5 ms·

Google reverse image search found a higher resolution (2472x1930) photo of the collapsed bridge: https://s.aolcdn.com/hss/storage/midas/984273818587a1353cda15d

Google reverse image search found a higher resolution (2472x1930) photo of the collapsed bridge: https://s.aolcdn.com/hss/storage/midas/984273818587a1353cda15d940bb17e9/206675182/19764398.jpg https://s.aolcdn.com/hss/storage/midas/984273818587a1353cda1... I'm not saying it's not new... but it doesn't _look_ new.

derefr 8y ago
It might have been, say, three years under construction, with a contract dispute interrupting construction for 2.8 of those years, the bridge sitting half-constructed and getting rain-weathered the entire time, and then just finally this month, construction resumed, was completed, and the bridge opened. You know, like most Canadian buildings. (Here in Vancouver, I see plenty of stick-built buildings left half-constructed due to developer or zoning problems, with their frames and plywood panelling just left exposed to the elements for months; and then construction resumes and the building has sheeting and cladding and insulation slapped on over just a few days. I've always wondered whether that traps in the moisture that's accumulated in the wood over the previous months, leading to those buildings having mould problems later on...)
- jacquesm 8y ago
  They could very well end up with expanding plywood or osb syndrome, which makes the building much less structurally sound and might require expensive repairs down the line. Mould would be the least of your problems!
- ggcdn 8y ago
  > You know, like most Canadian buildings. Not sure where you got that idea from, but as a structural engineer in Vancouver I generally see the exact opposite. Once construction starts, it's an all out scramble to finish as quickly as possible. Also, zoning problems occur at the building permit stage, which is well before construction starts.
  - derefr 8y ago
    I only know what I see walking around the neighbourhoods I frequent: buildings (usually single-family dwellings, but sometimes low-rises) that have sat half-completed, with no active construction, for months or even years. I’ve always assumed it was a result of either the development company or their general contractor going out of business / running out of budget before completion; and that, when construction resumes, it’s because the site has been liquidated and sold at auction to a new developer. Other times, buildings (usually commercial) are left 90% finished for years at a time—clad and insulated, but not wired or finished inside. I assume this these buildings are actually as finished as they’re going to get, and are for sale, waiting for an initial owner to decide how they want to finish them (instead of having to rip out and redo the previous interior and exterior), and they just aren’t being publically advertised. They still look kind of like blighted abandoned buildings, though, and kind of destroy the character of a neighbourhood in a similar way to the half-built homes.
    - baud147258 8y ago
      I remember seeing nearly finished building in Croatia, lacking only the exterior finish, but (apparently) with people living Inside. I first though it was a cost-cutting measure, saving on seemingly unecessary work, but I've also heard it was to avoid taxes on buildings.
      - miluge 8y ago
        When I first moved to Romania I saw the same and always wondered why. Now I built a small home and left it like this so I don't pay taxes (wanted to build, leave there a year of two and sell). You also don't pay as much taxes when sold not finished.
      - village-idiot 8y ago
        Haiti had/has the same rule: property taxes only applied to finished structures, so many of the rural dwellings were left unfinished. When my wife volunteered there right before the earthquake she said that many structures had exposed rebar sticking out of the concrete. She thinks that increases the fatalities significantly.
- skookumchuck 8y ago
  Once the house is weather tight, it's supposed to be dried out with portable heaters. It can take several days to do this.
- SiempreViernes 8y ago
  The article states: > The Saskatchewan Association of Rural Municipalities inspected the bridge earlier this year and told the RM that it would need to be replaced as it was rotting and dangerous. > The municipality put out a tender and selected Can-Struct, who had been working on the project for the last four or five weeks.
mtgx 8y ago
The iron structure doesn't look that solid either.
skookumchuck 8y ago
It looks like the center span was not supported by the vertical bridge supports. It makes one wonder what the engineers were thinking - even the construction people should have questioned it.
- michaelt 8y ago
  Look at the heights of the two blue piers. On the far pier, the diagonal braces are a meter above the water, while on the near pier they're 20cm below the water. My bet is when it was constructed the two piers were at the same height, and the center span was supported on both ends - then the near pier sank, allowing the center span to slip off.
megaremote 8y ago
Is this concrete with no rebar?
- michaelt 8y ago
  Look how cleanly the center span has split into six. It must have been made of six precast concrete beams [1] which would have been lifted into place by crane. You don't see any exposed rebar because the deck beams themselves haven't broken. Shame they fell off when the blue metal pier sank. [1] http://www.michiecorp.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/beams-concrete-new-hampshire-800x400.jpg http://www.michiecorp.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/beams-c...
- baud147258 8y ago
  It look like pre-built concrete blocks. And since none of the blocks was cracked open by the collapse, we can't see the rebar inside.
andyjohnson0 8y ago
The two remaining road sections aren't level with each other. I'm not a bridge engineer, but it looks like the supporting columns on the near-side may have sunk and snapped the centre-span at that point, which then sheared-off at the other side due to lack to support.
- Yetanfou 8y ago
  If that photo is anything to go by it looks like the concrete beams forming the centre span were not supported by the horizontal I-beams, causing the span to fall into the river below. I'll have to assume the centre span originally did rest on those I-beams so it would seem that they have moved, either during construction or due to some external influence.
rnatklnz 8y ago
That looks like something my dad did in his spare time lmao

