Phillips Park Bicycle Bridge

Group 98.07

Benjamin Osborne

Brian Richard

Jeffrey M. Lawrence

Francisco Narvaez-Fabrega

Advisor - Dr. Michael Santare

Current Situation

Eventual Plan

Our Role

Past Solutions

Mission

Approach

To redesign a cost-effective widened overpass and bridge with all safety and accessibility

concerns addressed.

To use benchmarking along with TQD to develop and decide upon an improved bridge design satisfying our

customers’ wants within building code constraints.

Willett Kempton Coordinator Off Road Bike CommitteeTom Zaleski

Parks SuperintendentLiam Campion

Skate Shop ClerkRobert Gifford

Roller Blade Enthusiast

Jim WoodsHandicapped Traveler

Brian DearolfMountain Biker

Anthony RipantiNewark Pedestrian

Jack McFannLocal Resident

Wheeled AccessableSkateboard DeterrantWide PassageEasily AccessableWheels Cannot Get StuckGuard RailsWeather Proof

Non-Slipperay SurfaceNatural ApperanceVandal DeterrantQuiet Operation

Continous PathwayQuiet ConstructionNature Observable

Fit Within Budget Wide Passage Get From Point

“a” to Point “b” Stay Above

Water Line Support Weight

Major Gary Summerville

Public Safety Trails for the Twenty-First Century

Rails-to-trails Conservancy Recommended Bridges

Amtrack cross in South College

Rail line across Rt. 4 Old Structure

Board Spacing

Ramp Pitch

Platform Width

Railing Height

Color / Form

Traction

Life

Sound

Crossing Time

Sight Line

Close slats on platforms

Wide slats on ramp Rumble Strips on

ramp Uneven approach to

ramps Railings on bridge /

overpass

Decide upon ramp pitch

“Soft” region Bridge support Tight ramp railings Add new beam to

widen

Concept Ident. Concept DescriptionsA "Wheelchair" Bridge

B Skateboarders' Nightmare

C Happy Compromise

A Prioritized List of Wheel Skate HappyQuality Metrics % Target value

Board Spacing 16.72 0.25 in. b w b

Ramp Pitch 15.05 3-12 b b b

Platform Width 15.05 8 ft. b b b

Railing Height 11.71 56 in. b b b

Color / Form 11.71 7 s s s

Traction 7.36 0.4 s w b

Life Expectancy 7.02 20 years b b b

Sounds 6.02 40 db s s s

Crossing Time 4.68 30 sec b b b

Sight Line 4.68 30 ft. s s s

Better than benchmark 6 5 7Worse than benchmark 0 2 0Same as benchmark 4 3 3Unknown relationship 0 0 0

Score 0% 68% 36% 76%

Test ResultRamp Pitch okayPlatform Width 1.5 ft.Railings 1/2 inchBoard Spacing okayCrossing Time 17 sec.Sight Line 85 ft.Tractor Test okay

Upon the initial prototype build, we realized that the railing construction was not adequate for our testing procedure. We therefore replaced the 2x4 railing posts with 4x4’s. Also, the 2x4 railings were replaced with 2x6’s.

In the design, the ramps were extruded normal to the platform. In the construction, we had to angle them to fit with the natural path and surroundings.

Start from scratch

Equidistant / symmetrical construction

Build second structure

Not rule out skateboard issue

Observation platform

Item Quantity Cost Each Total Cost6"x6"x8' 16.00$ 20.99$ $335.842"x10"x12' 18.00 18.49 $332.822"x10"x14' 10.00 19.99 $199.90deckingx8' 120.00 5.69 $682.80deckingx10' 50.00 6.99 $349.504"x4"x6' 33.00 5.49 $181.172"x6"x12' 38.00 7.49 $284.623/8"x8" Carriage Bolts 92.00 1.49 $137.083/8" Washer 92.00 0.05 $4.603/8" Nut 92.00 0.05 $4.60Decking Screws 50lb 45.00 $45.001/2"x8" Lag Bolts 32.00 1.49 $47.68

Total: $2,605.61

Task Man HoursFootings 16Stringers 16Crossbeams 8Decking 16Ramp 1 32Ramp 2 32Railings 24Total: 144

Engineering Development:100 hours