Abstract Manager

Great outcomes on bridge deck restoration projects can be achieved when all involved in the project address three critical “gaps”: 1) poor communication and siloed work responsibilities between project participants; 2) lack of pre-restoration discovery and documentation, and 3) obstacles on-site and job control. This presentation will describe these gaps in detail and offer ways to avoid them based on the presenter’s experience in project planning, management and execution including:

• clear communication and collaboration among bridge owner, design engineer (internal or external), third party bridge inspector, material supplier and contractor
• validating that project assumptions and role expectations align with drawings, plans, specifications and other documents
• establishing job site controls and processes for changes, delays, unexpected conditions and the like

The presentation will close with case studies of "do this, not that" to illustrate both poor and excellent outcomes. Attendees will leave the presentation with a best practices checklist for bridge deck restoration.

GAP 1 – poor communication, siloed work

ROLES:

• Owner
• Outside Engineer/Architect
• Inspector
• Material Supplier
• GC
• Specialty Contractor

DEFINE: scope of responsibility for each role. Identify gaps and overlaps.

DELIVERABLE:  Communication Plan

GAP 2 – not understanding the project in its entirety.

DEFINE:

• Substrate type
• Deck Condition (physical strength and core tests, RH, Humidity)
• Traffic volume and type
• Environmental – weather, time of year
• Symptoms driving deck restoration – age, material failure, history of the deck
• Existing cracks, deformations and treatment plan
• Prior waterproofing systems
• Tie ins – upturns, assemblies, joints, drainage, curbs
• Construction Joint/cold joint/expansion joint plan (including movement tolerances)
• Concrete repair required and materials used
• Existing maintenance plan and new maintenance plan that incorporates the restoration materials

DELIVERABLE:  Deck Restoration Discovery Document

GAP 3: Obstacles on-site and job control

DEFINE MITIGATION FOR:

• Site details inconsistent with plan details
• Qualifications (or lack of) of applicator
• Preparation not as expected
• Undisclosed concrete damage
• Project delays from site availability, weather, equipment breakdowns
• Restoration material shortages

DELIVERABLE: Change Management Plan

CASE STUDIES – Do this, not that

• Bus Loop Project
• Expansion Joint detail inconsistency
• Dam Project

BEST PRACTICES CHECKLIST AND DOCUMENTS