NationStates Jolt Archive

As we all know bridges in the US are perhaps less than optimal. So, based on the fantastic results of the NSG "what is your IQ" threads, I am putting out a request for NSG bridge designs.


Or is it new orleans all over again?

It has to have a secret tunnel. And water cannons for spraying pedestrians. And kittens. Lots of kittens. :)

It has to have a secret tunnel. And water cannons for spraying pedestrians. And kittens. Lots of kittens. :)

The great piers on the tyne have secret tunnels. So I like where you are going with this.

Possibly a taco dispenser too.

Also it shouldn't fall down.

The great piers on the tyne have secret tunnels. So I like where you are going with this.

Possibly a taco dispenser too.

Also it shouldn't fall down.

Or maybe it should fall down and then get up again. People bunjee jump off bridges all the time. It's time we made a bridge that did the same. :)

It has to have a secret tunnel. And water cannons for spraying pedestrians. And kittens. Lots of kittens. :)

I was with you right up to the kittens part. Can we replace those with puppies?

If only I had a subscription to an image-hosting site, I'd post some genius MS-Paint renderings. :p I kinda like suspension bridges - let's go with that, I say. :)

I was with you right up to the kittens part. Can we replace those with puppies?

Kittens > Puppies. *nod*

And kittens. Lots of kittens. :)
Kittens with captions.

*nods*

I argued with my dad over this (and quite a few other things actually). He believes we are not as far ahead as most of us think we are. He has actually used the term stone age .. but I know he doesn't literally mean stone age.. but that we just don't put forth the effort or have the desire to make structures/items etc as good and long lasting as past people. But he doesn't take into account our culture, he totally blames American culture and claims that we are lazy, greedy assholes who think we are the 'kings of the world' (literal term there from him). He's always comparing Germany and China to us (the U.S).

But anyway it has made me think. Why DO we normally build such shitty structures/items .. like the buildings and roads, bridges, even our transportation .. cars .. etc .. ? Is it to save money or to make money? Why don't we build most things to last like we use to do?

If only I had a subscription to an image-hosting site, I'd post some genius MS-Paint renderings. :p I kinda like suspension bridges - let's go with that, I say. :)

There are free hosting sites, like photobucket. Or you could ask teh peoples over at CI.

Anyway, sling up yor designs.

But anyway it has made me think. Why DO we normally build such shitty structures/items .. like the buildings and roads, bridges, even our transportation .. cars .. etc .. ? Is it to save money or to make money? Why don't we build most things to last like we use to do?

It's complicated. But basically we don't build things because we need them.

What you do is attach the bridge to the ground at all parts then build it out like a giant hill. - so it is like a hill wall mountain.

what you do for water is make it a dam. that can be used for hydroelectric generation. but let fish pass through. or add a mechanism that detects and captures them and diverts them to a fish pond .... for food sources or rehabilitation programs monitoring etc..

What you do for trains have a tunnel for them to go through. Same with boats

Then you can put rooms and stuff inside too that monitor stress yeild and can be used for other purposes like tourism, and utilities stuff. Depending on how large. the key is making it into a hill like wall. that touches the ground in solid places.
p.s. you could also put AA systems and stuff in it.


for bridges high up you use the sides for structural transferance as well as upper and lower supports you also run poles into the actual ground and remove the natural base and make an "artifical " base so that ground erosion won't reduce structural design. you also put parachutes ontop of it and fill the lower part with gases lighter than air like helium. (you could fill the part above it with gases lighter than air too..) and have it so that if the bridge breaks it is made of a magenetized substance and use giant magnets to kick in to hold it in place. so that if the bridge registers a break the giant electromagnet can kick in to make up for the lost support.

The most important thing about a bridge is that it should be cheap. Without that, some smartass is going to say "Hey, what's wrong with the old bridge?"

The next most important thing is aesthetic values. So the design, if not the actual bridge, has to be groundbreaking and evoke something of local myth, like oh ... I dunno ... flying ducks ? Kittens perhaps.

