Malahide Media Coverage

[ThomasJ]

Irish Times
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/...253195957.html

Inquiry focuses on seabed erosion

FRANK McDONALD and RONAN McGREEVY

EROSION OF the seabed under the Broadmeadow Estuary rail viaduct has been identified as the primary line of inquiry into its partial collapse, according to a preliminary assessment by Iarnród Éireann.

While not excluding other factors or possibilities, the investigation by engineers and other experts “centres on a recent and significant erosion of the seabed in the vicinity of the pier involved in [last] Friday evening’s incident”, the company said.

“It is believed that in a relatively short time-frame, possibly in recent weeks, a small breach occurred in a causeway plateau within the seabed. This would have resulted in changes to water flow, with increased water pressure on the area.

“Recent low tides, coupled with major rainfall on Wednesday, would have seen the volume and speed of water flowing out of the estuary increasing, causing water pressures to increase, with ultimately the forces of water pressure widening the breach quickly.

“The effect on the causeway plateau and seabed would ultimately result in the sudden and catastrophic undermining of the pier supports from below water level, resulting in the collapse of the pier on Friday evening,” Iarnród Éireann’s said.

The continuing investigation will examine “all other factors” relating to the viaduct, including tidal issues in Broadmeadow Estuary, rainfall and climatic issues as well as inspection of maintenance reports and procedures, with an input from all relevant personnel.

Iarnród Éireann said it would “immediately establish” an inspection team, assisted by independent advisers and overseen by a board committee, to inspect bridges and viaducts across areas of running water throughout the entire rail network.

Referring to last Tuesday’s inspection of the Broadmeadow viaduct by an engineer, it said this was “specifically a visual examination of the condition of the piers as visible above water, to ensure that any markings were cosmetic and not structural in nature”.

The inspection confirmed this, and Iarnród Éireann was “completely satisfied that the inspection was thorough, professional and accurate”. A track-monitoring vehicle had also travelled over the line last Thursday and no deviations from normal conditions were recorded.

The Broadmeadow viaduct’s last biannual inspection was carried out in October 2007 and the next such inspection was scheduled for October of this year. A separate inspection to assess water scouring and associated issues was carried out in 2006.

Iarnród Éireann said this inspection had been undertaken by independent specialists. “The outcome of this inspection was that no scour issues had arisen, and [it recommended] that the next scour inspection be scheduled for 2012.”

Labour Party transport spokesman Tommy Broughan TD called yesterday for a full review of Iarnród Éireann’s procedures for inspecting rail lines in the light of the collapse of the Broadmeadow viaduct.

The general manager of Translink, the Northern Ireland company which jointly runs the Belfast-Dublin Enterprise service along with Irish Rail, said yesterday he believed it would take up to six months for full services on the route to run again.

But Iarnród Éireann spokesman Barry Kenny said it was still sticking by its three-month time frame to replace the viaduct.

“At this point in time we would say six months is a bit pessimistic. It is our personnel that are on site and that is our own engineers’ best estimates – three months.”

He said the rail operator was pleased with the first day of operations yesterday where replacement bus services were put on routes affected by the collapse.

There will be one significant change from today. Direct buses will operate from Balbriggan to Dublin city centre. Yesterday people had to travel from Balbriggan to Skerries by train and then get a bus into Dublin.

[ThomasJ]

Independent
http://www.independent.ie/national-n...r-1868289.html

By Paul Melia


Tuesday August 25 2009

TRANSPORT Minister Noel Dempsey has ordered Iarnrod Eireann to carry out an urgent safety review of all viaducts and bridges which run across open water on the rail network.

And the rail company last night revealed that a preliminary investigation had identified erosion of the seabed as a possible reason for the collapse of a 20-metre section of the railway viaduct near Malahide, which has left thousands of commuters without a train service.

Investigators are now focusing on "recent and significant erosion of the seabed" as inspections of the viaduct in 2006 and 2007 found that it was structurally sound.

Heavy rainfall, coupled with low tides, may have seen water pressure increase on the bridge, which could have then caused the collapse.

Pressure

"It is believed that in a relatively short time-frame, possibly in recent weeks, a small breach occurred in a causeway plateau within the seabed. This would have resulted in changes to water flow, with increased water pressure on the area," the company said.

"Recent low tides, coupled with major rainfall on Wednesday, would have seen the volume and speed of water flowing out of the estuary increasing, causing water pressures to increase, with, ultimately, the forces of water pressure widening the breach quickly. . . The effect on the causeway plateau and seabed would ultimately result in the sudden and catastrophic undermining of the pier supports from below water level, resulting in the collapse of the pier on Friday evening."

