newmercman:
Italian steel, weaker than other steel? I would say yes if the rust bucket vehicles made from it were anything to go by…
Sent from my SM-G950W using Tapatalk
Unlike the rust buckets built at Longbridge, Dagenham, Luton
You’re too late nmm’s mind already seems to have been opened regarding Brit trucks so far that just leaves the cars while the Humber Bridge vid has put that skill set beyond doubt.
Wherever the steel and other materials originated, wouldn’t the construction company, and probably representatives of the clients, test them all?
Any substandard stuff should have been refused.
eagerbeaver:
I knew that TNUK had a crack team of lawyers in it’s ranks, I was also aware of the special forces crew, the pilots, the coppers, the uni graduates, the IT experts, the scientists, the Doctor’s, the submariners, the car designers, the history professors, the economics experts and the ex professional athletes.
It appears we can now add the structural engineers to the mix ffs
And that’s just the many skills of one person on here.
Franglais:
Wherever the steel and other materials originated, wouldn’t the construction company, and probably representatives of the clients, test them all?
Any substandard stuff should have been refused.
Franglais:
Wherever the steel and other materials originated, wouldn’t the construction company, and probably representatives of the clients, test them all?
Any substandard stuff should have been refused.
Sent from my SM-G361F using Tapatalk
When doing these kind of pours, thousands of sq metres at a time, and govt public works, ESPECIALLY bridges, then yes, they would have had samples taken, couple of buckets full, from mebbe 1 load out of 5 or 10 depending on their laws.
This would have been taken away, tested for what is actually in it, and also stress tested (squashed to destruction) and tensile tested (pulled to destruction).
That´s just the concrete though.
Franglais:
Wherever the steel and other materials originated, wouldn’t the construction company, and probably representatives of the clients, test them all?
Any substandard stuff should have been refused.
Sent from my SM-G361F using Tapatalk
When doing these kind of pours, thousands of sq metres at a time, and govt public works, ESPECIALLY bridges, then yes, they would have had samples taken, couple of buckets full, from mebbe 1 load out of 5 or 10 depending on their laws.
This would have been taken away, tested for what is actually in it, and also stress tested (squashed to destruction) and tensile tested (pulled to destruction).
That´s just the concrete though.
We already know that the tensile strength of concrete is hopeless as shown in the Humber Bridge vid.Then ironically in the case of a design which is all about lateral loads applied to the towers they seem to have forgot to use enough if any re bar let alone the quality of it if they’d have used it.
Franglais:
Wherever the steel and other materials originated, wouldn’t the construction company, and probably representatives of the clients, test them all?
Any substandard stuff should have been refused.
Sent from my SM-G361F using Tapatalk
When doing these kind of pours, thousands of sq metres at a time, and govt public works, ESPECIALLY bridges, then yes, they would have had samples taken, couple of buckets full, from mebbe 1 load out of 5 or 10 depending on their laws.
This would have been taken away, tested for what is actually in it, and also stress tested (squashed to destruction) and tensile tested (pulled to destruction).
That´s just the concrete though.
Why? Why not the steel and any other components as well?
Franglais:
Wherever the steel and other materials originated, wouldn’t the construction company, and probably representatives of the clients, test them all?
Any substandard stuff should have been refused.
Sent from my SM-G361F using Tapatalk
When doing these kind of pours, thousands of sq metres at a time, and govt public works, ESPECIALLY bridges, then yes, they would have had samples taken, couple of buckets full, from mebbe 1 load out of 5 or 10 depending on their laws.
This would have been taken away, tested for what is actually in it, and also stress tested (squashed to destruction) and tensile tested (pulled to destruction).
That´s just the concrete though.
Why? Why not the steel and any other components as well?
Well, they probably do. I can only speak for what I´ve seen happening with the concrete, both on the ground as a driver and at the workshops/labs for testing.
Now´s the time for the “steel guys” to chip in
Of course, when the lab tech wakes up one morning and the horses head next to him says
“You will make sure that the samples sent to you pass all the tests”
It´s a whole different ball game, innit.
Franglais:
Wherever the steel and other materials originated, wouldn’t the construction company, and probably representatives of the clients, test them all?
Any substandard stuff should have been refused.
Sent from my SM-G361F using Tapatalk
When doing these kind of pours, thousands of sq metres at a time, and govt public works, ESPECIALLY bridges, then yes, they would have had samples taken, couple of buckets full, from mebbe 1 load out of 5 or 10 depending on their laws.
This would have been taken away, tested for what is actually in it, and also stress tested (squashed to destruction) and tensile tested (pulled to destruction).
That´s just the concrete though.
Why? Why not the steel and any other components as well?
