Bridge Collapse

[DanaC]

Demonstrated again is exactly the point made repeatedly in previous posts. Yesman065 was criticized zero times in that first post. However Yesman065 took offense anyway - assumed criticism that clearly and obviously did not exist.

The criticism was implied when you chose to open your post by pointing out the difference between your view and yesman's. You made a post about the lack of foresight you percieve to have been used by the relevant authorities and chose Yesman's instinctive response to the sight of the fallen schoolbus as symbolic of the difference between you and the shortsighted authorities.

Of course it was a fucking criticism.

[tw]

Originally Posted by DanaC

The criticism was implied when you chose to open your post by pointing out the difference between your view and yesman's.

That assumes we must be politically correct. Are we all children? Why do you apply something that 1) I never intended and 2) was not explicitly posted? Why do you now do as only children do – see things that do not exist? Warch described posts with passion. Passion? Those are posts only intended to say only what they say – and make every blunt and politically incorrect effort to make that point.

In an above post, I have zero idea what Uisge Beatha is posting. Why? His post is completely ambiguous – both times – makes zero sense. Or should I say 'her'. I don't know, I don't care, and only children would take insult (another example of some here so emotional as to care that a reply used the wrong gender). Am I supposed to apply my biases to understand his post? However since you seem to know more about what is in his post, then tell me; what is Uisge Beatha trying to say? What is this understatement?

DanaC - I don't imply insults. If I was insulting you, then it would be clear how bad I thought your cunt smells. Did I insult your cunt? No. But those who read with implication into everything will now assume so. Let’s be explicitly clear here. There is not even an implied insult here. And yet many are still so ‘childish’ as to apply personal biases; therefore assume an implication. Can I be any more blunt, honest, and politically incorrect to make a point clearly (with "passion")? And yet still, some minds will be so childish as to assume an implied insult anyway.

Which brings us right back, again, to two questions. One, what is Uisge Beatha posting? And two, what are your biases that caused you to see something in a post that did not exist? Do you condemn people for worrying about one school bus – or see that worry about one school bus as an example of how people think differently? To see insult in that post, does DanaC assume those who are quick to entertain their emotions considered evil? I do expect answers because these questions only imply exactly what they ask. Those questions were never asked to imply anything. They were asked to elicit an answer.

Or even better, DanaC - rephrase that first paragraph to be political correct? You know what my point was. Post the rewrite.

Do I ask these questions to attack you? In those questions is only what those questions ask. If your personal biases see them as an attack (as Yesman065 would), then terminate your biases. Those questions only imply exactly what they ask.

[xoxoxoBruce]

When glare ice coats the highways, sand and salt trucks roar to the rescue, saving thousands of drivers from injury or death. The quantity of salt applied to Minnesota roads increases each year, up to 320,000 tons in 1999.

Calcium chloride and magnesium chloride
Novotny et al. (1999) provide a comprehensive overview of calcium chloride and magnesium chloride. These chemicals are more costly than many other deicers, but work at lower temps and have a faster melting capability. Both are commonly used with rock salt when temperatures fall as low as -25 degrees C. Calcium chloride is more corrosive than rock salt so it is seldom used alone.
~snip~
Calcium Magnesium Acetate (CMA)
CMA has received much attention in the literature as potentially the best alternative to deicing salt because it is not corrosive and causes less damage to plants, soil, and organisms.
~snip~
A strong deterrent to widespread CMA use is its high cost. It typically costs $600 per ton, compared to $30/ton for salt.

[tw]

Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce

I believe UT may be refering to a problem with bridges in MN. Their surface tends to be colder and tends to freeze faster. Salt that may work on MN roads may not be sufficient to keep bridges from freezing. Therefore bridges with heavy traffic may suffer from more of more destructive deicing materials. But again, only wild speculation because we don't even know bridge condition previous to collapse and don't know how the collapse occurred - even where the failure started.

For example, did the foundation at one end of the bridge shift causing one truss to slip off? I have very little information here. And I don't see many answers appearing in reply to numerous questions.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by tw

DanaC - I don't imply insults. If I was insulting you, then it would be clear how bad I thought your cunt smells. Did I insult your cunt?

[warch]

From something I read/heard the piers have been ruled out, and the focus is on the steel truss. The thing shifted on the south side, dropped straight in the middle then snapped a break on the north side (the tall peak)

Money was not an issue. There was money available if deemed immediately needed. I'm sure closure of this major artery also featured in the decision. They didn't choose to add the reinforcing plates (a more expensive fix) they say, for a few reasons, not because of money, but because there was no assurance that the new holes they would drill wouldn't cause more harm than good.

I've seen some effects of the chemical deicer. It is definitely corrosive...

5 dead, over 100 injured, and 8 confirmed missing/near site. That's pretty amazing.


ps. cunt seems a bit affect-laden, from my interpretation.

[Griff]

Pete's company has done a lot of work on automated railroad inspection. I wonder if their methods for finding metal fatigue are adaptable and sophisticated enough to be of value?

[xoxoxoBruce]

An example of rusting rebar can be seen where they are tearing up the bridge to widen I-94 for the Waukegan Toll Plaza. Notice some of the rebar hooks, that were encased in the now demolished concrete deck, are rusted enough there is no traces of concrete adhered to them. They should have a green epoxy paint coating like the straight rebar sticking up on the left.

The bottom picture shows missing concrete and rusty rebar. It's easy to assume the concrete broke off and the rebar rusted from exposure to the elements. This is not true, however. Actually, water, probably salt brine reinforced water, worked it's way down through cracks in the concrete and rusted the rebar. When iron/steel rusts it increases in volume, creates pressure like freezing ice, and blows the concrete apart. That process causes spalling of the concrete and appears like in the bottom picture.

Now think of how the steel can react when there's no concrete to protect it at all. Unlike 99% of the thousands of bridges, the big, high profile bridges (George Washington, Golden Gate) are being painted continuously. More importantly, their decks and underpinnings are being inspected and maintained constantly.

You've probably heard rumblings about the states selling the rights to large portions of the interstates to private corporations for cash. My prophesy is, then the politicians piss away the money like Cheney with a War Budget, and when a major catastrophe comes along the corporation declares bankruptcy, the high ups bail with golden parachutes and the taxpayers get the mess dropped in their laps.
At least the ones that weren't killed in the catastrophe.