Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

"Strong focus on aesthetics" contributed to collapse of Norway timber bridge

dezeen.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 140 posts

Re: "Strong focus on aesthetics" contributed to collapse of Norway timber bridge

#41

Post by speedgoose »

hellofellows wrote: post #31
rdtsc wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Plenty of poorly designed steel bridges from the 19th century have collapsed as well That's true. But I only meant that particular bridge, which did last for 100+ years. So, when the architects and the engineers go to the archives to relearn a few things, they can focus on the ones which haven't collapsed.

+ why even remove the steel bridge in the first place?

You have more pictures on the Norwegian Wikipedia page: https://no.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tretten_bru#/media/Fil%3ATre...

The old one wasn’t wide while the new one had two lanes and a normal sized sidewalk.

Re: "Strong focus on aesthetics" contributed to collapse of Norway timber bridge

#42

Post by 3D30497420 »

mperham wrote: post #10

The key line IMO: Tretten Bridge was designed while building regulations in Norway were in transition from a national system to European codes. Provisions for this transitional period enabled the project to follow the older national standards, which unlike the Eurocodes did not account for block shear failure.

Kind of. I should have thought the engineers involved would have been good enough to design a bridge that would have lasted more than a decade, even if the regulations weren't as rigorous.

Re: "Strong focus on aesthetics" contributed to collapse of Norway timber bridge

#43

Post by akira2501 »

_hbro wrote: post #27

The idea that a "strong focus on aesthetics" contributed to the failure of a bridge doesn't make any logical sense. Employing a strong focus on aesthetics doesn't preclude also having the necessary focus on stability and safety. Bridges fail because they were not designed or engineered properly.

> Employing a strong focus on aesthetics doesn't preclude also having the necessary focus on stability and safety

No, you just have to pay a lot more for it, and civil projects don't typically allow for endlessly ballooning budgets.

Re: "Strong focus on aesthetics" contributed to collapse of Norway timber bridge

#44

Post by im3w1l »

rdtsc wrote: post #14

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tretten_Bridge The ironic part is "The bridge replaced a steel truss bridge built in 1895 at the same location". Engineers in 1895 knew how to use steel trusses and built a bridge that lasted 100+ years, and in 2012 they decided to use glued wooden beams and it fell apart in 10 years. Well perhaps Plan Arkitekter and Norconsult can take a trip to the archives and see what the engineers i…

Well to paraphrase a common saying, it's easy to build a bridge that stands, but it's difficult to make sure that is so optimized that it's on the verge of failing but still somehow stands.

Re: "Strong focus on aesthetics" contributed to collapse of Norway timber bridge

#45

Post by blackbear_ »

3D30497420 wrote: post #42
mperham wrote: post #10

The key line IMO: Tretten Bridge was designed while building regulations in Norway were in transition from a national system to European codes. Provisions for this transitional period enabled the project to follow the older national standards, which unlike the Eurocodes did not account for block shear failure.

Kind of. I should have thought the engineers involved would have been good enough to design a bridge that would have lasted more than a decade, even if the regulations weren't as rigorous.

Somehow I feel like it's not the engineers who needed the regulations...

Re: "Strong focus on aesthetics" contributed to collapse of Norway timber bridge

#46

Post by VelesDude »

im3w1l wrote: post #44
rdtsc wrote: post #14

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tretten_Bridge The ironic part is "The bridge replaced a steel truss bridge built in 1895 at the same location". Engineers in 1895 knew how to use steel trusses and built a bridge that lasted 100+ years, and in 2012 they decided to use glued wooden beams and it fell apart in 10 years. Well perhaps Plan Arkitekter and Norconsult can take a trip to the archives and see what the engineers i…

Well to paraphrase a common saying, it's easy to build a bridge that stands, but it's difficult to make sure that is so optimized that it's on the verge of failing but still somehow stands.

A good engineer can make a bridge that stands 1,000 years. A great one makes one that can stand 100 years.

Re: "Strong focus on aesthetics" contributed to collapse of Norway timber bridge

#47

Post by Quekid5 »

3D30497420 wrote: post #42
mperham wrote: post #10

The key line IMO: Tretten Bridge was designed while building regulations in Norway were in transition from a national system to European codes. Provisions for this transitional period enabled the project to follow the older national standards, which unlike the Eurocodes did not account for block shear failure.

Kind of. I should have thought the engineers involved would have been good enough to design a bridge that would have lasted more than a decade, even if the regulations weren't as rigorous.

One would hope... but corporate structures can apply a LOT of pressure which can end up impairing judgment or resistance to decisions by higher-level executives. It might or might not be the issue here, but it's definitely been seen in past disasters.

(It's similar to the more readily/well understood "peer pressure", but even more insidious.)

Re: "Strong focus on aesthetics" contributed to collapse of Norway timber bridge

#48

Post by HPsquared »

jszymborski wrote: post #19

Tretten Bridge, not to be confused with (Lower) Trenton Bridge, the most passive aggressive bridge in the world. https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/4f/20...

Snappy, inspiring... I like it

Re: "Strong focus on aesthetics" contributed to collapse of Norway timber bridge

#49

Post by HPsquared »

hellofellows wrote: post #36
jszymborski wrote: post #19

Tretten Bridge, not to be confused with (Lower) Trenton Bridge, the most passive aggressive bridge in the world. https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/4f/20...

damn... world doesn't buys but takes..by force?

Could also be "Trenton active, the world passive"

Re: "Strong focus on aesthetics" contributed to collapse of Norway timber bridge

#50

Post by btbuildem »

That's so strange! Looking through the photos on the page, there's one showing the bridge still intact.

It's almost as if someone accidentally flipped the materials -- the members that work in compression are were made of metal, the members under tension, out of lumber. That's the opposite of what each material is naturally strong at.

Post reply on HN