Most of the metal that used by the machine shops at places I’ve worked have to come with certificates that covers information about the quality of the metal and I’ve also taken components to places for Non Destructive Testing, I assume similar things happens for critical metal components for civil engineering projects.
But for various reasons testing might not be a rigorous as required, Stevespain might have a point.
steviespain:
Of course, when the lab tech wakes up one morning and the horses head next to him says
“You will make sure that the samples sent to you pass all the tests”
It´s a whole different ball game, innit.
Stevie & Muckles, I won`t disagree with either of you.
In a properly managed project, all components and materials should be tested by different people multiple times at various stages.
In a mis-managed (due to incompetence, greed, corruption or whatever) project any tests are pretty irrelevant, unfortunately.
newmercman:
Don’t forget that bridge stood for 50years, surely if there were flaws in its construction, it would have collapsed long ago…
Seems to fit the description more by luck than judgement.Although the designers might have said you will knock it down and replace it with something better in around 20-30 years max when we’ve got more cash to play with won’t you. No need for the horses head when they just needed to say yes of course we will at that point and no one could prove otherwise.
newmercman:
Don’t forget that bridge stood for 50years, surely if there were flaws in its construction, it would have collapsed long ago…
Seems to fit the description more by luck than judgement.Although the designers might have said you will knock it down and replace it with something better in around 20-30 years max when we’ve got more cash to play with won’t you. No need for the horses head when they just needed to say yes of course we will at that point and no one could prove otherwise.
So it’s likely that most concrete structures from the 60s are past their best before date? Things were a lot more primitive in those days, slide rules with pen and paper rather than CAD, would concrete and steel testing have been as accurate as today’s methods, or even used at all? Had they learned to agitate concrete to remove air pockets at that time? Was it poured continually to prevent it become a series of blocks with a smooth outer surface?
alamcculloch:
I am wondering how long the new Forth crossing will last , built with Chinese steel. What could possibly go wrong?
Does Chinese Steel have a different structure to any other nation’s steel?
A process of Steel Manufacture is going to be a pretty universal thing - isn’t it? If you make a batch of steel that is liable to shatter upon shock - then it ain’t steel - it is pig iron. If it’s too flexible, then it won’t hold up much weight either. The standards for steel making are pretty universal across the world.
I don’t think the Chinese are going to be palming off Pig Iron or White Cast Iron as “Commie’s Finest Steel” somehow.
Making the steel is a universal thing then, and removing any undesired impurities beyond that manufacturing process - involves metallurgy rather than steelmaking then.
Is a Samurai Sword superior to a European Broadsword? - Yes. The metal has been hammered over upon itself a large number of times, which makes Japanese Steel superior to Toledo Steel for instance - Toledo Steel probably being the benchmark for swords made in the middle ages.
I still don’t think this bridge collapse is about the steel though. I think it is about the impurities in the concrete that were not removed properly when the concrete mix itself was being made.
newmercman:
Don’t forget that bridge stood for 50years, surely if there were flaws in its construction, it would have collapsed long ago…
Sent from my SM-G950W using Tapatalk
Not if there was a gradual metamorphic change in the concrete itself, as I’ve suggested at length…
I’m pretty sure that Steel doesn’t turn back into Pig Iron, and any steel struts within the concrete - should be protected from rust at the construction point as well.
No. It can’t be “construction flaws”, so I would agree with you on that. It would indeed have collapsed during the first storm, first bridge full of trucks passing over it, or even the first fault in the ground underneath, causing some other instability in the entire structure.
A gradual heating/drying of the impurities in the concrete (over many years of too much heat, and not enough rain), which I’ve suggested to be “Calcium Carbonate” (in the form of powdered Marble or Limestone)
It gradually builds up as Quicklime over time, which has a rather alarming reaction with water, generating quite a lot more heat, and then (most importantly) - expanding, and crumbling.
switchlogic:
So Autostrade are promising to rebuild the bridge in just 8 months! Makes you want to scream HAVE YOU LEARNT NOTHING? at them!
Personally I’d be more worried about the existing bridges of a similar age in Italy, than a new bridge which will no doubt be well over engineered and of a tried a trusted design and construction method, especially as (looking at one post on here) this isn’t a one off event in Italy in the last few years.
It isn’t going to be so easy to “Blame the government” for this one either.
It is a new government, that has only been in power a short time.
It cannot therefore be blamed for what has take the best part of half a century to set up as a public disaster.
The new incumbents will be judged, if anything, - on how they deal with the real culprits for this, and other “collapse” tragedies, of which Genoa merely happens to be the “worst so far”.
No need for the horses head when they just needed to say yes of course we will at that point and no one could prove otherwise. 