Rating:
No votes cast

Rosslyn Tunnel

Photos 

Photo taken by Famartin in January 2016

License: Creative Commons Attribution-Share-Alike (CC BY-SA)

Enlarge

View this photo at Wikimedia Commons

BH Photo #435018

Map 

Street Views 

Facts 

Overview
Tunnel under N.Nash St., N. Fort Myer Dr., N.Lynn St. on I-66
Location
Arlington, Arlington County, Virginia
Status
Open
History
Built 1983
Design
Cut-And-Cover Tunnel
Dimensions
Length of largest span: 45.9 ft.
Total length: 97.1 ft.
Also called
Gateway Park Tunnel
Approximate latitude, longitude
+38.89861, -77.07361   (decimal degrees)
38°53'55" N, 77°04'25" W   (degrees°minutes'seconds")
Approximate UTM coordinates
18/320178/4307569 (zone/easting/northing)
Quadrangle map:
Washington West
Inventory numbers
VA 29285 (Virginia bridge number)
BH 54502 (Bridgehunter.com ID)

Update Log 

  • September 23, 2018: New photos from Luke
  • August 25, 2018: Updated by Luke: Added link to FHWA National Tunnel Inventory.
  • August 11, 2018: New Street View added by Luke
  • August 11, 2018: Updated by Royce and Bobette Haley: Design change
  • November 16, 2012: Added by Jared Mixson

Comments 

Rosslyn Tunnel
Posted November 7, 2018, by whereyouare?

REVENITE

Rosslyn Tunnel
Posted August 26, 2018, by Royce and Bobette Haley (roycehaley111 [at] yahoo [dot] com)

Mr obtuse

Tunnel is clearly defined both in engineering and common use it is not subjective because you want it to be. "Cut and cover Tunneling" is a TECHNIQUE NOT A DESIGN. The designs of "cut and cover tunnels" vary-arches, rigid frames, culverts stringers etc. I am finished with the Luke blog and bridge page. Kindly F.O.

Rosslyn Tunnel
Posted August 26, 2018, by Luke

No, the obtuse one is you, because your cherrypicking of dictionaries (And wholly ignoring engineering material that explains tunnel construction for the narrow dictionary definitions you've cherrypicked.) does not trump actual multi-nationally-recongized-and-utilized tunnel engineering/construction designs and methodologies, and the fact that you think your pedantry is a "gotcha" that trumps them really highlights your idiocy, as does your constant+repetitious reliance on irrelevant political red herrings+ad hominems.

You're neither an engineer nor a linguist, so you ought to stop pretending you are, because the more you stamp your feet and go "NO! I KNOW BETTER THAN ENGINEERS!" (Which is exactly what you're doing.), the worse you make yourself look.

Rosslyn Tunnel
Posted August 26, 2018, by Royce and Bobette Haley (roycehaley111 [at] yahoo [dot] com)

"While the definition is subjective, listing the structure as a cut and cover tunnel would be a good compromise, as this design name sets it apart from a more standard bored tunnel."

No Mr. Obtuse, the definition is not subjective, hence the many sources that define tunnel the same way. "The design name"? it is called a box culvert or a steel stringer, both designs have been used for some time.

Rosslyn Tunnel
Posted August 26, 2018, by Royce and Bobette Haley (roycehaley111 [at] yahoo [dot] com)

Luke how obtuse can you be. It does not fit the engineering definition of a tunnel as I posted. It does not fit the common usage definition of a tunnel. It is not a tunnel because someone calls it a tunnel. Clue in Mr. Obtuse Order follower

I posted the oxford engineering dictionary definition and the common usage dictionary. The FHWA does not accept it as a tunnel they accept the name of the technique as cut and cover tunnel and guess what gubment worker, because the gubment tells you don't make it right. I am sure as with most gubment crap it needs to be dumbed down for gubment people to understand they talking about a hole with a street in it. Steel beams on abutments are stringers MR. Obtuse

Rosslyn Tunnel
Posted August 25, 2018, by Luke

"Luke, You strike me as a true life long government order follower. At the very least someone who spent most of their life in an industry that relies on government charity to survive. There is just a mind set in these people that is so enslaved."

And with you bringing up yet-another "hurr durr gubbrmynt"-theme Red Herring/Ad Hominem Combo Fallacy, we've further confirmed that you're not arguing in good faith.

"Being correct is important in the ideas we express and what we want to communicate to others in these pages."

Yes, and "being correct" requires one to prove that they're correct, which segues into the next point

"You first cried I was anti engineering and I presented facts that engineering does not support what you said."