It is also important that it uses a lot of effort and materials to build. The Brooklyn bridge is an excellent example -- simple in concept, but by the time it's built, dozens of people have died and the cost has multiplied several times.

The damn thing shouldn't hang around for ever. Building the ultimate bridge which lasts forever and is easily upgraded to carry more traffic is an insult to future generations. They want to build their own bridge, y'know?

At least one end of the bridge should be on land sacred to the aboriginal people of the area. If possible, both ends, and a traditional prohibition should exist against swimming or boating directly from the land at one end of the bridge to that at the other end of the bridge.

This last one might have some people puzzled. I'll clue you in: tunnels. Bridges are dreadfully old-fashioned. Cheap, dangerous and outright ugly things they are. Tunnels are far more expensive, far less pleasant to use, and easier to name. If one should happen to collapse, you just put a barricade up at either end, and turn on the "tunnel under repair" sign.

There are free hosting sites, like photobucket. Or you could ask teh peoples over at CI.

Anyway, sling up yor designs.

digital hosting city is REALLLY good you can get 1 year of hosting for $10 really good deal as far as most hosts... I've been with them almost a year now - havn't had any issues yet, very relaible - free scripts etc.. domains can be fairly inexpensive as well.

imageshack.us is probably the best image hosting site I"ve come across yet.

A disk...supported by a turtle. Nay! An elephant.

Kittens with captions.

*nods*
*seconds*

http://i96.photobucket.com/albums/l192/whereyouthinkyougoing/1166737792-1165745652296171.jpg


Also, I vote that the bridge be built not over a river or valley but on flat land. And it shouldn't have pylons - way too dangerous when they collapse. The tarmac part of the bridge should be level with the ground. I've created a model (http://www.honan.net/images/long-view.jpg) in photoshop. That way, nothing can collapse and the cars can't tumble down dozens of feet into an evil ravine.

Also, I vote that the bridge be built not over a river or valley but on flat land. And it shouldn't have pylons - way too dangerous when they collapse. The tarmac part of the bridge should be level with the ground. I've created a model (http://www.honan.net/images/long-view.jpg) in photoshop. That way, nothing can collapse and the cars can't tumble down dozens of feet into an evil ravine.

Yeah, that's probably about as risk-free as they get. :p

Bridges are for pussies!!!

And, it seems, they might collapse! So, here's a great thought: What if we built a bridge without that dangerous middle section! Nothing to collapse!

So, you build just the ramp on each end, and then install the catapults from the recently decommissioned aircraft carrier JFK. Cars that wish to pass over this river must then be fitted with a tailhook (to be supplied only by whichever defence contractor gives Dick Cheney the best bl*wjob), and away you go!

Consider all the bonuses!

Avoids expensive complete bridge construction - saves tax dollars.
Recycles heavy equipment - can be called a "green" project.
Siphons funds to the military - what spending bill can be passed without that?

It's perfect!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bridge_Builder

Or possibly take heed of how Manitoba successfully dealt with snake migration -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narcisse_Snake_Pits

There's an awesome bridge in my area. It's got giant spools on it with copper frogs sitting on top of them. The spools are there because it's a mill town (American Thread was based there) and the frogs because of this legendary 'Battle of the Frogs' when a bunch of colonists thought the Indians were attacking, but killed a bunch of mating bullfrogs instead.

http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y79/Goomg/untitled-1.jpg

*image*

Hey, I didn't know you had a kid ? What's he, four already ? :p

http://www.emory.edu/OXFORD/pierceprogram/Derry/ropebridge.jpg

Hey, I didn't know you had a kid ? What's he, four already ? :p

He's given teh best design so far.

IMAGE

Is that Carrick-A-Rede rope bridge?

Yeah, that's probably about as risk-free as they get. :p

well, if it can still be considered a bridge...

