ALL-FEMALE engineer team designed the Miami bridge that collapsed last week

[danielpalos]

gender coincidence or gender conspiracy? it isn't like guys have never had Any accidents.

I'm sure men have designed faulty bridges also. But they were hired on merit not because they were men.

i haven't looked into that much detail. I think we need to wait for the analysis to discover the point(s) of failure.

 

[bodecea]

gender coincidence or gender conspiracy? it isn't like guys have never had Any accidents.

I'm sure men have designed faulty bridges also. But they were hired on merit not because they were men.

Sure.....I bet you really believe that too.

 

[danielpalos]

It's natural that a bridge designed and built by the weaker sex is less strong.

j/k

Politics matters. Insist on your right to be, "just as strong as men", and make appointments for full body massage with happy ending, just for fun and equality.

 

[deanrd]

Maybe they were part of Trump's infrastructure plan.

 

[ShootSpeeders]

Is there anything women excel at?

Pregnancy, mothering, care-giving, and maybe some verbal-oriented occupations. Let's end government-coerced sexual preferences for women and see where the chips fall.

Yup - women have people skills!! HAHAHA. They make good social workers and english teachers.

All useful occupations like scientist, businessman, and engineer are 80% male and would be 95% without affirmative action.

 

[Dragonlady]

I have yet to see any evidence this bridge was designed by women. It’s not mentioned in any newspaper or TV piece, just the blog the OP linked to.

Newspaper reports said the emergency call came from the bridge design team, and it came from a male employee - the report gave his name.

 

[martybegan]

I heard the intended center support tower was not even built yet. No sign of it on the TV footage. I'm sure we will get a more complete and definitive explanation of what happened in time.

Ever watch AvE? I watch this guy all the time. He has two very interesting videos if you have time to watch them. It is my understanding from the drawings in the video that the center "support" wasn't necessary as load bearing...at least initially...though it was to be built to support the cable tower. The tensioning bolts were supposed to keep the concrete compressed to increase strength. He says in on of the photos, you can see a tension bolt that obviously broke before the collapse. The tension bolts were supposed to support the bridge completely until the tower was raised and the cable support was rigged.

I also understand that a stress test and tensioning was underway at the moment of the collapse...which lends credence to his theory.

It could have been a lot of things that led to the broken tension bolt. Human error, defective bolt, bad design, improperly cured concrete around the tension bolt anchor...we'll have to wait for the investigation to know for sure.

Videos to follow...

I watched the first video, and wasn't really impressed. Owning a slide rule doesn't make you smart. I know, because I haven't used mine since the early 70s, and I'm not sure I even remember all it can be used for. He also got a little confused about which part of the structure was in tension and which part was in compression for a few seconds there too. He did note that there was no center support, and it was designed to have one. No rational reason why it wasn't there. We will know soon enough. Investigations of this type take a while, but they don't miss anything, and they will want their findings published as widely as possible to prevent this type of tragedy in the future..

Some reports have said the cable stays were just for show. I've installed pipes on the exterior of a building that were part of an architectural screen and had no process or structural function.

The span length doesn't look long enough to need cable staying.

 

[BULLDOG]

I heard the intended center support tower was not even built yet. No sign of it on the TV footage. I'm sure we will get a more complete and definitive explanation of what happened in time.

Ever watch AvE? I watch this guy all the time. He has two very interesting videos if you have time to watch them. It is my understanding from the drawings in the video that the center "support" wasn't necessary as load bearing...at least initially...though it was to be built to support the cable tower. The tensioning bolts were supposed to keep the concrete compressed to increase strength. He says in on of the photos, you can see a tension bolt that obviously broke before the collapse. The tension bolts were supposed to support the bridge completely until the tower was raised and the cable support was rigged.

I also understand that a stress test and tensioning was underway at the moment of the collapse...which lends credence to his theory.

It could have been a lot of things that led to the broken tension bolt. Human error, defective bolt, bad design, improperly cured concrete around the tension bolt anchor...we'll have to wait for the investigation to know for sure.

Videos to follow...