Thousands of commuters are facing disruption for at least the next three months, with services to Balbriggan, Skerries, Rush, Drogheda and intercity services to Belfast affected.

Iarnrod Eireann's investigation will also examine tidal issues in the estuary, rainfall and climatic issues and inspection and maintenance procedures, and last night it said it would undertake a "detailed inspection" of bridges and viaducts across areas of running water.

This comes after Mr Dempsey ordered the review last Friday. A spokeswoman said the minister wanted the review completed as quickly as possible.

An Iarnrod Eireann board committee is to be established to oversee the investigation, and will retain independent advisers to assist. The company confirmed the viaduct was inspected twice last week, and that it stood over the quality of those inspections.

A full bridge inspection was also carried out in October 2007, with the next scheduled inspection in October this year.

Independent engineers also inspected the viaduct for scour -- or structural damage caused by water erosion -- in 2006 and no issues were raised

The next scour inspection is scheduled for 2012.

Last night Labour's transport spokesman Tommy Broughan called for a full review of the inspection regime, saying that if the bridge passed two inspections last week than there was something wrong with the system.

Investigations

There are now three separate investigations under way. The Rail Accident Investigation Unit is charged with establishing the cause of the incident, but it does not attribute blame or liability.

Iarnrod Eireann is conducting a separate inquiry, while the Railway Safety Commission will investigate if safety standards were complied with in relation to maintenance and inspection schedules.

Over €1.1bn has been spent upgrading the rail network under two railway safety programmes over the past decade.

- Paul Melia

[ThomasJ]

Belfast Telegraph
http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/ne...-14467100.html

When will Belfast to Dublin train services be back on track?

Three-month timescale for repairs to collapsed viaduct is labelled ‘optimistic’... it could be more like 11 months

Tuesday, 25 August 2009



There have been calls for a definite time frame on how long it will take to repair the main Belfast to Dublin railway line following its collapse at the weekend.


Thousands of Ulster passengers face delays in their daily commute to the Irish capital after a viaduct collapsed into the Broadmeadow estuary near Malahide on Friday evening.

Irish rail authorities have said it could take around three months to repair the damage and get services back to normal, but there has been speculation that it could take as long as 11 months.

Wendy Blundell, from the Institute of Civil Engineers, described the collapse as “serious”.

“Probably three months is optimistic at this stage,” she said. “An inspection will take some time and then the remedial work is to take place. It depends if further damage has happened to the bridge and any of the other spans.

“I would have thought three months is fairly optimistic, and will probably take a bit longer than that.”

The first Monday-morning commuter passengers were faced with delays of up to 30 minutes yesterday as they were bussed between Drogheda and Dublin.

With thousands of Northern Ireland travellers using the service every week, there have been calls for greater clarity over when the service will be available again.

“Passengers who use the Enterprise Service need confirmation on how long it will take for the bridge to be repaired and services to return to normal,” said Aodhan O’Donnell, head of transport at the Consumer Council.

“This is particularly important for those who buy multi-journey tickets in advance.

“The collapse of the railway bridge near Malahide is an extraordinary situation and we are thankful that there were no injuries or deaths as a result.

“However, there is no doubt that it will cause severe disruption for passengers and commuters who rely on the Enterprise service to travel to and from Dublin.”

Meanwhile, there was further travel misery for one trainload of passengers to Dublin yesterday morning after the Enterprise service broke down en route to the Republic.

Around 100 commuters were left temporarily stranded at Lisburn after the 8am service to Dublin broke down.

Translink blamed a “mechanical failure” for the breakdown, which added a delay of around 45 minutes to the journey. The passengers aboard the train were transferred to another train to continue their journey, which departed from Lisburn shortly after 9am.

Passengers on a return service to Belfast also found themselves waiting at Drogheda for around 45 minutes last night following a delay in the bus connection from Dublin.

Translink have said that services to Dublin generally can expect a 20 to 30-minute delay on average in passengers' journey times.

In Dublin last night, Irish Transport Minister Noel Dempsey ordered Iarnrod Eireann to carry out an urgent safety review of all viaducts and bridges which run across open water on the Republic’s rail network.

And the rail company last night revealed that a preliminary investigation had identified erosion of the seabed as a possible reason for the collapse of a 20-metre section of the railway viaduct near Malahide.

Investigators are now focusing on “recent and significant erosion of the sea-bed” as inspections of the viaduct in 2006 and 2007 found it was structurally sound.

Heavy rainfall, coupled with low tides, could have seen water pressure increase on the bridge which could have caused the collapse.

