It's still hanging around, apparently.

If you had a deathwish, that would be one hell of an awesome ride.

Not too farkin' bad!

weak.

1940 Tacoma Narrows Bridge (new window)

All in all, I would have to say it did rather well.

That's how we roll rock in SF too.

Bergyd: weak.

1940 Tacoma Narrows Bridge (new window)

I thought the video was going to be of the tacoma narrows too. I agree, this video is nothing compared to that classic video. The narrows knows (well, knew one time) how to ROCK a bridge.

Bouncy

Bergyd: weak.

1940 Tacoma Narrows Bridge (new window)

THIS

It was an epic engineering fail.

bob_ross: That's how we roll rock in SF too.

Well, until now, the Golden Gate piers could have bounced up off their supports and crashed down to earth. Which is why it's had so much work done on it.

Earthquake computer modelling wasn't so hot in the 1920s and 30s.

opiumpoopy:

Earthquake computer modelling wasn't so hot in the 1920s and 30s.

Sure it was:

bob_ross: Sure it was:

What does the wheel thingie do?

/knows exactly what it does

Pontifex FTW!

It's just shaking because its a little Chile out.

Radioactive Ass: bob_ross: Sure it was:

What does the wheel thingie do?

/knows exactly what it does

IT DRIVES ME NUTS!

Barnacles!: Bergyd: weak.

1940 Tacoma Narrows Bridge (new window)

I thought the video was going to be of the tacoma narrows too. I agree, this video is nothing compared to that classic video. The narrows knows (well, knew one time) how to ROCK a bridge.

The Tacoma Narrows Bridge failed because engineers didn't understand resonance enough to prevent that collapse. Earthquakes had nothing to do with it.

tacoma narrows-wind
chile-earthquake

not the same, eh?

/love both vids.

musashi:

I came in here to say that. Still a helluva ride though.

BTW, that is why you feel loud bass notes in your large intestine. Same principle.

/Can't understand why the military doesn't develop/use more audio-weapons. They would be fun to watch.

wheeee!

musashi1600: musashi1600

The Tacoma Narrows Bridge failed because engineers didn't understand resonance enough to prevent that collapse. Earthquakes had nothing to do with it.


I was going to say the same thing, but it appears you've got things covered..

Radioactive Ass: bob_ross: Sure it was:

What does the wheel thingie do?

/knows exactly what it does

Well,

What dose it do?

OMG THEY'RE NOT SPEAKING ENGLISH!

It steers the submarine.

that would get the blood flowing....ai carumba!

qrb912: What dose it do?

It makes the spinny thing in the back go round and round...

Cid_Highwind: It steers the submarine.

No. Not at all. Not even close. You're about 200+ feet off (well technically you could only be about 60 feet or so off, but you're still way off).

Radioactive Ass: Cid_Highwind: It steers the submarine.

No. Not at all. Not even close. You're about 200+ feet off (well technically you could only be about 60 feet or so off, but you're still way off).
.
.
.
It steers a restaurant 2oo feet from the submarine's dock?

Ikahoshi: It's just shaking because its a little Chile out.

Ikahoshi you've been on my favorites list for your comedic genius since this gem: Link (new window)

That must have been your peak.

Well, that's what they're supposed to do in an earthquake. They swing and move around and absorb the stresses, dissipating them gradually.

BTW, the Tacoma/Narrows Bridge failure happened not from an earthquake, but from wind stresses over and under the structure. The deck was thin enough to act like a lifting body in strong enough winds, and began a destructive oscillation cycle that tore itself apart. That was back when the flow of air around a long thin structure was relatively unknown; modern suspension bridges often have wind tunnel tests made on their designs now to keep that from happening.

/civil engineer
//Tacoma Narrows was a failure case studied in college

Radioactive Ass: bob_ross: Sure it was:

What does the wheel thingie do?

/knows exactly what it does

I don't get it, why are you asking if you know exactly what it does?
I don't understand these little add ons at the ends of messages.

Bendal: BTW, the Tacoma/Narrows Bridge failure happened not from an earthquake, but from wind stresses over and under the structure. The deck was thin enough to act like a lifting body in strong enough winds, and began a destructive oscillation cycle that tore itself apart. That was back when the flow of air around a long thin structure was relatively unknown; modern suspension bridges often have wind tunnel tests made on their designs now to keep that from happening.

As I understand it, it was more that it hadn't occured to them that airflow could set up a resonant oscilation in the structure.

Derkins: Ikahoshi: It's just shaking because its a little Chile out.

Ikahoshi you've been on my favorites list for your comedic genius since this gem: Link (new window)

That must have been your peak.
.
.
.
That wasn't a peak. That was just mild indigestion.

I don't get it. In the footage of the Tacoma, why is the camera so steady?

Wow, it shook.