Except you did no such thing. You pedantically cited a dictionary, (And a Wikipedia article, which lists cut-and-cover under construction types, which doesn't end up supporting your own argument.) which is not the same thing as citing actual engineering stuff.

Meanwhile I cited several PDFs describing the actual engineering methodology behind cut-and-cover construction AND referenced local media that referred to it as cut-and-cover AND referenced historicaerials showing them constructing the trench used in said cut-and-cover construction of shallow tunnels.

tl;dr I've looked for evidence that this is actually a tunnel, found it, and provided it.

You've done nothing but sat and gone "It's not literally bored through rock so it's not a tunnel" ad nauseum (Plus some rather childish antics.).

Rosslyn Tunnel
Posted August 25, 2018, by John Marvig (marvigj27 [at] gmail [dot] com)

Royce,

You're right that throwing logs over a ditch doesn't make it a tunnel. But digging a 30 foot deep trench, and putting a concrete encasement over it does make it a cut and cover tunnel. The point is, while it may not be a traditional bored tunnel, it is still considered to be a tunnel.

https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/bridge/tunnel/pubs/nhi09010/tunnel_...

While the FHWA has no accepted definition of a tunnel, according to the provided link, cut and cover is a tunnel construction technique. The FHWA (Federal Highway Administration, a government administration) seems to accept cut and cover style construction as tunnels. This document is very informational. Titled "Technical manual for design and construction of road tunnels-civil elements" and written by four professional civil engineers, I would believe that these people know what they are talking about. As a civil engineering student, I also believe that this would be acceptable to consider a tunnel.

While the definition is subjective, listing the structure as a cut and cover tunnel would be a good compromise, as this design name sets it apart from a more standard bored tunnel.

Rosslyn Tunnel
Posted August 25, 2018, by Royce and Bobette Haley (roycehaley111 [at] yahoo [dot] com)

Luke, You strike me as a true life long government order follower. At the very least someone who spent most of their life in an industry that relies on government charity to survive. There is just a mind set in these people that is so enslaved.

Being correct is important in the ideas we express and what we want to communicate to others in these pages. You first cried I was some sort of anti engineering and I presented facts that engineering does not support what you said. the vast, vast majority of definitions for tunnel, including engineering definitions do not support your inaccurate assessment and still you argue (order follower mentality). You attack being accurate and correct on the pages?

Your links do not provide a definition of a tunnel.

This quote covers the basics of your links.

" The contents do not

necessarily reflect policy of the Department of Transportation. This report does not

constitute a standard, specification, or regulation. The United States Government

does not endorse products or manufacturers. "

Again, digging a ditch and throwing logs over it does not a tunnel make.

Calling it Almond milk does not make it Milk, no matter who calls it Almond milk or how many. There are generally agreed upon definitions for things, including tunnels, cut and cover does not fulfill the definition of a tunnel in any commonly associated definition of tunnel.

Rosslyn Tunnel
Posted August 23, 2018, by Luke

1) People can't view the scripts page, but woweee here's all the NBI entries that refer to the structure as a tunnel (See image)

2) Again, being pedantic and only using your narrow definition of tunnel is idiotic

3) Look, I can cite things too:

https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/bridge/tunnel/pubs/nhi09010/tunnel_...

http://www.iitk.ac.in/nicee/wcee/article/14_05-03-0008.PDF

http://onlinepubs.trb.org/Onlinepubs/sr/sr171/171-016.pdf

http://www.ejge.com/2008/Ppr0864.pdf

https://www.waterproofmag.com/downloads/2012-01/WP_2012-01_T...

https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-1-4613-0449-4_...

http://www.hudsontunnelproject.com/documents/deis/03%20Const...

And they're all engineering pdfs that describe the cut-and-cover tunneling method in some form or another (Including a whole chapter from the FHWA.).

Perhaps you should READ THEM instead of yet-again spouting your inane pedantic/pseudointellectual personal opinions as if they're engineering factualities.

4) So to finish it off:

If you look at the location on historicaerials, you can see the area under construction from 1979-1982

You can see that they've dug DOWN to build the trench used in cut-and-cover tunnel construction.

A LOT of groups, from governmental to locals to engineering call this a tunnel.

There's more evidence supporting it being a tunnel than not.

You're a pedant, and annoyingly pseudointellectual one at that.