“It is believed that in a relatively short time frame, possibly in recent weeks, that a small breach occurred in a causeway plateau within the seabed. This would have resulted in changes to water flow, with increased water pressure on the area,” the company said.

“Recent low tides, coupled with major rainfall on Wednesday, would have seen the volume and speed of water flowing out of the estuary increasing, causing water pressures to increase, with ultimately the forces of water pressure widening the breach quickly.

“The effect on the causeway plateau and sea bed would ultimately result in the sudden and catastrophic undermining of the pier supports from below water level, resulting in the collapse of the pier on Friday evening.”

Thousands of commuters are facing disruption for at least the next three months, with services to Balbriggan, Skerries, Rush, Drogheda and intercity services to Belfast affected.

Iarnrod Eireann's investigation will also examine tidal issues in the estuary, rainfall and climatic issues and inspection and maintenance procedures.

The company confirmed the viaduct was inspected twice last week, and that it stood over those inspections. A full bridge inspection was also carried out in October 2007, with the next scheduled inspection for October.

[ThomasJ]

Analysis from Frank Mc Donald for Irish Times

Irish Times
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/...253138336.html

ANALYSIS: The collapse of a troublesome viaduct has created a logistical nightmare for Iarnród Éireann, writes FRANK McDONALD, Environment Editor.

THE VIADUCT over Broadmeadow Estuary has given trouble since it was first built by the Dublin and Drogheda Railway in 1844, mainly due to tidal scouring of its support piers. Indeed, the first structure – made entirely of timber – had to be replaced by wrought iron superstructure on stone piers as early as 1860.

As engineer Niall Torpey recounted in the Irish Railway Record Society’s journal, the superstructure had to be strengthened to carry heavier locomotives on the Dublin-Belfast line in 1932. The stone piers also needed regular attention because of Broadmeadow’s tidal scouring and were repointed in the 1960s.

“Finally, following the observed deterioration in the wrought iron in this marine environment, it was further replaced in the period 1966-1968 with the current prestressed concrete structure”, Mr Torpey wrote. Since then, no further major works were carried out on the viaduct, which is 180m (594ft) long.

In 1998, as Fine Gael transport spokesman Fergus O’Dowd recalled yesterday, International Risk Management Services (IRMS) identified sections of the viaduct as being among the most unsafe stretches of rail track in the country, assigning it a 60 per cent security risk on a scale where 5 per cent is “best practice”.

The IRMS report led to a major improvement in railway standards, including relaying track on precast concrete rather than wooden sleepers. Two follow-up reports, also by IRMS, in 2001 and 2003 monitored the progress on what Barry Kenny, spokesman for Iarnród Éireann, called “this massive investment programme”.

In 2003, the derailment of a freight train hauling cement wagons from Limerick Junction to Rosslare caused a section of the Cahir viaduct in Co Tipperary to collapse. But there was a major difference between that accident and the one that took place near Malahide on Friday, in that none of the Cahir bridge piers crumbled.

An investigation by the Railway Safety Commission of the Cahir derailment found “serious deficiencies” in Iarnród Éireann’s management of its infrastructure, and concluded that these critical shortcomings in the company’s inspection and maintenance regime “were principally responsible for the accident”.

According to Mr Kenny, every bridge on the rail network is thoroughly inspected at two-yearly intervals. The inspection of the Broadmeadow viaduct that was carried out last Tuesday – just three days before the collapse – was clearly not in this category; it was a purely visual inspection of the bridge deck and its support piers.

The Broadmeadow viaduct has 11 piers, one of which collapsed, bringing two of the deck spans with it.

The last full inspection of the structure was carried out in 2006, Mr Kenny said, and it paid particular attention to the effects of tidal scouring.

“No scouring issues were found at that time,” he told The Irish Times.

Local sources, say tides in the estuary were up to 4.5m (15ft high, which is stronger than usual. High tide was at about 1pm and low tide was shortly after the collapse at about 6pm.

A team of railway engineers, supported by divers, is now examining the viaduct’s stability to determine what needs to be done.

“We have to assess whether there is damage to the remaining sections of the viaduct,” Mr Kenny said. “The view at the moment would be to replace the damaged section with a single span, strengthening the adjacent piers to carry it.” However, he conceded that complete replacement cannot be ruled out.

It took 11 months to repair the damage to the Cahir viaduct, even though none of its piers needed to be replaced. The line it serves is one of the most underused in the rail network, with just two passenger trains a day, whereas the line severed by the latest viaduct collapse carried 10,000 passengers a day in each direction.

