New Issue: Orbital Catastrophe Ahead? Read Now

Repairs without Rivets

Carbon-fiber composites could lead to quick fixes for old bridges

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


Investigators still do not know exactly why the I-35W bridge collapsed into the Mississippi River in Minneapolis on August 1, killing 13 people and injuring about 100. But a succession of less spectacular failures over the years has raised concern among the country’s bridge engineers. New materials promise to make routine repairs less costly and intrusive, an important consideration in an era in which money for infrastructure is tight. “The days of letting a bridge deteriorate and then simply replacing it are going away,” says Mark Hirota, a consultant with Parsons Brincker­hoff and a former bridge engineer for the state of Oregon.

According to a 2005 study by the American Society of Civil Engineers, 27.1 percent of the nation’s bridges are either structurally deficient or functionally obsolete—a total of more than 160,000 bridges. The estimated cost to repair these bridges is almost $10 billion a year over the next 20 years. Built in 1967, the Minneapolis structure was a deck truss bridge with multiple steel girders and had been a concern among the state’s transportation officials for years. After the collapse, U.S. Secretary of Transportation Mary Peters quickly called for an inspection of all the nation’s steel truss bridges similar to the I-35W span. A truss bridge, one of the oldest bridge types, is fairly simple in design and relatively cheap to build as compared with suspension and cable-stayed bridges, but engineers make no generalizations about types especially prone to sudden collapse.

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe