If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(YouTube)   How do you move a 186 ft long, 270 ton tower 653 miles from Idaho to Colorado in the snow? With lots of planning and some cool and big-ass equipment   (youtube.com) divider line 31
    More: Cool  
•       •       •

4174 clicks; posted to Video » on 12 Aug 2014 at 10:49 PM (18 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



31 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2014-08-12 09:11:42 PM  
sponsored link?
 
2014-08-12 09:45:02 PM  
Will someone explain just what the fark that thing is? Rosie O'Donnell's dildo?
 
2014-08-12 09:46:44 PM  
It's a fractionation still for a petroleum refinery.
 
2014-08-12 10:25:59 PM  

cretinbob: sponsored link?


Link corrected.

 

gopher321: Will someone explain just what the fark that thing is? Rosie O'Donnell's dildo?


It's a methane tower for a natural gas compressing station.
 
2014-08-12 10:35:41 PM  

2xhelix: cretinbob: sponsored link?

Link corrected.

  gopher321: Will someone explain just what the fark that thing is? Rosie O'Donnell's dildo?

It's a methane tower for a natural gas compressing station.


it's just a commercial and I was hoping Drew was getting paid for it
 
2014-08-12 11:21:26 PM  
De-Methanizer...headed to Ft. Lupton...

FFS, that is just too easy.
 
2014-08-12 11:23:55 PM  
Yeah, that definitely looked like a 10-minute advertisement for that big-stuff-moving company.

So why couldn't the manufacturer just ship the parts to the site using normal trucks and then assemble it there? Seems like that would be cheaper and easier than building it in one location and then hauling it 650 miles in one huge piece.
 
2014-08-12 11:26:29 PM  
Wow... Crazy.

This one was cool... Unfortunately, I didn't hear about it until it was on its way, so I missed watching it .

www.heavyhaul.com

img.ksl.com

http://www.contracostatimes.com/california/ci_18554920
 
2014-08-12 11:45:13 PM  

Lukeonia1: So why couldn't the manufacturer just ship the parts to the site using normal trucks and then assemble it there?


Because the assembled unit must undergo pressure testing, x-ray,  pass QC and be certified to spec before shipping.  So once it's assembled, they'd have to disassemble it, ship it, then reassemble and retest on site, which would cost a lot more and add months to the project.  Some of the fittings on pieces like that have alignment tolerances in millimeters.
 
2014-08-13 12:15:05 AM  
Not sure why they didn't use a coordinated lift from a team of quadcopters.
 
2014-08-13 12:42:37 AM  
www.portlandbridges.com

The Sellwood Bridge is up for sale, but you have to come pick it up. Sounds like a job for these guys...
 
2014-08-13 02:13:53 AM  
I'd be more interested in watching them try to drive that through the western range between the coast and Denver, where all the turns and steep grades are.

I gave up on the video as soon as it became obvious it's just a commercial.
 
2014-08-13 06:27:30 AM  
Those truck tires look terribly unsafe, especially for that weather.

And what was the cost for moving that thing?
 
2014-08-13 07:08:40 AM  
that job makes the ice road truckers look like pussies

cdn.cnwimg.com
 
2014-08-13 07:25:10 AM  
That was actually pretty darn fascinating to me.

I've watched the energy company haul the long bodies for wind turbines up here into the mountains. Again, 2-lane roads only and pretty damn curvy. I thought that was amazing, but this video.. just wow.

Also kind of curious why they didn't prefab and assemble on site.

And those of you scoffing because it was an advert - watch the whole thing anyway. Pretty interesting stuff.
 
2014-08-13 08:03:33 AM  
It's simply uncanny, how quickly that video becomes painfully tedious.
 
2014-08-13 08:39:53 AM  

Lukeonia1: Yeah, that definitely looked like a 10-minute advertisement for that big-stuff-moving company.


What tipped you off, Sherlock?

So why couldn't the manufacturer just ship the parts to the site using normal trucks and then assemble it there? Seems like that would be cheaper and easier than building it in one location and then hauling it 650 miles in one huge piece.

Wow. I can't belive they didn't think of that. You should call them and let them know they did it all wrong.
 
2014-08-13 08:58:45 AM  
A long time ago, when I was working a job assignment in England, I saw a show about a UK based company that moved big stuff.  Their "huge" projects were barely more than a semi-truck here in the states.  Because of how small and winding all of the streets are, stuff that we would think of as routine is a major hassle.  They were having to disconnect/move overhead power lines, and run the semi rig with rear wheel steering just to maneuver down city streets.

This project - no way.
 
2014-08-13 09:17:44 AM  
 
2014-08-13 09:22:39 AM  
 
2014-08-13 10:08:14 AM  

2xhelix: Lukeonia1: So why couldn't the manufacturer just ship the parts to the site using normal trucks and then assemble it there?