“If the whole viaduct is going to have to be rebuilt, it could be massive undertaking,” one railway engineering source said. “If one of the piers collapsed, there is a danger of this happening with others, because of the difficult conditions you encounter in a tidal environment with a lot of scouring of these structures over the years.”

Iarnród Éireann is fortunate that the collapse happened during the evening peak period, with no loss of life. Had it occurred at night, the company would now be faced with a severe logistical problem as nearly all of the suburban commuter trains are housed in the new maintenance depot at Drogheda station.

“We have 44 carriages there that can’t now be used on the rest of the network,” Mr Kenny said. “That’s 44 out of a total of 180, so it means that other services can be met” – on the Maynooth, Kildare and Gorey lines. Two of the four Belfast Enterprise trains were north of Malahide, which means they can be run to and from Drogheda.

As for the cost, Iarnród Éireann is certain to lose revenue from passenger fares as well as having to pay for replacement bus services. The physical work of repairing the damage will be considerable – a lot more than the €3 million bill that had to be met from reinstating the viaduct over the river Suir at Cahir.

[Mark Gleeson]

Irish Times Editorial

Keeping track of the railways

Inquiry focuses on seabed erosion | 25/08/2009

THE COLLAPSE of the rail viaduct over Broadmeadow estuary in north Co Dublin last Friday evening might have been a disaster, causing significant loss of life. A commuter train had just passed over it minutes earlier and another would have followed but for the alertness of driver, Keith Farrelly, who raised the alarm when he noticed the bridge starting to collapse as his train was crossing it.

That is how close we came to a real human tragedy on Irish railways. Amazingly, it transpired that the 180 metre-long viaduct had been inspected just three days beforehand and no evidence of any defect was reported to Iarnród Éireann. Yet after one of its support piers had crumbled, the State railway company was able to say there was “little doubt” that tidal scouring was a factor in the incident.

Rail Users Ireland spokesman Mark Gleeson rightly suggested that what happened raises serious questions about the maintenance and inspection regime on Ireland’s rail network – and not for the first time. After the derailment of a cement train caused the partial collapse of the Cahir viaduct in Co Tipperary, the Railway Safety Commission found “serious deficiencies” in Iarnród Éireann’s management of its infrastructure, and concluded in its 2006 report that these critical shortcomings in the company’s inspection and maintenance regime “were principally responsible for the accident”. The number of passengers carried on the line that runs through Cahir from Limerick Junction to Rosslare is minuscule compared to the 20,000 passengers per day using Dublin’s northern commuter line or the Belfast Enterprise express.

All of these rail users are now suffering great inconvenience as a result of the line being severed, with an estimated 30 minutes added to their journey times by transferring to replacement buses; some have reverted to using cars, thus adding to traffic congestion in the morning and evening peak periods. And this disruption to people’s lives is likely to continue for at least three months, and probably a lot longer, depending on whether a decision is made merely to repair the missing section of the viaduct or to replace the entire structure. Given that all of the remaining 10 piers standing in Broadmeadow estuary are subject to the same tidal scouring as the one that crumbled on Friday last, complete replacement might be the preferable long-term solution. Clearly, however, a project of such magnitude cannot be completed in a few months.

What all of this highlights is that, however good we may be at building things, we are woeful at maintaining them. Railway bridges are the most vulnerable sections of any rail network and, as Mark Gleeson said, “it is essential that all bridges are inspected nationwide to ensure no critical faults have been overlooked”. Although strapped for cash due to Government cutbacks – which, ironically, might include closure of the Limerick Junction-Rosslare line, as recommended by the McCarthy report –Iarnród Éireann must embark on a systematic programme of bridge inspections. A cursory glance is not enough if lives are to be saved.

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/...253192428.html

[Mark Gleeson]

James in the Independent

Commute 'a little slower' but real test still to come

IT was with a guarded optimism that James Shields reached his desk in the IFSC yesterday morning after a slightly later than usual journey from his home in Drogheda.

While the financial services professional experienced a relatively hassle-free journey into work on a coach supplied by Iarnrod Eireann, he is sceptical about how straightforward his journeys into work will be over the next three months.

Mr Shields usually leaves his home at 8.05am to cycle to Drogheda station where he picks up the 8.20am Belfast to Dublin Enterprise service, which means that he is sitting at his desk just after 9am.

Yesterday was the first day that he had to tackle the alternative arrangements following the collapse of the railway viaduct at Malahide which saw him catch a bus from the station at 8.30am and arrive in Dublin at 9.30am.

"I admit that I was expecting it to be worse than it was. I don't know whether it will be as good for all of the three months but we will have to wait and see," said Mr Shields, who is originally from the capital.

