Log in
Register
Home
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New profile posts
Latest activity
News
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Features
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Install the app
Install
Reply to thread
Home
Forums
Pro Audio
Varsity
Commissioned Report on Indiana Fair Tragedy
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Phil Graham" data-source="post: 50626" data-attributes="member: 430"><p>Re: Commissioned Report on Indiana Fair Tragedy</p><p></p><p>For those that want to have a look, the salient engineering calculations are primarily in Appendices D and E. The appraisal of the existing calculations is in section D.10. Reading all of this was like a throwback to my college mechanics of materials classes.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Perhaps the biggest "reading between the lines" for me in here has nothing to do with the anchoring, the guy wires, or the changes in geometry from shifting barriers.</p><p></p><p>Namely, if the structure had been adequately anchored from permanent points, using guy wires of sufficient tensile strength, the loading of the attachment plates for the guy lines was going to be sufficient to fail either the plate weldments (what happened) or the tubular members they were attached to.</p><p></p><p>I'm not a structural engineer, or a PE, but I've had to to the types of calculations that are in the report. If your guying method can load the guy attachment plates to failure, then you need a new guying methodology. No amount of better/permanent barricades, stronger guys, or the like will compensate for this detail.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Phil Graham, post: 50626, member: 430"] Re: Commissioned Report on Indiana Fair Tragedy For those that want to have a look, the salient engineering calculations are primarily in Appendices D and E. The appraisal of the existing calculations is in section D.10. Reading all of this was like a throwback to my college mechanics of materials classes. Perhaps the biggest "reading between the lines" for me in here has nothing to do with the anchoring, the guy wires, or the changes in geometry from shifting barriers. Namely, if the structure had been adequately anchored from permanent points, using guy wires of sufficient tensile strength, the loading of the attachment plates for the guy lines was going to be sufficient to fail either the plate weldments (what happened) or the tubular members they were attached to. I'm not a structural engineer, or a PE, but I've had to to the types of calculations that are in the report. If your guying method can load the guy attachment plates to failure, then you need a new guying methodology. No amount of better/permanent barricades, stronger guys, or the like will compensate for this detail. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Home
Forums
Pro Audio
Varsity
Commissioned Report on Indiana Fair Tragedy
Top
Bottom
Sign-up
or
log in
to join the discussion today!