HistoricBridges.org Menu: HistoricBridges.org Menu:


We Recommend These Resources:
Bach Steel - Experts at historic truss bridge restoration.
Historic Bridge Finder App: Find Nearby Bridges

HistoricBridges.org: Bridge Browser

Vernita Bridge

Vernita Bridge

Primary Photographer(s): Nathan Holth

Bridge Documented: August 27, 2014

View Photos
and Videos
View Maps
and Links

Key Facts

Facility Carried / Feature Intersected
WA-24 Over Columbia River
Location
Rural: Benton County, Washington and Grant County, Washington: United States
Structure Type
Metal 10 Panel Rivet-Connected Polygonal Warren Through Truss, Fixed and Approach Spans: Pre-Stressed Concrete Stringer (Multi-Beam), Fixed
Construction Date and Builder / Engineer
1965 By Builder/Contractor: Unknown

Technical Facts

Rehabilitation Date
Not Available or Not Applicable
Main Span Length
264 Feet (80.47 Meters)
Structure Length
1982 Feet (604.11 Meters)
Roadway Width
28 Feet (8.53 Meters)
Spans
3 Main Span(s) and 14 Approach Span(s)
NBI Number
0007619A0000000

Historic Significance Rating (HSR)

Bridge Documentation

View Archived National Bridge Inventory Report - Has Additional Details and Evaluation

This bridge is unusual because its three main spans have polygonal top chords that are oriented in a manner that the three spans form a single arch shape, making the bridge look like a single continuous three-span truss. However, in reality the trusses are three simple spans. Mark Bozanich commented on www.bridgehunter.com that the Vernita Bridge was built with three simple trusses so that the center truss could be converted to a vertical lift span. There were plans at one time to build a dam downstream from Vernita and upstream from the Tri-Cities equipped with locks. Plans were abandoned now that the dam site is part of the Hanford Reach National Monument. Mark's comments seem to be supported by the physical configuration of the truss. Most notably, the piers for the center truss span are quite a bit wider than they need to be, suggesting that the piers were built to either completely or partially accommodate the towers that would be needed to make the bridge a vertical lift. Also, at the pier, the vertical end posts have empty bolt holes which could have been intended for attaching the lift tower and related materials.

The bridge is a late example of a metal truss bridge, and barely old enough to be considered historic. However, the bridge does stand out for its unusual false-continuous design. It also represents the end of the riveted truss era. Truss bridges built in the 60s like this bridge usually have details that show the decline in use of rivets and increase in the use of welds and bolts. What is unusual is that this bridge still used riveted connections, instead of bolted connections which are often found on 1960s bridges. In contrast, the built-up beams that compose the truss are welded, which is unusual since the built-up beams is one location where rivets are often still found on 1960s bridges.

Divider

Photo Galleries and Videos: Vernita Bridge

 
View Photo Gallery
Bridge Photo-Documentation
Original / Full Size Photos
A collection of overview and detail photos. This gallery offers photos in the highest available resolution and file size in a touch-friendly popup viewer. Alternatively, Browse Without Using Viewer
View Photo Gallery
Bridge Photo-Documentation
Mobile Optimized Photos
A collection of overview and detail photos. This gallery features data-friendly, fast-loading photos in a touch-friendly popup viewer. Alternatively, Browse Without Using Viewer

View Maps
and Links

Divider
 
Home Top

Divider

About - Contact

© Copyright 2003-2019, HistoricBridges.org. All Rights Reserved. Disclaimer: HistoricBridges.org is a volunteer group of private citizens. HistoricBridges.org is NOT a government agency, does not represent or work with any governmental agencies, nor is it in any way associated with any government agency or any non-profit organization. While we strive for accuracy in our factual content, HistoricBridges.org offers no guarantee of accuracy. Information is provided "as is" without warranty of any kind, either expressed or implied. Information could include technical inaccuracies or errors of omission. Opinions and commentary are the opinions of the respective HistoricBridges.org member who made them and do not necessarily represent the views of anyone else, including any outside photographers whose images may appear on the page in which the commentary appears. HistoricBridges.org does not bear any responsibility for any consequences resulting from the use of this or any other HistoricBridges.org information. Owners and users of bridges have the responsibility of correctly following all applicable laws, rules, and regulations, regardless of any HistoricBridges.org information.

Divider