When he moved to Drogheda, one of the main reasons for picking the town was the good rail service on which he travels using a €1,600 annual ticket.

"The morning was surprisingly uneventful. The bus was from Drogheda station and came in through the port tunnel and there was a little bit of delay getting out of Drogheda with roadworks and a little bit of traffic around Swords," he said.

Test

"It wasn't too bad. I don't know whether that was a fluke. When the schools go back next week will be the real test."

Mr Shields' home time varies depending on the number of hours he has worked on a particular day.

He left his office yesterday evening at 7pm, arriving in Drogheda at 8pm. After his cycle home he arrived at his house at 8.10pm.

"I quite often get the Enterprise at 7pm but this evening, I got the bus at 7pm and arrived in Drogheda at 8pm. It is a little slower than the train but with all things considered, I can't complain. It normally takes 40 minutes on the Enterprise so 20 minutes was added to my journey.

"The first day hasn't affected me too much. It is a little bit of extra time travelling. If it goes as smoothly as today for the next few weeks, I won't be too worried," he said.

Mr Shields' hours are flexible but he said to ensure he meets the hours required, he "might have to look at getting an earlier bus to be in work on time".

"There are plenty of buses available this week but I am concerned about availability next week when the schools are back," he added.

- Shane Hickey

http://www.independent.ie/national-n...e-1868292.html

[Mark Hennessy]

Once again, more shocking safety implications as IE were told of the change in water flows

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/...253270336.html

IARNRÓD ÉIREANN was warned about possible damage to one of the piers supporting the Broadmeadow Estuary rail viaduct five days before it collapsed.

One of the leaders of Malahide Sea Scouts in north Dublin contacted the company to report what he perceived to be erosion damage, along with a recent change in water flow in the estuary. “This wasn’t something that happened overnight,” said one of his colleagues, who did not wish to be identified. “We had noticed a massive change in the water flow over the past two months, with a third of it going through one of the arches that collapsed.”

...

The breach had happened weeks ago and “wasn’t noticed” by railway inspectors. “This wasn’t an ‘act of God’, as Iarnród Éireann seem to be suggesting, but something that was going on over a period of two months, and yet they took no action on it – that’s incompetence”.

[irishsaint]

yeah, read that in the it today..... what a disgrace. heads have to roll for that. Clearly and obviously there is serious incompetence in Irish Rails ability which stems from the TOP because if the men on the ground are not instructed to execute a full inspection including underwater analysis of the support structure after recieving details from people who are in an around the viaduct daily and relying on the water levels and flow.
If and it does, look like to people familiar with the viaduct noticed what appeared to them as errosion, the viaduct should have been put out of immediate use until a full inspection had been completed.
Irish Rail had put lives at risk which includes mine as I used the viaduct twice a day.

[tigger1962]

I agree, speaking as someone who used to paddle under the "arches" in malahide, I can quite clearly see that the bed layout and flow of the current is different from times I paddled there.....I was a bit taken aback by that photo! Irish Rail should have sent someone to do further checks on the sea bed! Many of the Sea Scout leaders are highly professional paddlers and well used to reading water flow changes.

[losexpectation]

Originally Posted by tigger1962

I agree, speaking as someone who used to paddle under the "arches" in malahide, I can quite clearly see that the bed layout and flow of the current is different from times I paddled there.....I was a bit taken aback by that photo! Irish Rail should have sent someone to do further checks on the sea bed! Many of the Sea Scout leaders are highly professional paddlers and well used to reading water flow changes.

whats different what should it look like?

[irishsaint]

Originally Posted by losexpectation

whats different what should it look like?

I dont know but I assume it should not look like a grand canyon rapid

[Colm Moore]

Originally Posted by losexpectation

whats different what should it look like?

I'm not sure if that really matters to us. It is the relatively sudden change that is the problem, not that it looks this way or that.

[Colm Moore]

http://www.tribune.ie/news/article/2...at-irish-rail/

Troubled waters at Irish Rail
Ken Griffin and Mark Hilliard

MANAGERS at Iarnród Éireann blocked the appointment of a safety director for over a decade because of the concerns the new post would dilute their responsibilities, it has emerged.

Although the appointment had been recommended by independent safety consultants IRMS in 1998, it was only made earlier this year.

According to a recent Department of Transport review, the delay came about because Iarnród Éireann "decided that the post was unnecessary" as "it would dilute accountability for the [safety] programme among [its] senior management team".

Even now, the manager only controls project expenditure and safety reporting, rather than the wide-ranging oversight role envisaged by IRMS.

