On Aug 3, 10:03 am, blake murphy > wrote:
> On Thu, 02 Aug 2007 19:13:21 GMT, Reg > wrote:
> >Dave Smith wrote:
>
> >> maxine in ri wrote:
>
> >>>>I think this event will reveal some fundamental flaws in their
> >>>>inspection regime. Whatever caused it, whether it's erosion
> >>>>of the pylons (known as scouring, it has caused collapses
> >>>>before. A major incident occurred in upstate NY) or deterioration
> >>>>of the structure itself, it should have been caught by their normal
> >>>>inspection regime.
>
> >>>There were no pylons. The bridge had a 450 foot unsupported span with
> >>>no suspension according to the report I heard.
>
> >> Of course is was supported, It has stood up since it opened in 1967. There
> >> was no suspension because it was not a suspension bridge. It was a steel
> >> arch Deck Truss bridge. Arches are supposed to be able to bear a lot of
> >> weight. Pylon may or may not be an accurate word to describe the concrete
> >> supports or pedestals, two on each side of the river, which support the
> >> ands of the arched metal structure.
>
> >"Footings" is probably the term I should have used.
>
> >I think there's a reasonable chance one may have come down as a result
> >of bridge scour, similar to the Schoharie Creek incident in 1987.
> >This caused a progressive collapse.
>
> >Another possible cause is structural failure due to metal fatigue.
>
> >In any case, the design lacked sufficient redundancy to
> >prevent a progressive collapse. One piece falls, causing them
> >all to go down. Such older designs require stricter inspection
> >and maintenance, which it appears didn't happen in this case.
>
> on the contrary, it was inspected at least twice and found
> 'structurally deficient.' they just didn't fix it.

Which is more important, giving huge tax breaks to the wealthiest 2%,
or fixing infrastructure so that working people don't get killed on
the way home from work?
Don'tchya ever let anyone tell ya that America ain't got no class.
>
> your pal,
> blake

--Bryan