|
Britains Crap Roads, Answers wanted
On Tue, 4 Nov 2003 18:42:40 -0000, "iantheengineer"
wrote: Not everything works on the same principles are you so stupid??? Water flows under gravity does that mean rock will too??? Certainly does as anyone who has studied civil engineering *ought* *to* *know*. ;-) There are some examples in Professor James Edward Gordon's books, (The New Science of Strong Materials or Why You Don't Fall Through the Floor, "Structures" was another one ), and there plenty for all to see around here where stone walls have deflected in areas of mining subsidence, The stones have bent over 50-100 years where the ground has subsided beneath them. There are also many examples in the medieval cathedrals you just need to look out for them. According to Steve yes, so when we build culverts for rocks we need to design them the same as for water??!??? You don't need to rush! DG |
Britains Crap Roads, Answers wanted
On Tue, 4 Nov 2003 18:09:11 -0000, "iantheengineer"
wrote: Lets face it Derek, you will never get your arse out of your car until the carbon monoxide from the polluted atmosphere leaks into it and we all die a horrible death. There's no CO from modern cars. People have tried to commit suicide by piping the exhaust back into the passenger compartment and persistently failed to die, that's why Dr What'sisface used those drugs. They've become the fav. method since car exhaust no longer works. What business are you in needing all these tools? I repair and install X-ray and Nuclear Counting/Imaging equipment in Hospitals and Research labs. Do you only travel for business? My employment supports my family, and involves travelling. This week Leeds,Exeter, Torquay, Dudley Leeds. Last week, Leeds, Edinburgh Aberdeen, Leeds. o you never travel for other reasons??? Yes, I go on holiday. 4 out of the last 5 years I've taken the car to the continent. I've driven to Amsterdam, Berlin, Prague, Venice, Florence, Rome, Naples, Amalfi, Vienna, Budapest, and all points in between. This last year the introduction of the Euro has caused a lot of inflation on the continent making 2 rooms x 25 nights too expensive so I went on a cruise and did Copenhagen, Vilnius, St. Petersburg, Helsinki, Gothland, Warnemunde, (Old East) Germany, Stokholm, and Aarhus in one trip. No amount of fact figures, studies will ever change your mind as you, and many others in this NG only believe what they want to believe so that they can sleep soundly at night. ?? In answer to your question about who does the maintenance on your product well what can I say. You sold the product to them to inflate your pockets. ?? If you couldnt have provided it someone else would have in the locality or they would have managed with what they had got perviously. I can tell you, you wouldn't have wanted a child of yours to endure the invasive proceadures that were routine before digital X-ray became available. Eg, get a child, strap it to a tilting table, drill a small hole in it's skull, inserta ;little plastic pipe, inject air as contrast media, turn child upside down on tilting table and fire X-ray shots at 2 per second as the bubbles make their way up the spinal column. As for the roadworks it obviously depends upon the length of works and the type of works. When you next go past try opening your eyes and assessing what work is being carried out. Obviously if you are patching its a quick job, if you are relaying then it is a much bigger task, if you are fittimg safety fencing / lighting or drainage then it takes even longer. Surely in whatever it is that you do, some jobs take longer than others. Just as I thought 2 hours is bull****. For your sort of work it isnt realistic to expect you to use public transport, but there are many other jobs that use cars, where PT could be used. Most office workers commute to a city with a briefcase. If they werent on the road then you would have less congestion. I think you would be better employed mounting a tirade about: 1) Long distance commuting. Too many people are commuting 100 - 150 miles. On the railway it's by and large too expensive, on the buses it's laughable! On the roads this means they are still travelling at 8-9 PM. But they don't do it for fun, society has pressed them into that mould. 2) Short distance commuting at rush hour, just disincentivise it, make these people pay the real cost of having vehicles and infrastructure stood around all day (Like motorists do) just to be used for the rush hour commute. But outside these distortions the transport systems should be able to meet the demand. DG |
Britains Crap Roads, Answers wanted
"Ian Edwards" wrote in message
... iantheengineer wrote: How many cars does it take to move 72 people, at say 5 seats per car 15, okay and what area does a car take up 5.75m by 2.5m roughly so 14.4m2 times 15 = 216m2, and what area does a double decker take 12.9m long by 2.5m = 32.25m2, hmm I need say no more. Very good. Now get the bus to go in 15 different directions at the same time. :-) The bus is going in 15 different directions at the same time. If it had a non-zero speed, it would need more than 12.9m x 2.5m |
Britains Crap Roads, Answers wanted
"derek" wrote in message ... There's no CO from modern cars. People have tried to commit suicide by piping the exhaust back into the passenger compartment and persistently failed to die, that's why Dr What'sisface used those drugs. They've become the fav. method since car exhaust no longer works. OK, it's pedantic, but modern cars do emit CO. A lot less than older cars, but they still produce it nonetheless. See http://www.naei.org.uk/other/vehicle_emissions_v8.xls |
Britains Crap Roads, Answers wanted
On Fri, 7 Nov 2003 11:32:41 -0000, "Stephen Cragg"