Fine Gael's transport spokesman Fergus O'Dowd said the situation was a disgrace and the safety manager needed to be given the full range of powers envisaged for the role.

"Safety transcends everything: it needs to be separate from other functions and interests but it seems that Iarnród Éireann's managers want to play cabbage-patch politics rather than ensure passenger safety," he said.

The state railway company's safety procedures have come under intense scrutiny following the recent collapse of the Broadmeadow viaduct on the Dublin-Belfast railway line.

The Department of Transport review also reveals the company's management have either abandoned or postponed other safety measures, including a confidential safety reporting scheme for staff.

The system was scrapped by Iarnród Éireann in 2007 because the rail operator felt that its "staff safety representatives and open culture" rendered it unnecessary.

These conclusions were challenged by the review's authors who said Iarnród Éireann should reinstate the system to "ensure that key safety concerns are not filtered out or diluted as they are passed up through the organisation".

Commuter representatives have also expressed concern about the scrapping of the system with Mark Gleeson of Rail Users Ireland alleging there was a culture of fear within the company.

"Even with the confidential reporting scheme, staff were concerned that they would be traced by management and that disciplinary action would be taken against them," he said.

Meanwhile, Irish Rail has confirmed that while technology is in existence to continually monitor the stability of bridges, it is not employed in Ireland.

The extent of such technology's use across Europe is unclear, but it is understood the systems would provide early warning mechanisms in the event of subsidence or other movement of bridge structures.

Irish Rail confirmed all such safety systems will form part of the ongoing review of operations in relation to the viaduct collapse.

A spokesman said: "Technology does exist to monitor bridge structures although it does not appear to be widely used in European railways.

"Obviously all safety systems will be examined as part of the investigation. However, it is unlikely, given the emerging evidence of the nature of this collapse, that such a system would have given any advance warning."

The technology in question is similar to that used by Irish Rail to monitor the Dart line during the construction of the Port Tunnel.

August 30, 2009

[ThomasJ]

http://www.rte.ie/news/2009/0909/rail.html

Rail bridge may be repaired by November
Wednesday, 9 September 2009 13:23
Members of the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Transport have inspected the scene of the railway bridge collapse in Malahide.

The Committee members were briefed by Iarnród Éireann officials, including company chairman John Lynch, about progress in the re-building of the bridge at Broadmeadow estuary.

Iarnród Éireann says they expect to complete the re-construction of the bridge, which collapsed last month, in November.

A company spokesperson said that its inquiry into the incident will take six months to complete.

Transport Committee member and Fine Gael Spokesperson on Transport Fergus O'Dowd says he wants independent verification that the work being conducted on the bridge is to the highest possible standard.

[Mark Gleeson]

A lot of people are going to look really stupid claiming 11 months....

I put 3 months as the timescale on the day afterwards. Once they are open by December 8th they will have delivered a miracle. Obviously the huge daily financial cost is a big motivating factor

[tigger1962]

well i is delighted by that, I was talking to a civil engineer on the enterprise one day and he said from what he saw he figured it would be 18 months. November is much nicer.

I'll miss the morning bus as i was getting in quicker... but i won't miss the afternoon rush then it'll be back to normal wondering if the incoming enterprise has problems again

[tigger1962]

the irish times has an article stating the same but my web access is a bit flaky at the moment! states there was 4m of water at time of collapse?

[Locky]

http://www.rte.ie/news/2010/0311/malahide.html
A report into the collapse of the Malahide viaduct has found that there was a failure of maintenance because Iarnród Éireann staff did not know the type of structure they was dealing with.

The independent report commissioned by the company found that over the years, staff became unaware that the piers were resting on rocks and not pile-driven into seabed.

The report found that increased water flow because of land development and climate change brought on the collapse, but such a collapse was inevitable.

Staff did not realise the structure was two components - a viaduct on top of a causeway made of large rocks - making the piers liable to erosion.

The report recommends that in future, knowledge should be passed on by Iarnród Éireann staff who move or retire.

It was also found that a warning from Malahide Sea Scouts was misunderstood by the company's engineer who went to inspect the bridge but examined the pier and not the causeway.

No individual member of staff will be held responsible for what happened.

A major accident was narrowly avoided on 21 August last year following the collapse of a section of the viaduct.

But a train driver and signal operator have been commended for their actions on the day, which prevented what could have been a 'catastrophic loss of life'.


As a result the rail line was closed for almost three months, reopening last November after repairs estimated to cost in excess of €4m were carried out.

Iarnród Éireann was responding to a report in today's Irish Independent that the company had been warned about serious erosion three years before the collapse.

