It’s definitely a good question— vertical members in a Pratt configuration (or most other configurations for that matter) are normally in compression, which eyebars are definitely not designed for...
Daniel: The member in question is the hip vertical. As such an eyebar is sufficient to handle the tension forces at this location. However they still needed to use a built-up beam with lacing at the bottom to provide a solid post upon which to mount the bridge railing (which no longer exists on the bridge).
Can anyone explain why there's a short vertical laced member with a pair of eyebars attached to it, rather than eyebars the full height? 3rd pic.
I remember jumping off of and swimming under this bridge in my youth. I once swung out from the bridge deck on a rope some brave soul had tied to the top rafters. I lost control and landed on my back on the water below. It knocked the breath out of me and scared me to death... I never used the rope again.
It looks like it has really been taken over by nature.
Seeing these photos brings back a lot of memories. I grew up in Daleville during the late 70's and early 80's, and I well remember many nights spent camping, drinking and swimming on, near or beneath this bridge. It still had its deck when I last saw it, and wasn't nearly as overgrown. My friends used to jump off it into the river, but I never had enough guts to do that. Thanks to the poster for bringing back some great memories of good times!!
Guardrail support makes sense, although I'm surprised they didn't use the diagonal nearby instead (or maybe they used both).
I wasn't sure what would explain the change from a member that could take compression, some bending, and tension to a tension only member, in the middle of the member. I guess something else (the guardrail) attaching there is about the only option.