If only I had a subscription to an image-hosting site, I'd post some genius MS-Paint renderings. :p I kinda like suspension bridges - let's go with that, I say. :)

Cable Stayed Bridges are the better way to go.

Let's design a bridge.

Sometimes, the world is black.
And tears run from your eyes.
And maybe we'll all get really sick.
And maybe we'll all die.
So...

Let's build a snowman!
We can make him our best friend.
We can name him Tom or we can name him George!
We can make him tall, or we can make him not so tall.
Snowman!

He'll have a happy face, a happy smile, a happy point of view.
If you build me a snowman, then I'll build one for you.

So, let's build a snowman!
We can make him our best friend.
We can name him Bob or we can name him Beowulf!
We can make him tall, or we can make him not so tall.
Snowman!

Is that Carrick-A-Rede rope bridge?

'Tis. Although his URL has it in the wrong county.

'Tis. Although his URL has it in the wrong county.

Yup the URL was what was throwing me

Hey, I didn't know you had a kid ? What's he, four already ? :p
Ian will be 5 in December. :)
He's given teh best design so far.

He says "Indeed."

[img=http://img399.imageshack.us/img399/5349/broforslagxo7.th.jpg] (http://img399.imageshack.us/my.php?image=broforslagxo7.jpg)

The catapult fires petrol to the heli to keep it up 24/7. How hard can it be?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bridge_Builder

Or possibly take heed of how Manitoba successfully dealt with snake migration -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narcisse_Snake_Pits
Haha, I loved that game. Especially level 15.

Haha, I loved that game. Especially level 15.

Dammit, I'm addicted now!

) He believes we are not as far ahead as most of us think we are. He has actually used the term stone age .. but I know he doesn't literally mean stone age.. but that we just don't put forth the effort or have the desire to make structures/items etc as good and long lasting as past people.

But anyway it has made me think. Why DO we normally build such shitty structures/items .. like the buildings and roads, bridges, even our transportation .. cars .. etc .. ? Is it to save money or to make money? Why don't we build most things to last like we use to do?

WHAT?! You're fucking with us, correct? Engineers design bridges to handle what is known in the engineering world as the "100 year storm;" AKA the weather disaster of the century. Anything that has to do with infrastructure or likewise is designed (AND HAS BEEN DESIGNED) to weather into the great beyond, because no engineer that I know wants his stamp on a bridge that will fail 10 years down the road. No fucking way.

Tell those assholes in your state or city assembly or those damn Caltrans or whatever your metropolitan transit authority is to get off of their ass and fund our infrastructure and make sure we go out and inspect it and actually do something.

Tell those assholes in your state or city assembly or those damn Caltrans or whatever your metropolitan transit authority is to get off of their ass and fund our infrastructure and make sure we go out and inspect it and actually do something.

Huzzah!

As we all know bridges in the US are perhaps less than optimal. So, based on the fantastic results of the NSG "what is your IQ" threads, I am putting out a request for NSG bridge designs.


Or is it new orleans all over again?

One bridge collapses so they must all be engineering failures. :rolleyes:

Is that Carrick-A-Rede rope bridge?

I've'nt the slightest...I just ripped it off Yahoo! Images...

Can you get some geological engineers to take a look at local soil and determine its composition? We will need to know how we will need to connect the bridge to the Earth, as it is quite central to its design. We'll also need traffic flow estimates, and a detailed road map of the area. Knowing things such as the budget we are working with and the desired safety factor would be a bonus too.

Can you get some geological engineers to take a look at local soil and determine its composition? We will need to know how we will need to connect the bridge to the Earth, as it is quite central to its design. We'll also need traffic flow estimates, and a detailed road map of the area. Knowing things such as the budget we are working with and the desired safety factor would be a bonus too.

We'll get the city to get a drill to find out the composition, compaction, type, and moisture percentage of the soil. We may or may not need a traffic engineer for the project. We'll need a couple of licensed civil engineers, along with a licensed mechanical engineer, plans/specs drafters, and vendors for all of our products, including:

-AC Paving
-AC Dike
-Shoring
-Erosion Control
-Landscaping
-Concrete
-Aggregate
-Asphalt
-Signage
-Traffic Signs/Lights
-Asphalt Coating
-Drainage
-etc.

