Pamban Bridge Gets Conditional Nod Even As Safety Commissioner Calls It ‘Bad Example of Constructing An Important Structure’ – News18

Last Updated:November 28, 2024, 01:59 IST

While authorising the bridge’s commercial use for passenger trains, the Commissioner of Railway Safety imposed specific stipulations that must be met before operations commence

In a critical inspection, the Commissioner of Railway Safety (CRS), South Circle, AM Chowdhary, highlighted several lapses in the construction of the new Pamban Bridge between Mandapam and Pamban stations in the Madurai Division of Southern Railways. While authorising the bridge’s commercial use for passenger trains, the CRS imposed specific stipulations that must be met before operations commence.

In his report, Chowdhary remarked, “The bridge sets a bad example of constructing an important structure, with glaring lapses from the planning stage to execution.”

In the authorisation letter issued on November 26, the CRS compared the new bridge with its predecessor, which is over 100 years old. He noted, “It is unfortunate that the Railway Board has been flouting its own guidelines.”

The report meticulously documents violations, ranging from non-standard design approaches to substandard welding techniques that could reduce the bridge’s stress-carrying capacity by 36%.

Alarmingly, the bridge, situated in what is considered the second-most corrosive environment globally, is already showing signs of significant deterioration even before its commercial commissioning.

Addressing the inspection, SR Gugneshan, Chief Public Relations Officer (CPRO), Southern Zone of Indian Railways, stated, “The bridge is fit for traffic. We have reviewed the observations by the CRS, and the recommended stipulations will be implemented as a standard practice for all authorisations.”

While railway officials have been tasked with implementing a comprehensive list of corrections before passenger services begin, another senior Indian Railways officer characterised the inspection as a “critical assessment”, emphasising its procedural nature to ensure the highest standards.

The technical report highlights systemic shortcomings. It points out that the lift span girder was designed using non-standard codes, bypassing Research Designs and Standards Organisation (RDSO) protocols. Plate girders were constructed without proper design approvals, and guidelines from the Technical Advisory Group were completely ignored. Additionally, the Fabrication Inspection Unit failed to conduct proper weld testing, with primary stressed members being welded on-site—violating established railway construction codes. During the initial speed trial, the bridge sustained speeds of up to 80 kilometres per hour, with peak acceleration not exceeding 0.15 g. However, the CRS has authorised a maximum sectional speed of 75 kilometres per hour for the bridge, with the lift span section (Span No. 77) restricted to a lower speed limit of 50 kilometres per hour due to technical concerns.

“The bridge is completely safe, and all observations will be addressed. These inspections are intended to ensure the highest safety standards and do not indicate that the bridge is unsafe. While the observations are critical, the CRS inspection aims to provide a thorough assessment,” a senior railway officer explained.