wrote: "derek" wrote in message .. . There's no CO from modern cars. People have tried to commit suicide by piping the exhaust back into the passenger compartment and persistently failed to die, that's why Dr What'sisface used those drugs. They've become the fav. method since car exhaust no longer works. OK, it's pedantic, Indeed it is, and not pertinent to this discussion. It would appear that emissions have been reduced by a factor of about 40 fold. We all know nothing is perfect. but modern cars do emit CO. A lot less than older cars, but they still produce it nonetheless. See http://www.naei.org.uk/other/vehicle_emissions_v8.xls DG |
Britains Crap Roads, Answers wanted
"Ian Edwards" wrote in message ... iantheengineer wrote: How many cars does it take to move 72 people, at say 5 seats per car 15, okay and what area does a car take up 5.75m by 2.5m roughly so 14.4m2 times 15 = 216m2, and what area does a double decker take 12.9m long by 2.5m = 32.25m2, hmm I need say no more. Very good. Now get the bus to go in 15 different directions at the same time. :-) -- Ian Edwards It doesnt need to for most of the commute |
Britains Crap Roads, Answers wanted
"Nick Finnigan" wrote in message ... "iantheengineer" wrote in message ... "Nick Finnigan" wrote in message ... "iantheengineer" wrote in message ... To continue to build roads will continue the problem. The answer is puvblic transport, but public transport cannot cater for all journeys and therefore over time journeys will need to become more corridored. For example go into any city during the am peak and the tidality of the flow is there to be seen. IF we were to get all of the people from their cars onto public transport, or even better living nearer to the workplace, the congestion would be far less. cars. Without cars on the urban road network public transport would be faster and more reliable. How fast would urban public transport be with no cars on the road? (and no vans, cycles, taxis etc. if that helps). Is this a question, is it not obvious enough. It will be exactly the travel time + the stops for pick up/drop off, without any delay occurring due to congestion, And what will the travel speed be, and who long will each stop take, and how frequently will the stops occur? Or, alternatively, how fast would a typical journey be? Well this depends upon the usage the frequency of buses, the congestion levels. The reason for the introduction of bus lanes at intersections was to advance the bus to the front of the queues thus gaining back on the journey speed to make up for stops. |
Britains Crap Roads, Answers wanted
"Clive" wrote in message ... In message , Chris Jones writes Your view is certainly not shared by me, yes she may have buiilt roads, but look at what happens road building leads to more traffic, this has been researched. This is almost the same argument put forward by one of the landed gentry on seeing the railways. "Oh no, it'll just encourage the working class to travel." It's along the lines of, "I'm entitled to travel, but you've got to stay put. -- Clive We cant travel if the rate of increase in traffic continues |
Britains Crap Roads, Answers wanted
"Steve Firth" wrote in message ... iantheengineer wrote: Not everything works on the same principles are you so stupid??? Water flows under gravity does that mean rock will too??? Well yes it does actually. Avalanche. Landslip. Continental drift Lava flow These appear to be some concepts missing from your limited education. [snip waffle] Anyway Steve I think theres a village missing an idiot Why not apply for the vacancy then numbnuts? -- Having problems understanding usenet? Or do you simply need help but are getting unhelpful answers? Subscribe to: uk.net.beginners for friendly advice in a flame-free environment. We could go on forever but suffice to say not all things work under the same rules, yes perhaps rock was a poor example due to the issue of it being lava when in a super heated stat, but to go by your theories we would only need one mathematical formula to solve all of the worlds issues and this isnt the case, ask any mathematician. I have pointed out the evidence which is accepted by transport professionals the world over and still you doubt, well fine I am not going to argue anymore wasting my time, suffice to say that the construction of a new road is a complex issue with many far reaching implications. It facilitates movement, but by that very facilitation it can make transport more attractive and increases the usage, which impacts upon other areas of the network. This is why whenever new roads are built traffic models have to be built that simulate traffic flow and we as engineers have to examine the impacts and mitigate against them to prevent gridlock within limited budgets. |
Britains Crap Roads, Answers wanted
"derek" wrote in message ... On Tue, 4 Nov 2003 18:42:40 -0000, "iantheengineer" wrote: Not everything works on the same principles are you so stupid??? Water flows under gravity does that mean rock will too??? Certainly does as anyone who has studied civil engineering *ought* *to* *know*. ;-) There are some examples in Professor James Edward Gordon's books, (The New Science of Strong Materials or Why You Don't Fall Through the Floor, "Structures" was another one ), and there plenty for all to see around here where stone walls have deflected in areas of mining subsidence, The stones have bent over 50-100 years where the ground has subsided beneath them. There are also many examples in the medieval cathedrals you just need to look out for them. According to Steve yes, so when we build culverts for rocks we need to design them the same as for water??!??? You don't need to rush! DG As an engineer I do know that many fundamental principles can be applied to many different materials, however what isnt being accepted is that different problems require different solutions and the same principles do not apply to all things, Steve seems to think that all problems can be solved through increasing capacity, which they can be solved, but at what expense???, however he is not considering the problem from all aspects to increase conveyance is only one way of solving the problem. I am by original training a drainage engineer and for many years (before my time) the only solutions to drainage problems were to increase the conveyance or capacity of the system. This has resulted (along with different rainfall patterns) in the floods that we experienced in 1998 and 2000. Engineers now look at this problem more holistically looking at the source of the rainfall and how it runs off the ground, in an attempt to attenuate the flow to more greenfield states. We cant as yet at least prevent rainfall falling at high intensity during the summer months and for long durations during the winter months, but we can slow its journey to the river system and reduce the peak flows in the river. Unlike rainfall we have another alternative with traffic we can restrain the source if we choose, which along with the other tools including where necessary road building will help the road system cope with the traffic. As for your example of stones deflecting well thats a new one on me. Subsidence is due to the mines or other underground tunnel etc gradually collapsing and what normally happens is failure of the foudation leaving a crack visible in the supported wall either through the blocks or the mortar joints whichever is the weakest. Stone and concrete are strong in compression but weak in tension so as you get a force acting on one side causing compression in one face through bending, you get tensiile forces on the other face which normally resulst in cracking and subsequent failure. I daresay that stone will deflect to a degree but this would be unmeasurable to the naked eye. |
Britains Crap Roads, Answers wanted
On Fri, 07 Nov 2003 22:23:48 +0000, iantheengineer wrote:
It doesnt need to for most of the commute Ahh, so the bus splits into 72 parts at each end? |
Britains Crap Roads, Answers wanted
"iantheengineer" wrote in message
... I am by original training a drainage engineer and for many years (before my time) the only solutions to drainage problems were to increase the conveyance or capacity of the system. In that case you ought to be able to recognise that de-bottlenecking is a vital part of traffic management, whereas the tendency has been to provide constrictions, leading to excessive congestion. -- Terry Harper http://www.terry.harper.btinternet.co.uk/ |
Britains Crap Roads, Answers wanted
"iantheengineer" wrote in message
... "Nick Finnigan" wrote in message ... "iantheengineer" wrote in message ... "Nick Finnigan" wrote in message ... "iantheengineer" wrote in message ... To continue to build roads will continue the problem. The answer is puvblic transport, but public transport cannot cater for all journeys and therefore over time journeys will need to become more corridored. For example go into any city during the am peak and the tidality of the flow is there to be seen. IF we were to get all of the people from their cars onto public transport, or even better living nearer to the workplace, the congestion would be far less. cars. Without cars on the urban road network public transport would be faster and more reliable. How fast would urban public transport be with no cars on the road? (and no vans, cycles, taxis etc. if that helps). Is this a question, is it not obvious enough. It will be exactly the travel time + the stops for pick up/drop off, without any delay occurring due to congestion, And what will the travel speed be, and who long will each stop take, and how frequently will the stops occur? Or, alternatively, how fast would a typical journey be? Well this depends upon the usage the frequency of buses, the congestion levels. Under the assumption that there are no cars, vans, bikes would there still be congestion? Assume the usage is the same as the total passenger km as on an urban bus route at the moment, and whatever bus frequency is optimal (which I expect to be at least 30 buses in the peak hour). |
Britains Crap Roads, Answers wanted
"Nick Finnigan" wrote in message ... "iantheengineer" wrote in message ... "Nick Finnigan" wrote in message ... "iantheengineer" wrote in message ... "Nick Finnigan" wrote in message ... "iantheengineer" wrote in message ... To continue to build roads will continue the problem. The answer is puvblic transport, but public transport cannot cater for all journeys and therefore over time journeys will need to become more corridored. For example go into any city during the am peak and the tidality of the flow is there to be seen. IF we were to get all of the people from their cars onto public transport, or even better living nearer to the workplace, the congestion would be far less. cars. Without cars on the urban road network public transport would be faster and more reliable. How fast would urban public transport be with no cars on the road? (and no vans, cycles, taxis etc. if that helps). Is this a question, is it not obvious enough. It will be exactly the travel time + the stops for pick up/drop off, without any delay occurring due to congestion, And what will the travel speed be, and who long will each stop take, and how frequently will the stops occur? Or, alternatively, how fast would a typical journey be? Well this depends upon the usage the frequency of buses, the congestion levels. Under the assumption that there are no cars, vans, bikes would there still be congestion? Assume the usage is the same as the total passenger km as on an urban bus route at the moment, and whatever bus frequency is optimal (which I expect to be at least 30 buses in the peak hour). Its an unanswerable question as it depends upon link and junction capacities so each location is different., but it is fair to say that the throughput of people would be greater so congestion would a lot less than it is at present |