We may also need to hire a construction management firm, in case the owner of the project does not want to deal directly with the general contractor. Tip of the iceberg.

We'll get the city to get a drill to find out the composition, compaction, type, and moisture percentage of the soil. We may or may not need a traffic engineer for the project. We'll need a couple of licensed civil engineers, along with a licensed mechanical engineer, plans/specs drafters, and vendors for all of our products, including:

-AC Paving
-AC Dike
-Shoring
-Erosion Control
-Landscaping
-Concrete
-Aggregate
-Asphalt
-Signage
-Traffic Signs/Lights
-Asphalt Coating
-Drainage
-etc.

We may also need to hire a construction management firm, in case the owner of the project does not want to deal directly with the general contractor. Tip of the iceberg.If you're building it in the city of Chicago, then you need to triple your budget to line the pockets of the teamsters and to pay for the hired trucks program where truck drivers collect $20 an hour to sleep an entire 8 hour shift.

[img=http://img399.imageshack.us/img399/5349/broforslagxo7.th.jpg] (http://img399.imageshack.us/my.php?image=broforslagxo7.jpg)

The catapult fires petrol to the heli to keep it up 24/7. How hard can it be?
Awesome. :p
While it obviously can't surpass the genius of my own proposal (and seriously, what could?) this comes in at a deserved second place on the Scale of Awesomity.

Tip of the iceberg.Basically.

If you're building it in the city of Chicago, then you need to triple your budget to line the pockets of the teamsters and to pay for the hired trucks program where truck drivers collect $20 an hour to sleep an entire 8 hour shift.

I.H.A.T.E.U.N.I.O.N.S.

The fact that these morons that work under the union bosses like James Hoffa despise rich CEOs but are willing to pay outrageous fees to even richer Union Leaders just makes me ill. The CEO cares if you work or not; if you don't, you're fired. The Union doesn't care; if you don't work, the Union will be negotiating terms with the CEO to give the Union employees a raise while increasing their dues. It's ridiculous.

We'll also need *deep breath*:

Accountants, Schedulers, Project Management, Subcontractors, Approval from the city, Approval from the city's traffic authority, Approval from the owner of the job, Importing and Exporting (truckers), Dirt, Gravel, Estimators, a $2mil insurance policy with coverage up to $5mil (we're expecting around one to two deaths on this project, depending on the complexity), and lawyers, because after we're done, the city, owner, and traffic authority will all want to have at us because we either didn't:

a) finish the job on time, or
b ) request all the material/equipment/workers we needed in our bid

I.H.A.T.E.U.N.I.O.N.S.

The fact that these morons that work under the union bosses like James Hoffa despise rich CEOs but are willing to pay outrageous fees to even richer Union Leaders just makes me ill. The CEO cares if you work or not; if you don't, you're fired. The Union doesn't care; if you don't work, the Union will be negotiating terms with the CEO to give the Union employees a raise while increasing their dues. It's ridiculous.I.L.O.V.E.U.N.I.O.N.S.

We are totally getting fucked by the people we are subcontracted under. While most of the people initially hated getting reduced hours (we went from 12 to 10 per day), some people are starting to like it as they have grown to hate work that much since Tuesday. If we weren't union we would be worse off than we already are as we wouldn't be free to quit at will.

Also, I know you should be prepared for a death on site, but accepting one death is just unacceptable. We are rebuilding a froth treatment plant for one of the local oil sands, and one LTI is considered unacceptable.

I guess you've never heard of something called an "island"?

...

?

Edit: You're posting 3 minutes in the future. Silly Ruffy.

Awesome. :p
While it obviously can't surpass the genius of my own proposal (and seriously, what could?) this comes in at a deserved second place on the Scale of Awesomity.