I watched the first video, and wasn't really impressed. Owning a slide rule doesn't make you smart. I know, because I haven't used mine since the early 70s, and I'm not sure I even remember all it can be used for. He also got a little confused about which part of the structure was in tension and which part was in compression for a few seconds there too. He did note that there was no center support, and it was designed to have one. No rational reason why it wasn't there. We will know soon enough. Investigations of this type take a while, but they don't miss anything, and they will want their findings published as widely as possible to prevent this type of tragedy in the future..

Some reports have said the cable stays were just for show. I've installed pipes on the exterior of a building that were part of an architectural screen and had no process or structural function.

The span length doesn't look long enough to need cable staying.

Sure, you go with that.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

I think we need to refrain from this sort of crap.

 

[martybegan]

I heard the intended center support tower was not even built yet. No sign of it on the TV footage. I'm sure we will get a more complete and definitive explanation of what happened in time.

Ever watch AvE? I watch this guy all the time. He has two very interesting videos if you have time to watch them. It is my understanding from the drawings in the video that the center "support" wasn't necessary as load bearing...at least initially...though it was to be built to support the cable tower. The tensioning bolts were supposed to keep the concrete compressed to increase strength. He says in on of the photos, you can see a tension bolt that obviously broke before the collapse. The tension bolts were supposed to support the bridge completely until the tower was raised and the cable support was rigged.

I also understand that a stress test and tensioning was underway at the moment of the collapse...which lends credence to his theory.

It could have been a lot of things that led to the broken tension bolt. Human error, defective bolt, bad design, improperly cured concrete around the tension bolt anchor...we'll have to wait for the investigation to know for sure.

Videos to follow...

I watched the first video, and wasn't really impressed. Owning a slide rule doesn't make you smart. I know, because I haven't used mine since the early 70s, and I'm not sure I even remember all it can be used for. He also got a little confused about which part of the structure was in tension and which part was in compression for a few seconds there too. He did note that there was no center support, and it was designed to have one. No rational reason why it wasn't there. We will know soon enough. Investigations of this type take a while, but they don't miss anything, and they will want their findings published as widely as possible to prevent this type of tragedy in the future..

Some reports have said the cable stays were just for show. I've installed pipes on the exterior of a building that were part of an architectural screen and had no process or structural function.

The span length doesn't look long enough to need cable staying.

Sure, you go with that.

While my degree is in chemical, not civil engineering I take enough cross-discipline continuing education to probably qualify more than you to have an opinion on this.

What i am trying to say is the lack of installation of the stays, if they were non-structural, has nothing to do with the collapse.

Edit:

From wikipedia:

The full 320-foot-long (98 m) pedestrian overpass was to cross both a major roadway and a parallel water canal with two separate spans connected at a faux cable-stay tower.

Florida International University pedestrian bridge collapse - Wikipedia

 

[martybegan]

I think we need to refrain from this sort of crap.

i don't like the thread title or the OP, but from a pile of dung sometimes a flower (real discussion) can come forth.

 

[EverCurious]

Meanwhile in Alaska; some dumbass tried to drive under the S. Eagle River overpass with an over-height portable building this afternoon and caused structural damage. Now all the traffic on the ONLY highway has to be routed across [my] bridge and through Eagle River to get to Anchorage. The DOT says it could take weeks to repair (if we're lucky.) /rants about the idea of all the yahoo drivers from the Valley trying to kill her at that stupid intersection. (Although in fairness yesterday they had an officer there playing traffic light, was actually kinda nice... If he's gonna be there the whole time I'll bring him coffee and doughnuts every morning.)


Anyway, I never would have thought that a "minor" seeming impact would damage the bridge (the portable building basically exploded into kindling.) Or at a minimum I would think that "modern" bridges would be safer in the case of the FL bridge. Yet this bridge in particular has been there probably 60 years or so - and most of us Eagle River folks have hated it honestly because you can't get up to highway speed on its corkscrew on-ramp even in the summer; a situation that only got worse when they upped the speed limit to 65. We had to replace the bridge over Eagle River itself (also ages old) a couple years back, but that was because it was deemed to be unsafe for the amount of traffic increase we've had from the Valley's population boom. I know that there are accidents at the S. Eagle River exit on an almost daily basis because you can't get up to highway speed on the ramps. I suppose I am hoping they just replace the thing rather than doing a repair job - though I should hope they get a better structural engineer than they did for FL's people bridge so perhaps a "repair" is actually preferred >.<

 

[Toro]

FIGG Bridge Group, which is headed by a woman, is perhaps the preeminent bridge design company on earth.