Britains Crap Roads, Answers wanted
"Paul Weaver" wrote in message .. . On Fri, 07 Nov 2003 22:23:48 +0000, iantheengineer wrote: It doesnt need to for most of the commute Ahh, so the bus splits into 72 parts at each end? No not at all, and I would think that the theory behind it is obvious, the key to bus usage is modal interchange, ie facilities to allow transfer from opne mode of travel to another. Fotr the most part of the commute menay people are travelling in the same direction however upon reaching the very last section of the journey and at the very start of the journey we all live and work in slightly different places, but we use the same main corridors. In cities, it is generally the case that most people can walk from their bus stop to their office. Complications arise for people who work to site etc, but for the most part many people are 9-5 approx and stay office bound. IF you carry out any o-d survey you will see that certain routes are trafficked by people from the same areas going to the same areas, and it is for these that public transport works. The main problem with public transport is the effective routing. In order to make it profitable a bus must collect x punters to make the service profitable, in order to do this sometimes it is necessary to protract the route to serve a certain catchment and by doing this it incurrs delays compared to the direct route of using the car, but , by many people using their cars they create delays through traffic congestion. Bus lanes assist to redress this balance a litlle, but at present do not provide sufficient advantage to make the bus seem attractive. |
Britains Crap Roads, Answers wanted
"Terry Harper" wrote in message ... "iantheengineer" wrote in message ... I am by original training a drainage engineer and for many years (before my time) the only solutions to drainage problems were to increase the conveyance or capacity of the system. In that case you ought to be able to recognise that de-bottlenecking is a vital part of traffic management, whereas the tendency has been to provide constrictions, leading to excessive congestion. -- Terry Harper http://www.terry.harper.btinternet.co.uk/ As I explained I have made a career out of drainage and traffic enginering so I am full aware of what works. What happens when you de-bottleneck as you put it, you send the problem downstream, this exactly what I was saying with the drainage problems. You remove one obstruction letting more traffic through and then it hits the next one and so on and so on. At some point you have to step back from the problem and say well this isnt really solving the problem just transferring it, how do we solve it. With traffic we can change the way that the demand is satisfied through public transport which effectively increases the passengers that can be got ionto the town without increasing infrastructure. We could keep going down the road of improving junctions but where would it end, we have been doing this for the past 100 or so years and we still havent solved it this way. |
Britains Crap Roads, Answers wanted
"PeterE" wrote in message ... Robin May wrote: It's completely obvious that's not what he means. It's true that people use their cars too much. It's ridiculous that people think it's ok to commute 50 or 100 or whatever miles to work each day in a car with only one person in it. Obviously people have to get to places some distance away from their home but there's no need for them to be so ridiculously far away just so some rich **** can live in a quiet little village. Most really long-distance commuting is done by train, not car. How many season tickets do GNER issue from Grantham and Newark to London? Is that somehow better? -- http://www.speedlimit.org.uk "If laws are to be respected, they must be worthy of respect." Dont take this the wrong way but do we have figures on the commute as I would be interested to see them. I would be interested to see if this is the case, as a train ticket to London when I last went in 1998 (not long enough in my view) cost me £45 return when I could have driven and parked for a lot less. I chose to use the train as I was going to an important meeting and neded time to prepare, but I am sure many more use their cars. |
Britains Crap Roads, Answers wanted
On Sat, 8 Nov 2003 13:39:59 -0000, "iantheengineer"
wrote: As I explained I have made a career out of drainage and traffic enginering so I am full aware of what works. What happens when you de-bottleneck as you put it, you send the problem downstream, this exactly what I was saying with the drainage problems. You remove one obstruction letting more traffic through and then it hits the next one and so on and so on. At some point you have to step back from the problem and say well this isnt really solving the problem just transferring it, how do we solve it. With traffic we can change the way that the demand is satisfied through public transport which effectively increases the passengers that can be got ionto the town without increasing infrastructure. We could keep going down the road of improving junctions but where would it end, we have been doing this for the past 100 or so years and we still havent solved it this way. You're a TRAFFIC ENGINEER? God save us all. -- Paul Smith Scotland, UK http://www.safespeed.org.uk please remove "XYZ" to reply by email speed cameras cost lives |