derefr 8y ago

It might have been, say, three years under construction, with a contract dispute interrupting construction for 2.8 of those years, the bridge sitting half-constructed and getting rain-weathered the entire time, and then just finally this month, construction resumed, was completed, and the bridge opened. You know, like most Canadian buildings. (Here in Vancouver, I see plenty of stick-built buildings left half-constructed due to developer or zoning problems, with their frames and plywood panelling just left exposed to the elements for months; and then construction resumes and the building has sheeting and cladding and insulation slapped on over just a few days. I've always wondered whether that traps in the moisture that's accumulated in the wood over the previous months, leading to those buildings having mould problems later on...)

jacquesm 8y ago
They could very well end up with expanding plywood or osb syndrome, which makes the building much less structurally sound and might require expensive repairs down the line. Mould would be the least of your problems!
ggcdn 8y ago
> You know, like most Canadian buildings. Not sure where you got that idea from, but as a structural engineer in Vancouver I generally see the exact opposite. Once construction starts, it's an all out scramble to finish as quickly as possible. Also, zoning problems occur at the building permit stage, which is well before construction starts.
- derefr 8y ago
  I only know what I see walking around the neighbourhoods I frequent: buildings (usually single-family dwellings, but sometimes low-rises) that have sat half-completed, with no active construction, for months or even years. I’ve always assumed it was a result of either the development company or their general contractor going out of business / running out of budget before completion; and that, when construction resumes, it’s because the site has been liquidated and sold at auction to a new developer. Other times, buildings (usually commercial) are left 90% finished for years at a time—clad and insulated, but not wired or finished inside. I assume this these buildings are actually as finished as they’re going to get, and are for sale, waiting for an initial owner to decide how they want to finish them (instead of having to rip out and redo the previous interior and exterior), and they just aren’t being publically advertised. They still look kind of like blighted abandoned buildings, though, and kind of destroy the character of a neighbourhood in a similar way to the half-built homes.
  - baud147258 8y ago
    I remember seeing nearly finished building in Croatia, lacking only the exterior finish, but (apparently) with people living Inside. I first though it was a cost-cutting measure, saving on seemingly unecessary work, but I've also heard it was to avoid taxes on buildings.
    - miluge 8y ago
      When I first moved to Romania I saw the same and always wondered why. Now I built a small home and left it like this so I don't pay taxes (wanted to build, leave there a year of two and sell). You also don't pay as much taxes when sold not finished.
    - village-idiot 8y ago
      Haiti had/has the same rule: property taxes only applied to finished structures, so many of the rural dwellings were left unfinished. When my wife volunteered there right before the earthquake she said that many structures had exposed rebar sticking out of the concrete. She thinks that increases the fatalities significantly.
skookumchuck 8y ago
Once the house is weather tight, it's supposed to be dried out with portable heaters. It can take several days to do this.
SiempreViernes 8y ago
The article states: > The Saskatchewan Association of Rural Municipalities inspected the bridge earlier this year and told the RM that it would need to be replaced as it was rotting and dangerous. > The municipality put out a tender and selected Can-Struct, who had been working on the project for the last four or five weeks.

mtgx 8y ago

The iron structure doesn't look that solid either.

skookumchuck 8y ago

It looks like the center span was not supported by the vertical bridge supports. It makes one wonder what the engineers were thinking - even the construction people should have questioned it.

michaelt 8y ago
Look at the heights of the two blue piers. On the far pier, the diagonal braces are a meter above the water, while on the near pier they're 20cm below the water. My bet is when it was constructed the two piers were at the same height, and the center span was supported on both ends - then the near pier sank, allowing the center span to slip off.

megaremote 8y ago

Is this concrete with no rebar?

michaelt 8y ago
Look how cleanly the center span has split into six. It must have been made of six precast concrete beams [1] which would have been lifted into place by crane. You don't see any exposed rebar because the deck beams themselves haven't broken. Shame they fell off when the blue metal pier sank. [1] http://www.michiecorp.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/beams-concrete-new-hampshire-800x400.jpg http://www.michiecorp.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/beams-c...
baud147258 8y ago
It look like pre-built concrete blocks. And since none of the blocks was cracked open by the collapse, we can't see the rebar inside.

andyjohnson0 8y ago

The two remaining road sections aren't level with each other. I'm not a bridge engineer, but it looks like the supporting columns on the near-side may have sunk and snapped the centre-span at that point, which then sheared-off at the other side due to lack to support.

Yetanfou 8y ago
If that photo is anything to go by it looks like the concrete beams forming the centre span were not supported by the horizontal I-beams, causing the span to fall into the river below. I'll have to assume the centre span originally did rest on those I-beams so it would seem that they have moved, either during construction or due to some external influence.

rnatklnz 8y ago

That looks like something my dad did in his spare time lmao