The company says that the 2006 Bridge Scour inspection of the Malahide Viaduct, carried out by independent specialist diver engineers, did not state that there was any reason for concern at that time.

It did recommend that as the bridge was susceptible to scour, that underwater examinations should continue at intervals of not more than six years.

The company submitted its report to the Rail Accident Investigation Unit and the Railway Safety Commission on 19 February, and has published parts of it today.

The report will be considered by the Rail Accident Investigation Unit as part of its independent investigation into the collapse.

[Colm Moore]

http://www.irishrail.ie/news_centre/news.asp?action=view&news_id=668

Malahide Viaduct accident investigation by Corporate Communications

Iarnród Éireann’s investigation into the Malahide Viaduct accident has been completed, the company has stated.

A major accident was narrowly avoided on 21st August 2009, following the collapse of pier 4 of the viaduct. The line was closed for a period of almost 3 months, reopening on 16th November 2009.

The company submitted the complete report to the Rail Accident Investigation Unit, and the Railway Safety Commission on 19th February 2010, and is today (11th March 2010) publishing the report’s summary, conclusions, actions taken to date and recommendations (attached).


Company rejects claim of 2006 warning

In addition, Iarnród Éireann wish to correct the assertion in today’s Irish Independent that the company “was warned about serious erosion…three years before” this accident. This is untrue. The 2006 Bridge Scour inspection of the Malahide Viaduct, carried out for Iarnród Éireann by independent specialist diver engineers, did not state that there was any reason for concern about scour at that time. It stated that as the bridge was susceptible to scour, that underwater examinations should continue at intervals not to exceed 6 years. It was Iarnród Éireann’s investigation into the accident which, using external hydrological expertise, assembled available data on the viaduct and surrounding area, allowing modelling of the viaduct and the likely effects of water over time. It was this post-accident investigation, and not the 2006 report, which retrospectively concluded that scouring may have commenced at the time of the 2006 investigation, albeit some distance away from the piers.

Continued

[Colm Moore]

.

Continued


Iarnród Éireann investigation into the Malahide Viaduct collapse

Iarnród Éireann’s investigation was independently chaired by John Buxton, Chartered Civil Engineer, and was also advised by a panel of experts led by Dr Eamon McKeogh of University College Cork in relation to the complex hydraulic and environmental issues involves. The Iarnród Éireann report will also be considered by the Rail Accident Investigation Unit in the preparation of their independent investigation into the accident.

The report found:

- Works undertaken in 1967 on the superstructure of the viaduct also included significant grouting work, to a depth of 2 metres, to the causeway/weir. These works, it was believed, would generally reduce the need for ongoing maintenance, particularly the unloading of “rip-rap” stone (large stone blocks) which had been regularly carried out to maintain the causeway/weir profile by replacing stones washed away by the tides. Since this time, the placing of rip-rap was more limited and appeared to be carried out only to protect the piers.

- Over time, erosion of a section of the causeway/weir between Piers 4 and 5 caused changes to the water flow under the structure, resulting in the majority of the water flowing in a deepened channel between these two piers, further increasing erosion. In a relatively short period of time, the weir “crest” receded from the seaward side of these piers to beneath the span between them and, subsequently, onto the other (estuary) side of the viaduct. In the months prior to the collapse, the channel deepened further and the flow became ever stronger with standing waves and, latterly, a “piping” mechanism causing further “scour” action. Eventually Pier 4 became undermined and collapsed.

- A key finding of the investigation is that since grouting works were undertaken on the causeway/weir in 1967, the engineering emphasis has been focused on the maintenance of the viaduct structure itself. However, the condition of the grouting in the causeway/weir required maintenance. By this time, although protection of the pier foundations was still being undertaken, the importance of maintaining the weir profile was no longer fully appreciated. Prior to the collapse, therefore, it was no longer appreciated that the structure as a whole comprised two separate components: a causeway/weir and a viaduct. The structure is unusual in that the piers did not extend down to the “bedrock”, but are instead founded within the manmade causeway/weir formed of large rip-rap resting on the bed of the estuary, making the piers prone to erosion or “scour” damage.

- Climatic, oceanographic and hydrological changes over recent decades have increased the hydraulic “head” and hence the erosive effect of the water flowing into and, more especially, out of the Broadmeadow Estuary over the causeway/weir.