Britains Crap Roads, Answers wanted
"Clive" wrote in message ... In message , iantheengineer writes Speed humps are used to prevent speeding idiots and save lives. Do you REALLY think that a local authority with limited funds would waste it n putting in humps for the sake of it. Come on now get real!! In my neck of the wood, West Cumbria, yes. We have restricted parking next to a school in term time, 100yds. Away we have a 24/7/365 20mph. Limit next to a school. The road planners just don't know what they're doing, they just have to spend the available money. So we get speed humps on our roads and very little salt/grit in the winter. -- Clive Have you ever thought beyond the parking restrictions and speed humps. Speed humps slow drivers down thus making accidents less likely and less severe. The placement of parking restrictions prevents children from running between parked cars into the road as they are visible to drivers and the cars are visible to the children. If you have children these inconveniences are nothing compared to the saftey of your child. As for speed limit in force at all times well if it wasnmt drivers would get confused, and is travelling at 20 over that distance such a problem??. Gritting / salting should only be undertaken when absolutely necessary. The only guide that is given is the weather forecast, so occasionaly it gets salted when it doesnt needs it ans not salted when it should. Salting has to be done when the ice is forming, not before or after. If you salt too early it gets washed and trafficked off. If you salt too late you need 40g/m2 as opposed to 15g/m2. Local authorities normally have a limited stock for the whole winter ( blame the accounting systems of the country) so they can normally only go out a limited number of times a year (ridiculous I know) so the decisions are not taken lightly. I hope that explains things a little and restores at least a little confidence in your lha. |
Britains Crap Roads, Answers wanted
"Clive" wrote in message ... In message , Grant Crozier writes With a bit of luck in eighteen months time the UK will be governed by a decent party with a man at the helm who knows what he is doing . First of all, they've got to find one. -- Clive Not the conservatives then |
Britains Crap Roads, Answers wanted
"iantheengineer" wrote in message
... "Nick Finnigan" wrote in message ... Under the assumption that there are no cars, vans, bikes would there still be congestion? Assume the usage is the same as the total passenger km as on an urban bus route at the moment, and whatever bus frequency is optimal (which I expect to be at least 30 buses in the peak hour). Its an unanswerable question as it depends upon link and junction capacities so each location is different., You can not say whether there would be congestion when the only traffic on the road is buses? Or you can not say whether the PT travel speed in ideal conditions is any better than it is at the moment? but it is fair to say that the throughput of people would be greater so congestion would a lot less than it is at present Well, I hadn't mentioned throughput, but what would you expect the maximum PT throughput per lane to be? |
Britains Crap Roads, Answers wanted
everyone knows the theory of public transport, however you are forgetting
the disadvantages of bus use, that's what puts most people off. |
Britains Crap Roads, Answers wanted
Pete Smith wrote:
BTW, isn't rocks rolling down a hillside, behaving like water called a "Rockslide"? (I'd personally have used the term Avalanche too - I've seen it used in relationship to rocks before). Pete. I've experienced one, well two actually, one ahead and one behind, we had to hide under the landrover to avoid the smaller stones. |
Britains Crap Roads, Answers wanted
iantheengineer wrote:
"NM" wrote in message m... iantheengineer wrote: How fast would urban public transport be with no cars on the road? (and no vans, cycles, taxis etc. if that helps). Is this a question, is it not obvious enough. It will be exactly the travel time + the stops for pick up/drop off, without any delay occurring due to congestion, and there would be no need for bus lanes! Without busses and bus lanes there would be even less congestion. How many cars does it take to move 72 people, at say 5 seats per car 15, okay and what area does a car take up 5.75m by 2.5m roughly so 14.4m2 times 15 = 216m2, and what area does a double decker take 12.9m long by 2.5m = 32.25m2, hmm I need say no more. Take off your rose tinted's and actually look at your average bus, usually about 5 or less passengers, I went from Cheltenham to London by coach the other day, there were as many passengers as I could get in my car with seats left over. |
Britains Crap Roads, Answers wanted
On Sat, 8 Nov 2003 13:33:26 -0000, "iantheengineer"