/who would have thought?

phalaeo: I don't get it. In the footage of the Tacoma, why is the camera so steady?


Steadicam.

It's a little known fact that Stanley Kubrick designed it for use when he himself was a news cameraman during the second world war. He lived in the Tacoma region at the time of the wobbly bridge.

amazingly boring

phalaeo: I don't get it. In the footage of the Tacoma, why is the camera so steady?

Because it was caused by wind, not an earthquake.

Bendal: Well, that's what they're supposed to do in an earthquake. They swing and move around and absorb the stresses, dissipating them gradually.

BTW, the Tacoma/Narrows Bridge failure happened not from an earthquake, but from wind stresses over and under the structure. The deck was thin enough to act like a lifting body in strong enough winds, and began a destructive oscillation cycle that tore itself apart. That was back when the flow of air around a long thin structure was relatively unknown; modern suspension bridges often have wind tunnel tests made on their designs now to keep that from happening.

/civil engineer
//Tacoma Narrows was a failure case studied in college

It's nice that you were able to remain civil.

michaeld5: I don't get it, why are you asking if you know exactly what it does?
I don't understand these little add ons at the ends of messages.

It was a joke. Note how the second part was much smaller, as in a whisper.

Now, read on...

headstone: It steers a restaurant 2oo feet from the submarine's dock?

It's the Steam Plant Control Panel (SPCP) from a S5W reactor onboard a nuclear submarine (various classes). The other two shown are the Reactor Plant Control Panel (RPCP) and the Electric Plant Control Panel (EPCP) (left to right). The wheels control the engine forward (the big one) and aft (the small one).

Bendal: Well, that's what they're supposed to do in an earthquake. They swing and move around and absorb the stresses, dissipating them gradually.

BTW, the Tacoma/Narrows Bridge failure happened not from an earthquake, but from wind stresses over and under the structure. The deck was thin enough to act like a lifting body in strong enough winds, and began a destructive oscillation cycle that tore itself apart. That was back when the flow of air around a long thin structure was relatively unknown; modern suspension bridges often have wind tunnel tests made on their designs now to keep that from happening.

/civil engineer
//Tacoma Narrows was a failure case studied in college

And it wasn't a particulary strong wind either, if I recall. Not so much engineering fail, more like tough lesson learned in an expensive way.

Seems like this Chilean bridge did it's job.

Dammit, I wish I hadn't clicked on that Tacoma Pass video. Now I'll never want to walk across the Mighty Mac bridge again!

GungFu: phalaeo: I don't get it. In the footage of the Tacoma, why is the camera so steady?


Steadicam.

It's a little known fact that Stanley Kubrick designed it for use when he himself was a news cameraman during the second world war. He lived in the Tacoma region at the time of the wobbly bridge Galloping Gertie.

/FTFY

musashi1600: Barnacles!: Bergyd: weak.

1940 Tacoma Narrows Bridge (new window)

I thought the video was going to be of the tacoma narrows too. I agree, this video is nothing compared to that classic video. The narrows knows (well, knew one time) how to ROCK a bridge.

The Tacoma Narrows Bridge failed because engineers didn't understand resonance enough to prevent that collapse. Earthquakes had nothing to do with it.

and winds.

ME-iac: GungFu: phalaeo: I don't get it. In the footage of the Tacoma, why is the camera so steady?


Steadicam.

It's a little known fact that Stanley Kubrick designed it for use when he himself was a news cameraman during the second world war. He lived in the Tacoma region at the time of the wobbly bridge Galloping Gertie.

/FTFY

He's not standing on the bridge. Plus, it could be that he had it on a tripod, and given that he owned a camera shop, I would say he knew that the hell he was doing.

Great video, indeed.

What's the deal? That bridge performed as it's supposed to. There was the one overhead lamp that looked a little loose for comfort, but the bridge wobbled a little bit and stayed intact.

A perfectly rigid structure would have broken under that kind of stress. A steel roller-coaster also undulates significantly - you want that behavior in a steel structure, as long as it's not at a length where harmonic resonance is going to be an issue, like the Tacoma-Narrows.

That video of Gallopin Gertie has some great background music, it's just like watching a Flash Gordon serial from the late 30's.

Bathia_Mapes [TotalFark] Quote 2008-10-12 04:33:24 AM
Bergyd: weak.

1940 Tacoma Narrows Bridge (new window)

THIS

It was an epic engineering fail.

Agrees. Bad engineering caused the Narrows Bridge to fail. This one in Chile obviously has a proper design.

Mongo cut wood: This one in Chile obviously has a proper design.

But how does it do in a constant 42 kt wind?

/quite well I'm certain if it was built after the Tacoma Narrows...

Balchinian: /Can't understand why the military doesn't develop/use more audio-weapons. They would be fun to watch.

Well, that's the idea behind thermobaric weapons.

Below 1 Hz, 10,000Db.