I guess you've never heard of something called an "island"?

I think that I should point out that almost no one on this board is qualified to design a bridge or any other complex structure. I'm an exception to this but I've never done a large span bridge before and I'd honestly prefer piers.

...

?

Edit: You're posting 3 minutes in the future. Silly Ruffy.

Your design is a road. A ROAD CANNOT GO TO AN ISLAND!

.. hehehe, I know. I like borking threads!

Your design is a road. A ROAD CANNOT GO TO AN ISLAND!

.. hehehe, I know. I like borking threads!

Tunnel the road to the island

Your design is a road. A ROAD CANNOT GO TO AN ISLAND!

.. hehehe, I know. I like borking threads!

My design is clearly a Safety Bridge™. And: oh yeah? (http://www.anse-du-brick.com/images/Zoom/Mont%20St%20Michel.JPG)

I think that I should point out that almost no one on this board is qualified to design a bridge or any other complex structure. I'm an exception to this but I've never done a large span bridge before and I'd honestly prefer piers.

I have extensive education in the [mumble]blahblah[/cough] field, and you have just insulted my design, good sir!

Tunnel the road to the island

They scare me.

So ships can pass by and it should hook up to all sea bordering nations.

I think that I should point out that almost no one on this board is qualified to design a bridge or any other complex structure. I'm an exception to this but I've never done a large span bridge before and I'd honestly prefer piers.

We don't need to. There's your local transportation authority - they'll draft out plans for a bridge then sell the project to the highest bidder. Simple as that.

My design is clearly a Safety Bridge™. And: oh yeah? (http://www.anse-du-brick.com/images/Zoom/Mont%20St%20Michel.JPG)

Your "safety bridge" is ruining nature! And that's not a road, it's a dragon!

I have extensive education in the [mumble]blahblah[/cough] field, and you have just insulted my design, good sir!

I'm studying Civil Engineering and have finished my first year. More of my education, however, has come from the paid intership I've had with a construction/engineering company.

Hopefully when I get out of college, I can take my PE test only a couple of years afterwards.

I'm studying Civil Engineering and have finished my first year. More of my education, however, has come from the paid intership I've had with a construction/engineering company.

Hopefully when I get out of college, I can take my PE test only a couple of years afterwards.

Alright, Anthony Soprano.

I'm studying Civil Engineering and have finished my first year. More of my education, however, has come from the paid intership I've had with a construction/engineering company.

Hopefully when I get out of college, I can take my PE test only a couple of years afterwards.I'm have finished my first year Engineering too. I learned allot from working in teh ebil oil sands that I never would have in school (like the metric system).

The bridge should be made from taffy and have lots of cubbyholes under it for trolls to live in.

I think that I should point out that almost no one on this board is qualified to design a bridge or any other complex structure. I'm an exception to this but I've never done a large span bridge before and I'd honestly prefer piers.

Bah. I've built a log bridge over a 15-foot span. So, there. :) Build sides and a roof, and you have an old-style covered bridge like you see back east sometimes. Same principle. :p

Bah. I've built a log bridge over a 15-foot span. So, there. :) Build sides and a roof, and you have an old-style covered bridge like you see back east sometimes. Same principle. :p

Yeah, why did they put roofs on those bridges? I mean, its not like the weather stopped when you left the bridge deck.

Yeah, why did they put roofs on those bridges? I mean, its not like the weather stopped when you left the bridge deck.

totally unqualified interjection of doom>>>>

probably because it looked nice. also possibly extra bracing. oh, and if they're going to build something anyway, people will appreciate a shelter. if the traffic's not heavy there, one Could conceivably stop until the rain or whatever went away. also no snow on the bridge = one less thing to go wrong while crossing it, depending how it were designed the roof and sides could protect from strong wind, so as long as the bridge its self can stand up to it, anything crossing wouldn't have That as an issue.


and so on.