Rosslyn Tunnel
Posted August 23, 2018, by Royce and Bobette Haley (roycehaley111 [at] yahoo [dot] com)

To finish off the conversation,

The FHWA has no accepted definition of a tunnel, (call what ever you like a tunnel), the AASHTO does not have an accepted definition of tunnel, only what defines weather it is a short or long tunnel.

https://www.ldoceonline.com/Engineering-topic/tunnel_2

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tunnel

The NFPA defines a tunnel as an "underground" structure longer than 75 feet

http://www.oxfordreference.com/abstract/10.1093/acref/978019...

on and on and on

Rosslyn Tunnel
Posted August 23, 2018, by Royce and Bobette Haley (roycehaley111 [at] yahoo [dot] com)
Rosslyn Tunnel
Posted August 23, 2018, by Royce and Bobette Haley (roycehaley111 [at] yahoo [dot] com)

North Nash Street-Stringer-http://bridgehunter.com/scripts/bridge/add-nbi.cgi?fips=51013;id=000000000000069;v=2017;from=54502

Fort Meyer Drive-Stringer-http://bridgehunter.com/scripts/bridge/add-nbi.cgi?fips=51013;id=000000000000071;v=2017;from=54502

North Lynn Street-Stringer-http://bridgehunter.com/scripts/bridge/add-nbi.cgi?fips=51013;id=000000000000073;v=2017;from=54502

All draw bridges in front of castles are now tunnels when down.

Cut and Cover the Almond milk of engineering.

Rosslyn Tunnel
Posted August 12, 2018, by Luke

Hopefully the tunnels don't catch on fire as easily as his cars :')

Rosslyn Tunnel
Posted August 12, 2018, by Don

Tunnel is so last century. I vote that we start calling them "bores" since Elon's Boring Company now makes tunnels.

They also sell flamethrowers, so we could call this a flame war. Lol

Rosslyn Tunnel
Posted August 12, 2018, by Luke

1) All 5 of the NBI entries refer to it as a tunnel (As does everyone from the federal, state, and local governments to news outlets to highway fanatics.), and as I already stated, stringer is the typical roof construction method for cut-and-cover tunnels, but I guess paying attention is hard.

2) This tunnel passes under a park built upon the backfill used to bury the it.

3) And now you're being willfully obtuse and willfully ignoring the actual engineering/design differences between cut-and-cover tunnels and overpasses.

Literalism and pedantry don't trump actual engineering.

Rosslyn Tunnel
Posted August 12, 2018, by Anonymous

I thought tubes were tubes and stringers were stringers.

I suppose you could make an argument for the tubes as they are actually under something. This "tunnel" is not under anything, a pretty standard definition of tunnel. Otherwise do we start adding all the wide stringers as tunnels, cities are full of them, not to mention NBI (the gospel) lists it as stringers. And yea, the common and reasonable definition of something is generally best used, don't you think?

Royce

Rosslyn Tunnel
Posted August 12, 2018, by Anonymous

You can ignore engineering techniques for your own personal opinion all you Like, it doesn't mean you're in the right.

Cut-and-cover (Which are typically stringer-roofed trenches.), along with immersed tubes (Used frequently in your home state, Royce.) are forms of tunnel construction, despite not being litetally tunneled through rock.

Ignoring this for a literalist view is extremely idiotic.

Rosslyn Tunnel
Posted August 12, 2018, by Anonymous

Seems if it wasn't tunneled it is not a tunnel, hence the word tunnel. NBI has it listed as steel stringers

Rosslyn Tunnel
Posted August 11, 2018, by Luke

I've found several references to this being a "cut-and-cover" tunnel project , which is how most tunnels are built nowadays, especially when being built in already-built-up metropolitan areas

Citing sites that refer to it as cut-and-cover:

http://www.angelfire.com/va2/Route66/Background.html

http://www.dcroads.net/roads/I-66_VA/

http://wwwtripwithinthebeltway.blogspot.com/2015/02/i-66-add...

Rosslyn Tunnel
Posted August 11, 2018, by Anonymous

Let's all be like Elsa. Let it go. Let it go.

Rosslyn Tunnel
Posted August 11, 2018, by Royce and Bobette Haley (roycehaley111 [at] yahoo [dot] com)

"even VDOT calls it a tunnel" LOL, well if the government says so it must be true.

Rosslyn Tunnel
Posted August 11, 2018, by Anonymous

Funny, because even VADOT calls it a tunnel

Rosslyn Tunnel
Posted August 11, 2018, by Royce and Bobette Haley (roycehaley111 [at] yahoo [dot] com)

This is not a tunnel