Hi All, It was hard to interpret what Werner was saying about the C-8 Structure the way he framed it. And I am not a Civil Engineer!
BUT, with that said, I did go to College and took two simple courses known as "Physics I" and "Physics II". And having taken those, I am well aware of what can happen to virtually ANY unprotected Metal that sits for 20 Years next to the Ocean! My old Suburu was partially submerged in the Point Pleasant Floods of 1992. It took only 3 Years for the bottom third of that car to totally rot OUT after the flood! And the car I bought brand new in 1989! I do realize that Building Steel is a MUCH more resilient type of Metal that it's built out of. But even PLANES, which fly every DAY in questionable Weather and are made of Aluminum or Titanium (Some parts) have serious problems with the Weather affecting parts & even the Fuselage. Ask any Aerodynamics Engineer ...Or even an Aircraft Mechanic (There are actually two different types of Aircraft Mechanics that work on different parts of the Plane ..Both are underpaid for their responsibility since President Reagan halved their salaries in the 1980's). Anyway, there absolutely MUST be a measurable degradation of the Frame that remains of the C-8 Building! Even for Werner to say there isn't, sorry Werner, but you have to go back and Crack your old Physics & Chemistry Books Open again and re-state what you said! Considering those facts, there ARE experts who are TOTALLY qualified to re-examine the C-8 Structure and completely determine whether it IS or IS Not Safe NOW ......Today! They are best fit to determine that, not ME or Werner or Skip Bernstein ........Or certainly the Mayor, who's a Musician! I did write a Paper on Laser Fusion in 1978 while in College, and that's certainly a MUCH more Complex thing than determining the Safety of a Steel Frame on a Building! In fact, I'll tell you NOW that a Combination of Magnetic Fusion and MagLevTrains will BE the Transportation/ Energy Combination that SAVES the Earth from Global Warming IF we develop and/ or USE them SOON! Steve Wider --- In AsburyPark@yahoogroups.com, "Skip Bernstein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > "The only things relevant are: has corrosion thinned the steel below > the load bearing spec, and can below spec areas be repaired/replaced. > To the contrary, the building as is, represents millions of dollars > invested in clearance, foundations, superstructure, etc. It makes > sense to use it if technically/financially feasible." > > It's hard to imagine that steel not being well below the "load bearing > spec"; structural steel offers little resistance to corrosion in high > moisture or wet applications, the presence of salt air is particularly > deadly. The below design details list is for highway bridge > construction where salt is only a seasonal concern. > > Design Details. For uncoated steel in bridges and other highway > structures, the following items should receive careful consideration: > (1) Eliminate bridge joints where possible. > (2) Expansion joints must be able to control water that is on the > deck. Consider the use of a trough under the deck joint to divert > water away from vulnerable elements. > (3) Paint all superstructure steel within a distance of 1 1/2 times > the depth of girder from bridge joints. > (4) Minimize the number of bridge deck scuppers. > (5) Eliminate details that serve as water and debris "traps". > (6) "Hermetically seal" box members when possible, or provide weep > holes to allow proper drainage and circulation of air. > (7) Consider protecting pier caps and abutment walls to minimize > staining. > (8) Seal overlapping surfaces exposed to water (to prevent capillary > penetration action). > > C-8 was designed to be encapsulated in concrete with general > weatherproofing; with 20 years exposure the chance that that structure > won't fall under its own weight seems extremely remote. > > That said, why wouldn't The Fish go full steam ahead? > > --- In AsburyPark@yahoogroups.com, "wernerapnj" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In AsburyPark@yahoogroups.com, Greg S <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > I can not believe that there is an Engineer or Insurance > > > professional that would let that superstructure be built on. > > > It has been in the salt air for 20(?) years. > > > > The only things relevent are: has corrosion thinned the steel below > > the load bearing spec, and can below spec areas be repaired/replaced. > > > > > The floors are crumbling and collapsing every day. > > > > There are no floors, only the corrogated sheets that the floors would > > have been poured on. They have mostly rusted away and will be > > replaced. Then the floors will be poured. > > > > > I am sure there is going to be a request to change the plan, > > > we should say no. > > > > What change are you anticipating to say no to? There are two options, > > complete it as designed. Or, raze it and build to the new controls. > > > > > It doesn't take a lot of vision to understand that the > > > "structure" is of no value (beside scrap). > > > > To the contrary, the building as is, represents millions of dollars > > invested in clearance, foundations, superstructure, etc. It makes > > sense to use it if technically/financially feasable. > > > > Werner ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Get fast access to your favorite Yahoo! Groups. Make Yahoo! your home page http://us.click.yahoo.com/dpRU5A/wUILAA/yQLSAA/Y2tolB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/AsburyPark/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