Because the assembled unit must undergo pressure testing, x-ray,  pass QC and be certified to spec before shipping.  So once it's assembled, they'd have to disassemble it, ship it, then reassemble and retest on site, which would cost a lot more and add months to the project.  Some of the fittings on pieces like that have alignment tolerances in millimeters.


Seems like they would have to do all of that again on site, after 700 miles of jostling.
 
2014-08-13 11:09:48 AM  
but what if I just ordered it on amazon and needed it overnighted?
 
2014-08-13 01:06:13 PM  

MooseBayou: Seems like they would have to do all of that again on site, after 700 miles of jostling.


Welds on this type of tank generally doesn't require additional testing after it leaves the shop.  A bit of jostling is not going to be an issue.  Now if they would have dropped the thing or ran it into something, that would be a different story.

I thought that it was pretty cool but I like engineering and logistics.
 
2014-08-13 01:38:42 PM  
Will the tank be moved to the vertical, and if so how will it be lifted without worrying about it bending and breaking those welds, or just kinking?
 
2014-08-13 03:16:55 PM  

RoyBatty: Will the tank be moved to the vertical, and if so how will it be lifted without worrying about it bending and breaking those welds, or just kinking?


This tank has a huge Moment of Inertia.  The stress on these welds and on the tank itself will be pretty small when lifting it up since the forces will be spread out.
 
2014-08-13 04:15:49 PM  

HeadLever: RoyBatty: Will the tank be moved to the vertical, and if so how will it be lifted without worrying about it bending and breaking those welds, or just kinking?

This tank has a huge Moment of Inertia.  The stress on these welds and on the tank itself will be pretty small when lifting it up since the forces will be spread out.


Thanks, I'll take your word for it, and wish I had taken some courses in civil engineering....

It still seems counterintuitive, given how I think stress works (to find and accumulate in the weakest area) so I would intuitively think that if there was a weak spot on the upper side of the tank, it might kink there.

But thank you for the link.
 
2014-08-13 04:58:48 PM  

RoyBatty: It still seems counterintuitive, given how I think stress works (to find and accumulate in the weakest area) so I would intuitively think that if there was a weak spot on the upper side of the tank, it might kink there.


Yeah, I love structural engineering, though I am more of a water/piping person now.

Here are some decent lectures on Inertia of rectangular shapes.  For a pipe/tank the generalize moment of Inertia is calculated by (Pi)(D^4-d^4)/64, where D is the outside diameter and d is the internal diameter.
And here is how this I relates to stress within the structure.

Hopefully, you will be able to follow along.  In any case, the larger the Moment of Inertia, the better the structural member can spread out the bending forces placed on it, resulting in lower stresses.
 
2014-08-13 06:29:42 PM  

HeadLever: RoyBatty: It still seems counterintuitive, given how I think stress works (to find and accumulate in the weakest area) so I would intuitively think that if there was a weak spot on the upper side of the tank, it might kink there.

Yeah, I love structural engineering, though I am more of a water/piping person now.

Here are some decent lectures on Inertia of rectangular shapes.  For a pipe/tank the generalize moment of Inertia is calculated by (Pi)(D^4-d^4)/64, where D is the outside diameter and d is the internal diameter.
And here is how this I relates to stress within the structure.

Hopefully, you will be able to follow along.  In any case, the larger the Moment of Inertia, the better the structural member can spread out the bending forces placed on it, resulting in lower stresses.


Thanks, I'll look and watch those later.

With my dumb physics BS, I would never have considered beam deflection in terms of something called "moment of inertia", so that's been interesting in and of itself.
 
2014-08-13 08:14:49 PM  

thisistwitchy.files.wordpress.com

 
2014-08-13 09:12:30 PM  

RoyBatty: With my dumb physics BS, I would never have considered beam deflection in terms of something called "moment of inertia", so that's been interesting in and of itself.


If you have a BS in physics, you should be able to follow along easy enough.  This is a basic form of applied physics based on Newton's First Law.
 
2014-08-14 12:06:18 AM  

cretinbob: 2xhelix: cretinbob: sponsored link?

Link corrected.

  gopher321: Will someone explain just what the fark that thing is? Rosie O'Donnell's dildo?

It's a methane tower for a natural gas compressing station.

it's just a commercial and I was hoping Drew was getting paid for it


It's just the farking video that someone decided to link to. Jesus, some of you people are sensitive. A commercial has to have a demographic. How many farkers can you think of who need to haul a million pounds anywhere? Not every farking video in existence was shot by Beavis and Butthead when they found the camera equipment. Occasionally on the internet, you are going to find professionally produced videos that people AREN'T sharing just because they're getting paid to.

This whole "it's just a commercial" thing is the refuge of the retarded who can't think of anything more clever to say.
 
Displayed 31 of 31 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report