Article

2007-08-05 Science & Technology

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Fred 2007-08-05 11:34|| || Front Page|| [4 views ] Top

#1 where it will dig for clues to past and present life.

For phuechs sake! How about a hand to ~~bridge builders~~ the scuba divers up in Minneapolis who are "digging for clues" for life in the Mississippi River. Sad, so very sad.

Posted by Besoeker 2007-08-05 13:57|| 2007-08-05 13:57|| Front Page Top

#2 re #1. The pork projects in the transportation bills would have more than paid for infrastucture rehab. Polititians have a poor record w/r to engineering & transportation planning. I would make a bet that the MinnDOT engineers wanted to rehab that structure long ago but the politicians wanted Rapid Transit and bike path widening instead so they decided to "study" the problem while they built their pet projects.

In addition, the Transportation bill stalled in congress has had a very negative efect on both state and federally funded projects. The moneys are then prioitized (what is not diverted by politico's via earmarks). The federal money is present but the Transportation bill not funded (more than onece in recent years, both parties to blame). Throw in state level politico's that want the road to their cabin paved and you get a bridge in the water.

Summary: Stealing moneys from DOD or NASA would not solve the problem as the problems are the process and are systemic rather than primarily funding. I would make a bet that the MinnDOT engineers would have delt with this and other problems long ago if allowed.

NOTE: Consultants are not neccessarily the solution to the problem. Politicians just don't want to hear bad news from competent State employee's so spend millions for outside studies that will hopefully give them the news they want.

Posted by Throger Thains8048 2007-08-05 14:39|| 2007-08-05 14:39|| Front Page Top

#3 Mostly agree, TT8048, except - so they decided to "study" the problem while they built their pet projects. No. Plenty of that goes on, but that's not why the bridge fell.

"Structurally Deficient" is not anywhere near "dangerous". The thosands of structurally deficient bridges are not dangerous, either. It might just mean, "We don't build 'em that way anymore." The first thing that happens is the bridges get "posted" with a load limit, like many rural roads.

When a 100-year old bridge that is posted at 20,000 pounds (max) gets a lost truck weighing 80,000 lbs, sometimes the driver makes it. Often he does not.

Maybe somebody missed something on an inspection, or perhaps it was some unusual loads from the repair work. Usually, failures like this are a result of several small issues that were not harmful. The Titanic could've survived the iceberg hit, if the bulkheads went all the way to the top, or the Captain had not been running so fast, or the steel was not so brittle, or the rivets were not so bad, and there were lifeboats for everybody. But other than that, it was the iceberg.

Posted by Bobby 2007-08-05 17:47|| 2007-08-05 17:47|| Front Page Top

#4 Bobby, I concur with your comments but I have some suspicion about this case just because it is on an annual inspection sequence and it has had at least one major study done recently. The folks in the bridge section of a state DOT don't usually spend that kind of money casually.

I'm afraid my distrust of political policys w/r to engineering decisions is showing. In some cases I have seen the political project sucks the away such that what might be a easily funded maintenance or replacement project gets put on the back burner unless that expensive consultant says it is critical.

Back to the subject at hand -- It's nice to see good scientific research being done and most younger folks have no idea how much the world has changed due to the spin-offs of the space program over the decades.

Posted by Throger Thains8048 2007-08-05 20:53|| 2007-08-05 20:53|| Front Page Top

#5 If the problem was erosion around the pilings, I don't think a structural inspection would have uncovered it.

Does anyone know if divers or sonar is used in bridge inspections on a regular basis?

Posted by Adriane 2007-08-05 23:40|| 2007-08-05 23:40|| Front Page Top

23:57 Zenster
23:56 Zenster
23:56 Jonathan
23:51 Verlaine
23:50 Zenster
23:48 Zenster
23:43 Zenster
23:43 twobyfour
23:41 tipper
23:40 twobyfour
23:40 Adriane
23:38 Richard Aubrey
23:32 Pappy
23:21 Pappy
22:56 Clealing Bluetooth4471
22:55 gromgoru
22:43 Old Patriot
22:43 Clealing Bluetooth4471
22:39 Zenster
22:36 Mullah Richard
22:30 Super Hose
22:27 Zenster
22:26 Super Hose
22:18 3dc