Just to reduce wear of the bridge due to weather effects - coldness of ice, heat of sunshine, rain. Oh, and imagine cleaning snow from a bridge.

Just to reduce wear of the bridge due to weather effects - coldness of ice, heat of sunshine, rain. Oh, and imagine cleaning snow from a bridge.

...salt?

I argued with my dad over this (and quite a few other things actually). He believes we are not as far ahead as most of us think we are. He has actually used the term stone age .. but I know he doesn't literally mean stone age.. but that we just don't put forth the effort or have the desire to make structures/items etc as good and long lasting as past people. But he doesn't take into account our culture, he totally blames American culture and claims that we are lazy, greedy assholes who think we are the 'kings of the world' (literal term there from him). He's always comparing Germany and China to us (the U.S).

But anyway it has made me think. Why DO we normally build such shitty structures/items .. like the buildings and roads, bridges, even our transportation .. cars .. etc .. ? Is it to save money or to make money? Why don't we build most things to last like we use to do?

Government projects are handed to the lowest bidder.
Think about that for a moment.

That said, bridge collapses are not solely a US phenomenon; I wish they didn't happen at all, but there you go.

Look at a structure such as the Brooklyn Bridge. http://www.markmyshots.com/images/brooklyn_bridge.jpgThat sucker was built looking forward -- made many times stronger than anyone ever thought it would need to be. And yet it's stood there since 1883, stands up to car and truck traffic, and is not in danger of crumbling.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/08/04/AR2007080400719.html

It seems the more we advance, the less able or less willing we are to create durable structures. For heaven's sake, there are Roman aqueducts that still work perfectly well, but 90 year old water mains that explode and kill people.

Look at a structure such as the Brooklyn Bridge. http://www.markmyshots.com/images/brooklyn_bridge.jpgThat sucker was built looking forward -- made many times stronger than anyone ever thought it would need to be. And yet it's stood there since 1883, stands up to car and truck traffic, and is not in danger of crumbling.


Not so much. Roebling took a huge gamble when he designed the brooklyn side foundations. And don't forget all teh extensive rehab the bridge has had over the years.

Katganistan is right (not surprising) -- when yoiu build a bridge's supports, you WANT a lot of redundancy.

Not so much. Roebling took a huge gamble when he designed the brooklyn side foundations. And don't forget all teh extensive rehab the bridge has had over the years.

I don't think I ever said "plunk it down and never think about it again." Sure, it's been resurfaced, had a rail line added and later removed. And sure, there's been regular rehabbing. And if you read the article, what parts of the bridge are strongest? The original bits Roebling built (towers, cables, and deck). What parts are in the worst condition? The ramps added in the 1950s and 1960s.

I don't think I ever said "plunk it down and never think about it again." Surem it's been resurfaced, had a rail line added and later removed. And sure, there's been regular rehabbing. And if you read the article, what parts of the bridge are strongest? The original bits Roebling built (towers, cables, and deck). What parts are in the worst condition? The ramps added in the 1950s and 1960s.

Yes, but when roebling built it, he took a huge gamble on the brooklyn sides foundation. As it happens it turns out he was right about stuff, but no one knew that at the time.

The idea that it is such a good structure because a lot of forethought and planning went into making it so just isn't right. It could just as easily have turned out to be like the manhattan bridge.

...which was built somewhat later, is entirely metal in a salt environment vs. largely stone in a salt environment.... and frankly which is severely overburdened and not built with the redundancies the Brooklyn Bridge was built with. (For instance, Roebling designed the cables to hold six times more weight than they actually have to -- and even when the company making the cables cheated him and substituted lighter cable -- it was still five times stronger than it had to be.)

Hell, half the time one of the sides of the rails (usually, it seems, the bay side) is shut down for rehab -- I don't suppose that running the trains on one side of the bridge only is particularly good for spreading out the wear and tear.

You're not suggesting, I hope, that the difference in the bridges' ability to weather the environment when both are within sight of each other is merely *chance* as opposed to construction of the structures?

