Lower Iron Bridge
Photo taken by C Hanchey in February 2011
BH Photo #194238
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.
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!!