wrote: "Paul Weaver" wrote in message . .. On Fri, 07 Nov 2003 22:23:48 +0000, iantheengineer wrote: It doesnt need to for most of the commute Ahh, so the bus splits into 72 parts at each end? No not at all, and I would think that the theory behind it is obvious, the key to bus usage is modal interchange, Is that your name for what we call a bus stop? ie facilities to allow transfer from opne mode of travel to another. you mean you ride the bus to the bus stop, get off and walk the rest of the way home. Fotr the most part of the commute menay people are travelling in the same direction however upon reaching the very last section of the journey and at the very start of the journey we all live and work in slightly different places, but we use the same main corridors. In cities, it is generally the case that most people can walk from their bus stop to their office. Complications arise for people who work to site etc, but for the most part many people are 9-5 approx and stay office bound. IF you carry out any o-d survey you will see that certain routes are trafficked by people from the same areas going to the same areas, and it is for these that public transport works. Buses may be OK if you work in the centre of a city and live in a suburb of that same city near to an arterial road to the city centre and are lucky (the bus stop being near to your house). If you live in one suburb and work in another you can forget about PT. The main problem with public transport is the effective routing. You're wrong there the main problem with public transport is the dreich people you have to share your space with. The last time I used a bus there was a man in a dirty shabby mac sat next to me, smelling of wee, his face covered in sores, and a "dewdrop" glistening on the end of his nose like a pearl. In order to make it profitable a bus must collect x punters to make the service profitable, cloudy thinking, what has profitability to do with it? It is the function of the bus to pick up and carry passengers. The bus must pick up passengers - period, or it might as well stay in the depot all day. in order to do this sometimes it is necessary to protract the route to serve a certain catchment Second thoughts you're right, a public transport system that didn't have to pick up passengers would run much more efficiently. Another example of the travelling public being unreasonable. and by doing this it incurrs delays compared to the direct route of using the car, but , by many people using their cars they create delays through traffic congestion. Bus lanes assist to redress this balance a litlle, but at present do not provide sufficient advantage to make the bus seem attractive. Correct, it would take *some* doing. DG |
Britains Crap Roads, Answers wanted
On Sat, 8 Nov 2003 14:02:15 -0000, "iantheengineer"
wrote: "Clive" wrote in message ... In message , Grant Crozier writes With a bit of luck in eighteen months time the UK will be governed by a decent party with a man at the helm who knows what he is doing . First of all, they've got to find one. -- Clive Not the conservatives then Not unless the NHS, Education, Railway chickens come home to roost for Labour or there's another monumental cockup like Foot & mouth. Are you a betting man? DG |
Britains Crap Roads, Answers wanted
On Fri, 7 Nov 2003 22:53:32 -0000, "iantheengineer"
wrote: As an engineer I do know that many fundamental principles can be applied to many different materials, however what isnt being accepted is that different problems require different solutions and the same principles do not apply to all things, Steve seems to think that all problems can be solved through increasing capacity, which they can be solved, but at what expense???, however he is not considering the problem from all aspects to increase conveyance is only one way of solving the problem. I am by original training a drainage engineer and for many years (before my time) the only solutions to drainage problems were to increase the conveyance or capacity of the system. This has resulted (along with different rainfall patterns) in the floods that we experienced in 1998 and 2000. Engineers now look at this problem more holistically looking at the source of the rainfall and how it runs off the ground, in an attempt to attenuate the flow to more greenfield states. We cant as yet at least prevent rainfall falling at high intensity during the summer months and for long durations during the winter months, but we can slow its journey to the river system and reduce the peak flows in the river. Unlike rainfall we have another alternative with traffic we can restrain the source if we choose, which along with the other tools including where necessary road building will help the road system cope with the traffic. As for your example of stones deflecting well thats a new one on me. Subsidence is due to the mines or other underground tunnel etc gradually collapsing and what normally happens is failure of the foudation leaving a crack visible in the supported wall either through the blocks or the mortar joints whichever is the weakest. Stone and concrete are strong in compression but weak in tension so as you get a force acting on one side causing compression in one face through bending, you get tensiile forces on the other face which normally resulst in cracking and subsequent failure. I daresay that stone will deflect to a degree but this would be unmeasurable to the naked eye. Professor Unwin, I assure you that around here I can show you stone (most likely millstone grit) walls that have deflected (The stones have bent it's not that the all the motor joints have broken and the wall is just a collection of stones in formation) by about an inch in a 5 foot run under their own weight and the weight of the stones above them. DG |
Britains Crap Roads, Answers wanted
|
Britains Crap Roads, Answers wanted
On Thu, 6 Nov 2003 17:27:04 -0000, Pete Smith