(and actually, the Brooklyn side is on bedrock, from what I understand -- it's the Manhattan side that was placed on sand.)

You're not suggesting, I hope, that the difference in the bridges' ability to weather the environment when both are within sight of each other is merely *chance* as opposed to construction of the structures?

That it turned out that way is chance. The idea that roebling knew what he was doing is a flawed assumption. He was a reckless gambler that got lucky.

That it turned out that way is chance. The idea that roebling knew what he was doing is a flawed assumption. He was a reckless gambler that got lucky.

Well, apparently, the historians and engineers who have written many, MANY documents about its construction disagree with you.

Well, apparently, the historians and engineers who have written many, MANY documents about its construction disagree with you.

Historians don't know jack shit about engineering. The brooklyn side foundation was a completely untested and untried approach. For all Roebling knew, it would collapse. That's gambling. (Remember he did this almost sixty years before Terzaghi invented soil mechanics. It just didn't exist back then, so he was just guessing about the foundation system. As it turned out he guessed right, but he didn't know that for sure.)

I think you'll find the bulk of bona fide geotechnical engineers who actually know the history of the bridge agree with me.

If only I had a subscription to an image-hosting site, I'd post some genius MS-Paint renderings. :p I kinda like suspension bridges - let's go with that, I say. :)

Use Imageshack. It needs no subscription.

Historians don't know jack shit about engineering.
You don't have to know shit about engineering to write history.


I think you'll find the bulk of bona fide geotechnical engineers who actually know the history of the bridge agree with me.
Geotechnical engineers don't "know shit about" history, as you used it.

http://www.nycsubway.org/articles/rapid_transit_chamber_commerce_04.html
http://www.uh.edu/engines/epi1488.htm
http://www.nycroads.com/crossings/brooklyn/
http://www.inventionfactory.com/history/RHAbridg/
http://brooklyn.about.com/cs/seventhave/a/brooklynbridge.htm
http://wirednewyork.com/bridges/brooklyn_bridge/
http://www.me.utexas.edu/~me179/topics/lessons/case1articles/case1article4.html
http://www.newyorkarchitecture.info/Building/435/Brooklyn_Bridge.php

Yup. Obviously was a gambler who left it to chance -- given that two of his bridges are still in use today. And yes, a second source confirming the Brooklyn Foundation is on bedrock, the Manhattan on sand (which is why the Brooklyn Tower is ~44 feet tall while the Manhattan is ~78 feet tall).

A disk...supported by a turtle. Nay! An elephant.

How about five elephants ON the turtle holding the disc....

Oh, wait, who needs five elephants? Let's get rid of The Fifth Elephant....


Ok, FOUR Elephants standing on the back of a turtle, holding a disc upon their backs....

I built a bridge out of pennies last night.........it only took like $3 in pennies and it was really strong, I could push on it and it didn't break, only if I didn't put pressure on it in the right angle it would........but I didn't use any glue or anything........so I was proud.

Also, in junior high I built one out of toothpicks and marshmallows........can we do that?

http://www.nycsubway.org/articles/rapid_transit_chamber_commerce_04.html
http://www.uh.edu/engines/epi1488.htm
http://www.nycroads.com/crossings/brooklyn/
http://www.inventionfactory.com/history/RHAbridg/
http://brooklyn.about.com/cs/seventhave/a/brooklynbridge.htm
http://wirednewyork.com/bridges/brooklyn_bridge/
http://www.me.utexas.edu/~me179/topics/lessons/case1articles/case1article4.html
http://www.newyorkarchitecture.info/Building/435/Brooklyn_Bridge.php

Yup. Obviously was a gambler who left it to chance -- given that two of his bridges are still in use today. And yes, a second source confirming the Brooklyn Foundation is on bedrock, the Manhattan on sand (which is why the Brooklyn Tower is ~44 feet tall while the Manhattan is ~78 feet tall).

The brooklyn foundation is on sand. He had no idea whether or not it would work.