I am confused about the bridge collapse in Minnesota because it just doesn't make sense to me that the whole thing just fell down instead of just one section. For the whole thing to just fall down like that makes the thing that the whole thing was rotten or rusted out or something. Logically if there were a single failure then just a section of the bridge would have fallen. For it all to go down just doesn't make sense to me.
Not that I think it makes perfect sense, but I think it somewhat reasonable, or at least conceivable that the bridge's sections could be interdependent, particularly if they each have been weakened over the years. Just a thought.
Posted by: William The Great at August 13, 2007 01:18 PMThat bridge had been rotting in several places for quite some time and this was widely known; well at least to local engineers. No one wanted to throw money at the problem so what happened was pretty predictable.
Posted by: Gary at August 13, 2007 09:04 PMThe bidge was a truss bridge. If one component fails it falls. They are called "fracture critical" for that reason.
Posted by: richard harold at September 4, 2007 01:36 PM