wrote: In article , says... "Steve Firth" wrote in message ... iantheengineer wrote: Not everything works on the same principles are you so stupid??? Water flows under gravity does that mean rock will too??? Well yes it does actually. Avalanche. Landslip. Continental drift Lava flow An avalanche ( arent these made of snow which formed water!!!) made of rock , I think you are talking of a pyroclastic cloud. Go on then Steve upto what level and in what areas are you educated too??? You're thinking of a pyroclastic _flow_, which is hot rocks & dust from a volcano, behaving in _exactly_ the same way as water. Can't see any references which say it behaves _exactly_ like water. it's very unlikely in fact. One of these is what "destroyed" Pompeii. BTW, isn't rocks rolling down a hillside, behaving like water called a "Rockslide"? Never heard of a rockslide. Landslide, yes. (I'd personally have used the term Avalanche too - I've seen it used in relationship to rocks before). In Physical Electronics a phenomena known as avalanche multiplication occurs when a particle accelerated in an electric field can travel long enough to aquire sufficient energy to liberate one or more additional particles which themselves are accelerated by the field and go on to create more collisions USW, USW. A lot of "Zener" diodes are in fact avalanche diodes.Similar phenomena occur in Geiger counting tubes, although in that case the "gain" is so high that every single atom of the gas in the tube becomes ionised, (avalanche multiplication mode) using a lower electric field it is possible to operate the tube in a linear (so-called proportional) mode and output is proportional to the energy of the original ionising event, but the "gain" is much lower. I personally regard any self-perpetuating chain of events in an energy field as an avalanche. A rockslide, landslide or snowfall may/may not be an avalanche. By my definition Pyroclastic flows are not avalanches. WRT Pompei (I've been there, by car :-) ). AIUI during the eruption many, many kilotons of material were ejected 20+ Km into the stratosphere and was being kept aloft by the momentum of the gases and solids contiguously being ejected, eventually the force of the eruption waned this process could not continueand this material started falling to earth. This led many of the population of Pompei to look at the eruption as it was happening and think they were safe. :-( DG |
Britains Crap Roads, Answers wanted
On Sat, 8 Nov 2003 13:39:59 -0000, "iantheengineer"
wrote: As I explained I have made a career out of drainage and traffic enginering so I am full aware of what works. What happens when you de-bottleneck as you put it, you send the problem downstream, I take it this does not amount to a defense of bottlenecks in traffic systems. You wouldn't propose build-outs and chicanes in the M1? this exactly what I was saying with the drainage problems. You remove one obstruction letting more traffic through and then it hits the next one and so on and so on. At some point you have to step back from the problem and say well this isnt really solving the problem just transferring it, how do we solve it. With traffic we can change the way that the demand is satisfied through public transport which effectively increases the passengers that can be got ionto the town without increasing infrastructure. We could keep going down the road of improving junctions but where would it end, Good question where will it all end? Since there are no answers to that why don't we just sort out the problems we have now that have been created by the previous governments over the previous 45 years. we have been doing this for the past 100 or so years and we still havent solved it this way. Cars solved the horse and cart problem in London for 70 of the last hundred years. Taking our eye of the ball over the last 30 has left us in the state we are now. DG |
Britains Crap Roads, Answers wanted
"Steve Firth" wrote in message .. . iantheengineer wrote: An avalanche ( arent these made of snow which formed water!!!) made of rock http://library.thinkquest.org/C00360...rockavalanches shtml , I think you are talking of a pyroclastic cloud. I think you possibly mean Nuée Ardente, but that's not what I was referring to. Go on then Steve upto what level and in what areas are you educated too??? What the **** has my education to do with you? -- Having problems understanding usenet? Or do you simply need help but are getting unhelpful answers? Subscribe to: uk.net.beginners for friendly advice in a flame-free environment. Just curious??? |
Britains Crap Roads, Answers wanted
"Steve Firth" wrote in message .. . iantheengineer wrote: but to go by your theories we would only need one mathematical formula to solve all of the worlds issues and this isnt the case Wrong again. -- Having problems understanding usenet? Or do you simply need help but are getting unhelpful answers? Subscribe to: uk.net.beginners for friendly advice in a flame-free environment. How so? |
Britains Crap Roads, Answers wanted
"Paul Smith" wrote in message ... On Sat, 8 Nov 2003 13:39:59 -0000, "iantheengineer" wrote: As I explained I have made a career out of drainage and traffic enginering so I am full aware of what works. What happens when you de-bottleneck as you put it, you send the problem downstream, this exactly what I was saying with the drainage problems. You remove one obstruction letting more traffic through and then it hits the next one and so on and so on. At some point you have to step back from the problem and say well this isnt really solving the problem just transferring it, how do we solve it. With traffic we can change the way that the demand is satisfied through public transport which effectively increases the passengers that can be got ionto the town without increasing infrastructure. We could keep going down the road of improving junctions but where would it end, we have been doing this for the past 100 or so years and we still havent solved it this way. You're a TRAFFIC ENGINEER? God save us all. -- Paul Smith Scotland, UK http://www.safespeed.org.uk please remove "XYZ" to reply by email speed cameras cost lives and drainage |