 

[martybegan]

FIGG Bridge Group, which is headed by a woman, is perhaps the preeminent bridge design company on earth.

They specialize in bridges only, which is a smaller niche market than overall civil/structural design firms.

 

[BULLDOG]

I heard the intended center support tower was not even built yet. No sign of it on the TV footage. I'm sure we will get a more complete and definitive explanation of what happened in time.

Ever watch AvE? I watch this guy all the time. He has two very interesting videos if you have time to watch them. It is my understanding from the drawings in the video that the center "support" wasn't necessary as load bearing...at least initially...though it was to be built to support the cable tower. The tensioning bolts were supposed to keep the concrete compressed to increase strength. He says in on of the photos, you can see a tension bolt that obviously broke before the collapse. The tension bolts were supposed to support the bridge completely until the tower was raised and the cable support was rigged.

I also understand that a stress test and tensioning was underway at the moment of the collapse...which lends credence to his theory.

It could have been a lot of things that led to the broken tension bolt. Human error, defective bolt, bad design, improperly cured concrete around the tension bolt anchor...we'll have to wait for the investigation to know for sure.

Videos to follow...

I watched the first video, and wasn't really impressed. Owning a slide rule doesn't make you smart. I know, because I haven't used mine since the early 70s, and I'm not sure I even remember all it can be used for. He also got a little confused about which part of the structure was in tension and which part was in compression for a few seconds there too. He did note that there was no center support, and it was designed to have one. No rational reason why it wasn't there. We will know soon enough. Investigations of this type take a while, but they don't miss anything, and they will want their findings published as widely as possible to prevent this type of tragedy in the future..

Some reports have said the cable stays were just for show. I've installed pipes on the exterior of a building that were part of an architectural screen and had no process or structural function.

The span length doesn't look long enough to need cable staying.

Sure, you go with that.

While my degree is in chemical, not civil engineering I take enough cross-discipline continuing education to probably qualify more than you to have an opinion on this.

What i am trying to say is the lack of installation of the stays, if they were non-structural, has nothing to do with the collapse.

Edit:

From wikipedia:

The full 320-foot-long (98 m) pedestrian overpass was to cross both a major roadway and a parallel water canal with two separate spans connected at a faux cable-stay tower.

Florida International University pedestrian bridge collapse - Wikipedia

Thanks for the info. That gives more detail than I had seen before. I was under the impression that the collapsed section was the entire bridge, and there was a support structure designed for midway of that span. 174 Ft is certainly long enough to require cable support, depending on the design. We can offer conjecture all we want, but as I said before, we will eventually know the whole story. It's important for them to determine the exact cause of the collapse, and to distribute that information as widely as possible to prevent future tragedies.

 

[martybegan]

Ever watch AvE? I watch this guy all the time. He has two very interesting videos if you have time to watch them. It is my understanding from the drawings in the video that the center "support" wasn't necessary as load bearing...at least initially...though it was to be built to support the cable tower. The tensioning bolts were supposed to keep the concrete compressed to increase strength. He says in on of the photos, you can see a tension bolt that obviously broke before the collapse. The tension bolts were supposed to support the bridge completely until the tower was raised and the cable support was rigged.

I also understand that a stress test and tensioning was underway at the moment of the collapse...which lends credence to his theory.

It could have been a lot of things that led to the broken tension bolt. Human error, defective bolt, bad design, improperly cured concrete around the tension bolt anchor...we'll have to wait for the investigation to know for sure.

Videos to follow...

I watched the first video, and wasn't really impressed. Owning a slide rule doesn't make you smart. I know, because I haven't used mine since the early 70s, and I'm not sure I even remember all it can be used for. He also got a little confused about which part of the structure was in tension and which part was in compression for a few seconds there too. He did note that there was no center support, and it was designed to have one. No rational reason why it wasn't there. We will know soon enough. Investigations of this type take a while, but they don't miss anything, and they will want their findings published as widely as possible to prevent this type of tragedy in the future..

