Train GraphicClick on the map to explore geographics
 
I need help
FAQ
Emergency
About .
Travel & transport from BBC stories as at 07:15 25 Apr 2024
* Labour pledges to renationalise most rail services within five years
- The Papers: Labour 'vow to nationalise rail' and school stabbing
* Labour pledges to renationalise most rail services
Read about the forum [here].
Register [here] - it's free.
What do I gain from registering? [here]
 02/06/24 - Summer Timetable starts
17/08/24 - Bus to Imber
27/09/25 - 200 years of passenger trains

No 'On This Day' events reported for 25th Apr

Train RunningCancelled
07:34 Didcot Parkway to Banbury
Short Run
08:35 Banbury to Didcot Parkway
Delayed
06:30 London Paddington to Cheltenham Spa
PollsThere are no open or recent polls
Abbreviation pageAcronymns and abbreviations
Stn ComparatorStation Comparator
Rail newsNews Now - live rail news feed
Site Style 1 2 3 4
Next departures • Bristol Temple MeadsBath SpaChippenhamSwindonDidcot ParkwayReadingLondon PaddingtonMelksham
Exeter St DavidsTauntonWestburyTrowbridgeBristol ParkwayCardiff CentralOxfordCheltenham SpaBirmingham New Street
April 25, 2024, 07:28:34 *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Forgotten your username or password? - get a reminder
Most recently liked subjects
[163] Lack of rolling stock due to attacks on shipping in the Red Se...
[105] Theft from Severn Valley Railway
[59] Where have I been?
[58] 2024 - Service update and amendment log, Swindon <-> Westbury...
[56] Labour to nationalise railways within five years of coming to ...
[49] Death of another bus station?
 
News: the Great Western Coffee Shop ... keeping you up to date with travel around the South West
 
   Home   Help Search Calendar Login Register  
Pages: [1]
  Print  
Author Topic: On this day - 28th December - 1879  (Read 559 times)
grahame
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 40822



View Profile WWW Email
« on: December 28, 2021, 16:15:25 »

The Tay Bridge Disaster - from Wikipedia

Quote
The Tay Bridge disaster occurred during a violent storm on Sunday 28 December 1879, when the first Tay Rail Bridge collapsed as a train from Burntisland to Dundee passed over it, killing all aboard. The bridge—designed by Sir Thomas Bouch—used lattice girders supported by iron piers, with cast iron columns and wrought iron cross-bracing. The piers were narrower and their cross-bracing was less extensive and robust than on previous similar designs by Bouch.

Bouch had sought expert advice on wind loading when designing a proposed rail bridge over the Firth of Forth; as a result of that advice he had made no explicit allowance for wind loading in the design of the Tay Bridge. There were other flaws in detailed design, in maintenance, and in quality control of castings, all of which were, at least in part, Bouch's responsibility.

Bouch died less than a year after the disaster, his reputation ruined. Future British bridge designs had to allow for wind loadings of up to 56 pounds per square foot (2.7 kilopascals). Bouch's design for the Forth Bridge was not used.

Some public domain pictures:







Logged

Coffee Shop Admin, Acting Chair of Melksham Rail User Group, Option 24/7 Melksham Rep
ellendune
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 4452


View Profile
« Reply #1 on: December 28, 2021, 16:25:51 »

Future British bridge designs had to allow for wind loadings of up to 56 pounds per square foot (2.7 kilopascals). Bouch's design for the Forth Bridge was not used.
[/quote]

Pounds per square foot!  What kind of units are they? at least it converted it into kPa. I have heard of psi (pounds per square inch) and someone suggested to me recently that a design should be done to an ASTM standard that used American customary units  that included ksi (apparently 1 ksi = 1000 psi).  I asked whether the proposed design method complied with Eurocodes and suggested that asking UK (United Kingdom) engineers, who are trained to design in proper units, to design to such illogical units might not be a a good idea. 
Logged
stuving
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 7170


View Profile
« Reply #2 on: December 28, 2021, 19:56:22 »

Future British bridge designs had to allow for wind loadings of up to 56 pounds per square foot (2.7 kilopascals). Bouch's design for the Forth Bridge was not used.

Pounds per square foot!  What kind of units are they? at least it converted it into kPa. I have heard of psi (pounds per square inch) and someone suggested to me recently that a design should be done to an ASTM standard that used American customary units  that included ksi (apparently 1 ksi = 1000 psi).  I asked whether the proposed design method complied with Eurocodes and suggested that asking UK (United Kingdom) engineers, who are trained to design in proper units, to design to such illogical units might not be a a good idea. 

They were the units in use at the time - for example in the report of the court of inquiry into the Tay Bridge disaster. This report was published in the Scotsman of 5th July 1880 - yes, in full, over a page and a bit. Those were the days ...

In fact there were two reports, as the chairman (Henry Rothery) disagreed on a couple of the conclusions. So he wrote his own, and the official report was written by the other two. Notably, Rothery (a lawyer) thought Bouch should be blamed while the two engineers shied away from doing that. Not that it made a lot of difference to Bouch, as he lived less than a year afterwards.

The reports concluded on the wind pressure question that it was poorly understood (certainly true) and  no standard allowances were being used in this country. Rather surprisingly, the two engineers said the board of trade should set a required level, while Rothery said the engineering profession needed to decide on one first.

Other national standards of 50 or 55 pounds per square foot were noted. In the published text, where there a lot of references to such pressures, the units get shortened to just pounds or pounds per foot. The latter is I think not as odd as it looks, since a figure for a specific structural member may be worked out per unit length!
Logged
Do you have something you would like to add to this thread, or would you like to raise a new question at the Coffee Shop? Please [register] (it is free) if you have not done so before, or login (at the top of this page) if you already have an account - we would love to read what you have to say!

You can find out more about how this forum works [here] - that will link you to a copy of the forum agreement that you can read before you join, and tell you very much more about how we operate. We are an independent forum, provided and run by customers of Great Western Railway, for customers of Great Western Railway and we welcome railway professionals as members too, in either a personal or official capacity. Views expressed in posts are not necessarily the views of the operators of the forum.

As well as posting messages onto existing threads, and starting new subjects, members can communicate with each other through personal messages if they wish. And once members have made a certain number of posts, they will automatically be admitted to the "frequent posters club", where subjects not-for-public-domain are discussed; anything from the occasional rant to meetups we may be having ...

 
Pages: [1]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.2 | SMF © 2006-2007, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
This forum is provided by customers of Great Western Railway (formerly First Great Western), and the views expressed are those of the individual posters concerned. Visit www.gwr.com for the official Great Western Railway website. Please contact the administrators of this site if you feel that the content provided by one of our posters contravenes our posting rules (email link to report). Forum hosted by Well House Consultants

Jump to top of pageJump to Forum Home Page