and cause a disaster.
Did anyone else go read the article to see actual train bridges? Like the kind the train drives across? Especially titillated because train bridges have been pretty train bridgey for the last +150 years and the promise of something new was exciting?
"Stunning design" it is not, and what if you're approaching from the other direction? Now you've gotta do this awkward S-shaped motion just to cross the bridge
What's stopping this from being incorporated into a more traditional bridge?
I'm guessing it's to minimize the space taken up on the sides of the tracks. Train tracks are often next to things, so I assume that's what's stopping it -- not having available space.
> Nicknamed "The Trembling Lady" because of its tendency to vibrate when large numbers of people walked over it, the bridge has signs at its entrances that warn troops to break step whilst crossing the bridge.
[+] [-] Someone|4 years ago|reply
A few minutes of googling gives me https://www.fibercore-europe.com/en/projects/, which has dozens of FRP bridges. I doubt that’s the only producer in the world. I don’t see what’s special about this one (but feel free to educate me)
That leaves the shape. I would guess the corners in the road are there to avoid having to use land that isn’t owned by the railway. If so, what’s left is the specific design. That’s nice, but other nice designs are possible.
Now, as to the idea of making a pedestrian bridge over a railway: it’s better than no pedestrian connection, but the stairs on such bridges necessarily are fairly high. Train tracks often lie above ground level, and even if they don’t, the total height to the top of the overhead line, plus some safety, plus the height of the bridge’s deck means you’re easily going two floors up and down.
[+] [-] stuaxo|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] pmyteh|4 years ago|reply
One of the key drivers for cheaper and easier footbridges is to close level crossings. In the UK we have tons of crossings - footpath, private road, and highway - dating back to Victorian times, and Network Rail would like them gone. They're one of the biggest remaining sources of injuries and deaths on the network, especially on 125mph fast lines, and are operationally awkward.
They got rid of a bunch of private farm crossings during our Foot and Mouth Disease outbreak by going door to door with desperate farmers and offering wedges of cash to give up their private crossings. They care a lot.
[+] [-] unknown|4 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] Glawen|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] fredley|4 years ago|reply
So plastic? Might look shiny now, but I wonder how these will look after 20 years of sunlight and other weathering.
[+] [-] Scene_Cast2|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Gatsky|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ethagknight|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] brudgers|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Groxx|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] raffraffraff|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] rossdavidh|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] aliasEli|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] tialaramex|4 years ago|reply
The at-grade crossing there is closed for up to 40 minutes per hour, because the railway carries both freight (to/ from a major port) and passenger trains. If you're in a vehicle too bad, "Long Queue. Turn Engines Off" as the signs say but if you're on foot the bridge means you don't need to care too much about that.
You might be wondering: Why isn't there a road bridge? It's an industrial estate, so any road bridge needs to carry large goods vehicles, articulated trucks and so on, which means a fairly large concrete structure with up and down ramps occupying a large footprint and there's nowhere to put that. It's also next to a tidal river, dig down and it'll flood, further into the city they just tunnelled the entire railway under the park, but that is not cheap.
[+] [-] LurkersWillLurk|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] chrisseaton|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] gsnedders|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] snthd|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] TylerE|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] varispeed|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Animats|4 years ago|reply
[1] https://www.ribacompetitions.com/networkrailfootbridge/
[+] [-] Zenst|4 years ago|reply
So maybe cheaper, though if they was able to use this design in the more urban area's, would certainly have a larger footprint and that aspect may make it more expensive.
[+] [-] darkfirefly|4 years ago|reply
... How exactly is this environmentally friendly? FRPs don't tend to be recycled easily or cheaply[1], not to mention the fact that they are often derived from oil-based products and require high-temperature curing.
[1]: "The recycling of composite materials is on the right track, but challenges still have to be taken-up in order to finally make it a commercial reality" (https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S007964251...)
[+] [-] Zenst|4 years ago|reply
I'd be interested in seeing it in more detail as whilst the design does seem to possibly be wheelchair accessible, it does seem to have some stepping upon the up and down slops.
Though nice design on many levels, feels like the railway foot crossings may leap out of the Victorian era designs into something a bit more tomorrow. Which if you want to see what many footbridges look like - https://www.railadvent.co.uk/2021/03/victorian-footbridge-re... will tick many a quaint and tourist box but for daily use or those less able to climb such gradient stairs, not much fun.
[+] [-] barbazoo|4 years ago|reply
It looks like it's steps on either side, not sure how they're gonna make that wheelchair accessible without dramatically reducing the angle of the slope.
[+] [-] readonthegoapp|4 years ago|reply
i guess that current pedestrian bridges are expensive.
it makes me think -- wouldn't a crossing at grade (at the ground level) be cheaper? better? allow wildlife to still cross easily? fit more nicely with 'the environment'?
i guess having a bridge could be safer. at least statistically. maybe?
what's the real agenda?
https://www.alamy.com/blaenavon-wales-july-2020-two-people-c...
[+] [-] chrisseaton|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mikewarot|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] travisgriggs|4 years ago|reply
I feel dumb. And had.
[+] [-] unknown|4 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] FridayoLeary|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] bkor|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] tomc1985|4 years ago|reply
What's stopping this from being incorporated into a more traditional bridge?
[+] [-] crazygringo|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mc32|4 years ago|reply
What happens when teenagers all cram into one, or a marching troop goes over one?
I think it wasn’t too long ago a footbridge failed to take into account synchronized steps (marching) and swayed under foot traffic.
[+] [-] gherkinnn|4 years ago|reply
> Nicknamed "The Trembling Lady" because of its tendency to vibrate when large numbers of people walked over it, the bridge has signs at its entrances that warn troops to break step whilst crossing the bridge.
0 - https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_Bridge,_London