3 ms·
Ironically, simply bulking up the ground around the piers would have had the ship run aground; at 8 knots the ship would have slowed to a stop within several ya
by doer1984 3y ago
Ironically, simply bulking up the ground around the piers would have had the ship run aground; at 8 knots the ship would have slowed to a stop within several yards, and suffered minor damage, maybe would have required being tugged back into clear waters. Running aground puts the majority of impact into a downward force absorbed by the earth. It's hard to build a bridge pier that will withstand 200,000 tons of direct impact, no matter how slowly that's moving.
- adrianmonk 3y agoThat's what makes sense to me. Ships are designed to minimize drag going through the water. But the friction of the entire hull scraping across the bottom should be MUCH larger and thus able to exert lots more stopping force. Also, if the ground is sloped, it will act like a ramp, lifting the ship out of the water. The loss of buoyancy means its weight will push downward on the ground below it. An increased normal force means more friction, thus more stopping ability.
- fl7305 3y ago> simply bulking up the ground around the piers That is exactly what they did around the pylons of the large Öresundsbridge between Denmark and Sweden.