Some reports have said the cable stays were just for show. I've installed pipes on the exterior of a building that were part of an architectural screen and had no process or structural function.

The span length doesn't look long enough to need cable staying.

Sure, you go with that.

While my degree is in chemical, not civil engineering I take enough cross-discipline continuing education to probably qualify more than you to have an opinion on this.

What i am trying to say is the lack of installation of the stays, if they were non-structural, has nothing to do with the collapse.

Edit:

From wikipedia:

The full 320-foot-long (98 m) pedestrian overpass was to cross both a major roadway and a parallel water canal with two separate spans connected at a faux cable-stay tower.

Florida International University pedestrian bridge collapse - Wikipedia

Thanks for the info. That gives more detail than I had seen before. I was under the impression that the collapsed section was the entire bridge, and there was a support structure designed for midway of that span. 174 Ft is certainly long enough to require cable support, depending on the design. We can offer conjecture all we want, but as I said before, we will eventually know the whole story. It's important for them to determine the exact cause of the collapse, and to distribute that information as widely as possible to prevent future tragedies.

174 ft for a truss bridge is well within the structural loading capabilities, of steel. Here they used concrete in a novel way, and who know if this contributed to the problem.

One obvious ****-up was allowing traffic to continue during a tensioning activity. This is something they should have done at night with the road closed,

 

[BULLDOG]

I watched the first video, and wasn't really impressed. Owning a slide rule doesn't make you smart. I know, because I haven't used mine since the early 70s, and I'm not sure I even remember all it can be used for. He also got a little confused about which part of the structure was in tension and which part was in compression for a few seconds there too. He did note that there was no center support, and it was designed to have one. No rational reason why it wasn't there. We will know soon enough. Investigations of this type take a while, but they don't miss anything, and they will want their findings published as widely as possible to prevent this type of tragedy in the future..

Some reports have said the cable stays were just for show. I've installed pipes on the exterior of a building that were part of an architectural screen and had no process or structural function.

The span length doesn't look long enough to need cable staying.

Sure, you go with that.

While my degree is in chemical, not civil engineering I take enough cross-discipline continuing education to probably qualify more than you to have an opinion on this.

What i am trying to say is the lack of installation of the stays, if they were non-structural, has nothing to do with the collapse.

Edit:

From wikipedia:

The full 320-foot-long (98 m) pedestrian overpass was to cross both a major roadway and a parallel water canal with two separate spans connected at a faux cable-stay tower.

Florida International University pedestrian bridge collapse - Wikipedia

Thanks for the info. That gives more detail than I had seen before. I was under the impression that the collapsed section was the entire bridge, and there was a support structure designed for midway of that span. 174 Ft is certainly long enough to require cable support, depending on the design. We can offer conjecture all we want, but as I said before, we will eventually know the whole story. It's important for them to determine the exact cause of the collapse, and to distribute that information as widely as possible to prevent future tragedies.

174 ft for a truss bridge is well within the structural loading capabilities, of steel. Here they used concrete in a novel way, and who know if this contributed to the problem.

One obvious ****-up was allowing traffic to continue during a tensioning activity. This is something they should have done at night with the road closed,

I'm confident that the design was vetted to several times the expected maximum stress. They usually don't just throw up a structure and hope it will work. I'm guessing some questionable installation procedures. Of course, until the investigation is complete, anything you or I might think is just conjecture.

 

[Ame®icano]

I know female architects and engineers, OP is wrong. The top Engineer in the country is a female.

I think his point is that less qualified females were given the jobs over better qualified people because of their sex.

Who knows, maybe they were most qualified at the time?

 

[Ame®icano]

These fat, incompetent, Cuban ladies were given special preference because they have vaginas and speak Spanish. It's ridiculous and the result is now dead bodies and a massive failure.

The 8A program - . About the 8(a) Business Development Program | The U.S. Small Business Administration | SBA.gov - is a joke.

Why are we rewarding incompetence? "We the People" should award contracts based on merit, PERIOD.

Return bridge building to Chinese.

 

[Ame®icano]

gender coincidence or gender conspiracy? it isn't like guys have never had Any accidents.

I'm sure men have designed faulty bridges also. But they were hired on merit not because they were men.

After failure like this, I wonder are men gonna be hired again because they're man.