 Poster: A snowHead
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
I'd be having a word with the bridge builders. It looks brand new!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
Did the bridge collapse? It looks like the basher just missed the bridge completely. I'd be breathalysing the driver 
p.s. I hope he/she's ok.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
Oops! 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
| halfhand wrote: |
Did the bridge collapse? It looks like the basher just missed the bridge completely. I'd be breathalysing the driver
p.s. I hope he/she's ok. |
Looks like the centre of the bridge collapsing. Wow!
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
A cubic foot of wet snow weighs can about 20 pounds, and thats one big ol' pile of soggy stuff right at the weakest point of the bridge deck. Add the basher and bridge says 'No more!'
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Richard_Sideways wrote: |
| A cubic foot of wet snow weighs can about 20 pounds, and thats one big ol' pile of soggy stuff right at the weakest point of the bridge deck. Add a lardy snowHead and bridge says 'No more!' |
FIFY! 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Mollerski wrote: |
| I'd be having a word with the bridge builders. It looks brand new! |
Not necessarily bridge builders, could all be down to the design that they were asked to build. Any structure will have a limit to the loads it can stand, as Richard says it may not have been design for a pile of snow like that + a few tonnes of piste basher.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
|
Was the driver aiming to shove that big pile of snow into the river?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Piste basher weighs 6 metric tonnes. Should still be well within the bridge load however.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
| SnoodyMcFlude wrote: |
| Mollerski wrote: |
| I'd be having a word with the bridge builders. It looks brand new! |
Not necessarily bridge builders, could all be down to the design that they were asked to build. Any structure will have a limit to the loads it can stand, as Richard says it may not have been design for a pile of snow like that + a few tonnes of piste basher. |
It's not as if load of snow is gonna fall on it or a piste basher is gonna drive over it in such a location. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
| Peter S wrote: |
| The Piste basher weighs 6 metric tonnes. Should still be well within the bridge load however. |
Surely that pile of snow is going to weigh a lot more than that though. Doesn't a metre cubed of water weigh a metric tonne, if so what fraction of that does wet compacted snow weigh? I'm sure a SH somewhere will know.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Google says fresh fallen snow is 1/10 the weight of same volume of water. I reckon compacted piled up snow could well be twice as dense/heavy.
How big is the pile of snow? maybe 6m high, maybe 12m across it's base and no idea of depth so say 6m again? If so volume would be circa 140m3, so weight nearly 30 metric tonnes.
Right, now someone do a proper job of working it out..................
Last edited by So if you're just off somewhere snowy come back and post a snow report of your own and we'll all love you very much  on Tue 12-05-15 10:05; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
| pam w wrote: |
| Was the driver aiming to shove that big pile of snow into the river? |
My guess would be yes, quite often I've seen around villages piste bashers pushing banked up snow into the rivers. I'm always worried there going to cause flooding but never seems to be a problem.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
| midgetbiker wrote: |
| Google says fresh fallen snow is 1/10 the weight of same volume of water. I reckon compacted piled up snow could well be twice as dense/heavy. |
Do you think icebergs sink?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
@dogwatch, err, twice as dense/heavy as un-compacted snow, not twice as dense/heavy as water!! 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
On average, a cubic meter of freshly-fallen snow has an average mass of about 50 kilograms. Snow that has been compacted by its own weight at a depth of 3 meters can have 200 kilograms in the same volume.
Density is defined as mass/volume. Freshly-fallen snow has a density of 50 kg/meter3 = 50 kg/m3, while the compressed snow described above has a higher density of 200 kg/m3.http://spacemath.gsfc.nasa.gov/earth/89Mod11Prob2.pdf
Snow artificially compacted may well have a much higher weight per cubic metre than this so the loading on the structure could have been fairly high.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
@Scarpa, so I was working on 200kg/m3 (not 2000kg/m3 as @dogwatch seems to think), in which case your closing sentence implies it could have been well over 30tonnes (only if my size est is anything like though, which it probably isn't).
PS I guess your 50kg/m3 for fresh as opposed to my quick Google spec of 100kg/m3 is down to whether your in Japow or the Brecons (respectively)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
@johnE, weird, looking at the pics though I get a contradicting impression of which way the I beams & sleepers run.
Is there a spec for required snow clearence on bridges as there can be on larger flat roofs in colder climes I wonder?
Certainly not a good idea to pile it up to point loads (on roofs or bridges)!
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
That's a very neat hole shown in the second picture almost like it was meant to be there.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
@midgetbiker, @johnE,
I found another photo here
https://presse.zeitungsfoto.at/?mode=view&id=482, does that first photo appear to how an I-beam that has failed?
I wonder if the bridge is designed with adjoining I-beams, with sleepers running to the outside of each I-beam (something like I-II-II-I, where I is an I-beam and - sleepers), with the central I-I failing completely?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Mollerski wrote: |
| SnoodyMcFlude wrote: |
| Mollerski wrote: |
| I'd be having a word with the bridge builders. It looks brand new! |
Not necessarily bridge builders, could all be down to the design that they were asked to build. Any structure will have a limit to the loads it can stand, as Richard says it may not have been design for a pile of snow like that + a few tonnes of piste basher. |
It's not as if load of snow is gonna fall on it or a piste basher is gonna drive over it in such a location. |
It's not just snow fall though, is it? It's a big pile of compacted snow on top of the normal snowfall. Engineers can account for variables like snow fall, but they're less likely to calculate a numpty piling several additional tonnes of snow and a bloody great piste basher on top. NOt saying it couldn't be foreseen, just that it's not exactly a case of 'blame the guys that built it'
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
The Bashers do make sure that there is sufficient snow on the bridge so that skiers/boarders can reach the bars on the opposite side of the river without having to be inconvenienced...This is Ischgl afterall.
On the evening in question, this is what was being done, the basher was pushing snow on the bridge when the bridge gave way.
The bridge construction is of steel beams which span the river. The top deck is of timbers, which span the steel beams.
The steel beams are around half the length needed to span the river, therefore they are bolted together end to end. This means you have a common join along the mid point of the bridge.
The bolts on one section gave way and one section failed. No one was hurt.
Repairs we carried out over the coming days.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The bridge will have a safe working load (SWL). Before any pointing of fingers, the question is whether or not the load was over the SWL?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