- During the week before the collapse, a group leader of Malahide Sea Scouts observed that a rock at the base of pier 4 had been washed away and contacted Iarnród Éireann on 17th August to report this. The information reported by this member of the public was dealt with in a professional manner by Iarnród Éireann staff. However a misunderstanding appears to have developed so that the engineer delegated to inspect the viaduct on 18th August was looking primarily for cracks or missing stones in the pier structure rather than in its foundations. He found the “dressed” stonework of the viaduct to be in need of pointing and there were some cracked stones on a number of piers. Whilst none of these faults were of a serious structural nature, their presence appeared to him to explain the reason for the report from the canoeist. Therefore this visual inspection did not lead engineers to question the stability or the structural integrity of the viaduct.



A series of actions have already taken place or are underway arising from the accident.

- The replacement Pier 4 is founded on piles and all the remaining existing piers have been retro-fitted with piled foundations. A bridge monitoring system has been installed on the Malahide Viaduct

- The list of structures susceptible to scour has been reviewed and is now more comprehensive. Pier and abutment depths are being established for all bridges on the scour list wherever practicable. Where this is not possible, other mitigating measures will be implemented.

- There is one other structure on the IÉ network that has similar foundations to Malahide, Rogerstown Viaduct. This is on the same route as the Malahide Viaduct. Pier and abutment depths have been established for this structure and found to be deeper than for Malahide and are secure.

- The Acting Chief Civil Engineer has initiated a full review of the systems in place for monitoring structures subject to scour and has commissioned consultants to look at international best practice for this with a view to implementing system improvements.

- The driver of the 18.07hrs Balbriggan to Pearse train has been commended for his quick thinking in placing his power controller into the ‘coast’ setting which reduced the forces acting on the collapsing viaduct as the train passed over it. His actions to protect the line after the incident were also exemplary as were those of the CTC Signalman who has also been commended.

- The need to maintain the causeway/weir of the Malahide Viaduct to an acceptable profile is now clearly understood. The weir has been reconstructed to its original profile. Furthermore an improved weir profile is being developed, in line with the outcome of the studies undertaken by UCC.

- Information on the viaduct that is currently known, or can reasonably be collected including archived materials, is being assembled and will be made available through IAMS (Infrastructure Asset Management System). Thus in future, IAMS will form the basis of the required inspection and maintenance process and staff will be better equipped to undertake these duties. Similar information will also be added, on a risk prioritised basis, for all other structures on Iarnród Éireann.

- Most of the bridges on the “scour inspection list” have been inspected (by engineer divers) and this work will be completed by April 2010. Following on from these inspections each structure will be given a risk rating and the inspection frequency will be based on this rating. Trigger levels will be defined for special additional inspections of the structure as required (e.g. exceptional tides) and/or its closure when conditions deteriorate. A re-opening process for each structure is also to be documented.



The investigation also makes a series of recommendations.

- Recommendation 1: Complete all of the above actions.

- Recommendation 2: The structures standard should be revised to include more information on ‘scour’, the erosive effects of different water conditions (e.g. standing waves), particularly in the context of the design of remedial measures.

- Recommendation 3: The introduction of the revised structures standard should be supported by the running of a series of Structures Inspection Training Courses. The training should incorporate ‘follow up’ mentoring in the field by experienced, competent staff.

- Recommendation 4: Roles and reporting lines for structures and track patrolling inspections should be reviewed and a ‘handover’ process should be put in place to ensure knowledge is not lost on staff movements within the organisation or when staff leave the service.

- Recommendation 5: Flood and tidal warning arrangements, using information from Met Éireann and the Coast Guard, should be formalised throughout Iarnród Éireann.

- Recommendation 6: Consideration should be given to extending the installation of monitoring/warning equipment to structures susceptible to scour so that changing conditions at sites during adverse conditions can be monitored.

- Recommendation 7: The bridge card system of monitoring the condition of structures should be expanded to incorporate all relevant information that needs to be recorded during an inspection. The records should cover each span or relevant element of the structure and these should be incorporated into an enhanced IAMS based system supported by photographs.

- Recommendation 8: The process for dealing with reports from the public should be documented and unified across the organisation.

- Recommendation 9: The effects of climate change, land and leisure developments in the Broadmeadow catchment area should be kept under review by IÉ so that the organisation is well placed to take informed action to mitigate any potential future adverse effects on the railway. In particular, it is recommended that dialogue is initiated with the relevant state agencies accordingly.

Iarnród Éireann assures customers that these recommendations will be fully implemented, as will any and all recommendations arising from the investigation of the Rail Accident Investigation Unit.

The investigation also states that the public spiritedness of third parties who contacted Iarnród Éireann prior to and subsequent to the incident should be commended.


Malahide Viaduct Summary and Conclusions http://www.irishrail.ie/upload/malahideviaduct.pdf