Britains Crap Roads, Answers wanted
"Steve Firth" wrote in message .. . Paul Smith wrote: You're a TRAFFIC ENGINEER? I doubt it. He may be a thick **** working in a local authority somewhere. They usually have exaggerated views of their own capabilities. -- Having problems understanding usenet? Or do you simply need help but are getting unhelpful answers? Subscribe to: uk.net.beginners for friendly advice in a flame-free environment. I actually work for a consultancy and not a local authority, so wrong again Steve |
Britains Crap Roads, Answers wanted
"Steve Firth" wrote in message .. . iantheengineer wrote: As an engineer ..you over rate your abilities. -- Having problems understanding usenet? Or do you simply need help but are getting unhelpful answers? Subscribe to: uk.net.beginners for friendly advice in a flame-free environment. At least I have abilities Steve unlike your good self |
Britains Crap Roads, Answers wanted
"Steve Firth" wrote in message .. . derek wrote: Professor Unwin, I assure you that around here I can show you stone (most likely millstone grit) walls that have deflected (The stones have bent it's not that the all the motor joints have broken and the wall is just a collection of stones in formation) by about an inch in a 5 foot run under their own weight and the weight of the stones above them. I'm wondering what sort of engineer he is (service 'engineer'?) Any engineer worth his salt knows that rock and glass both flow. On one degree course that I know of engineering students were monitoring the changes in the glass of the building that they worked in. Knowing that glass and rock will deform and flow under pressure is essential for civils. If they can't design around the known characteristics of the material then they are **** all use to anyone. -- Having problems understanding usenet? Or do you simply need help but are getting unhelpful answers? Subscribe to: uk.net.beginners for friendly advice in a flame-free environment. I keep asking myself what use you are Steve but as yet you havent been any |
Britains Crap Roads, Answers wanted
"Steve Firth" wrote in message .. . derek wrote: Professor Unwin, I assure you that around here I can show you stone (most likely millstone grit) walls that have deflected (The stones have bent it's not that the all the motor joints have broken and the wall is just a collection of stones in formation) by about an inch in a 5 foot run under their own weight and the weight of the stones above them. I'm wondering what sort of engineer he is (service 'engineer'?) Any engineer worth his salt knows that rock and glass both flow. On one degree course that I know of engineering students were monitoring the changes in the glass of the building that they worked in. Knowing that glass and rock will deform and flow under pressure is essential for civils. If they can't design around the known characteristics of the material then they are **** all use to anyone. -- Having problems understanding usenet? Or do you simply need help but are getting unhelpful answers? Subscribe to: uk.net.beginners for friendly advice in a flame-free environment. PS Im not a service engineer, they arent engineers, Im a chartered engineer thankyou |
Britains Crap Roads, Answers wanted
"Steve Firth" wrote in message .. . derek wrote: Professor Unwin, I assure you that around here I can show you stone (most likely millstone grit) walls that have deflected (The stones have bent it's not that the all the motor joints have broken and the wall is just a collection of stones in formation) by about an inch in a 5 foot run under their own weight and the weight of the stones above them. I'm wondering what sort of engineer he is (service 'engineer'?) Any engineer worth his salt knows that rock and glass both flow. On one degree course that I know of engineering students were monitoring the changes in the glass of the building that they worked in. Knowing that glass and rock will deform and flow under pressure is essential for civils. If they can't design around the known characteristics of the material then they are **** all use to anyone. -- Having problems understanding usenet? Or do you simply need help but are getting unhelpful answers? Subscribe to: uk.net.beginners for friendly advice in a flame-free environment. What are you then Steve,or shall we go all defensive again |
Britains Crap Roads, Answers wanted
"Paul Smith" wrote in message ... On Sat, 8 Nov 2003 13:39:59 -0000, "iantheengineer" wrote: As I explained I have made a career out of drainage and traffic enginering so I am full aware of what works. What happens when you de-bottleneck as you put it, you send the problem downstream, this exactly what I was saying with the drainage problems. You remove one obstruction letting more traffic through and then it hits the next one and so on and so on. At some point you have to step back from the problem and say well this isnt really solving the problem just transferring it, how do we solve it. With traffic we can change the way that the demand is satisfied through public transport which effectively increases the passengers that can be got ionto the town without increasing infrastructure. We could keep going down the road of improving junctions but where would it end, we have been doing this for the past 100 or so years and we still havent solved it this way. You're a TRAFFIC ENGINEER? God save us all. -- Paul Smith Scotland, UK http://www.safespeed.org.uk please remove "XYZ" to reply by email speed cameras cost lives Okay Paul what are your views and ideas |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 09:42 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2006 LondonBanter.co.uk