Australia

4070 readers

89 users here now

A place to discuss Australia and important Australian issues.

Before you post:

If you're posting anything related to:

The Environment, post it to Aussie Environment
Politics, post it to Australian Politics
World News/Events, post it to World News
A question to Australians (from outside) post it to Ask an Australian

If you're posting Australian News (not opinion or discussion pieces) post it to Australian News

Rules

This community is run under the rules of aussie.zone. In addition to those rules:

When posting news articles use the source headline and place your commentary in a separate comment

Banner Photo

Congratulations to @Tau@aussie.zone who had the most upvoted submission to our banner photo competition

Recommended and Related Communities

Be sure to check out and subscribe to our related communities on aussie.zone:

Plus other communities for sport and major cities.

https://aussie.zone/communities

Moderation

Since Kbin doesn't show Lemmy Moderators, I'll list them here. Also note that Kbin does not distinguish moderator comments.

Additionally, we have our instance admins: @lodion@aussie.zone and @Nath@aussie.zone

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

lodion@aussie.zone

Fluid@aussie.zone

bestusername@aussie.zone

eatham@aussie.zone

Nath@aussie.zone

Why wooden bridges still have a place despite upkeep challenges (www.abc.net.au)

submitted 4 days ago by Tau@aussie.zone to c/australia@aussie.zone

5 comments fedilink hide all child comments

From quaint beginnings as log crossings to sophisticated structures of modern transportation, timber bridges are interwoven in Australia's history.

And despite a number of government-owned timber bridges in Australia being in disrepair in the past decade, an engineer says there is still a place for clever uses of wood.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] TheCriticalMember@aussie.zone 2 points 4 days ago (3 children)

Trouble is, wood has a much shorter design life and needs a lot more maintenance than concrete. Concrete bridges have a design life of 100 years, while timber will likely need significant refurbishment within 20-40, not to mention constant inspections every year with testboring at 2 year intervals (per AustRoads) and they're often more expensive to build nowadays with the price of timber.

So yeah, they can look cool, but there are far better things to spend our money on.

[–] TimePencil@infosec.exchange 1 points 4 days ago (2 children)

@TheCriticalMember Did you read the article?
Where did you obtain the information regarding the lifespan of a wooden bridge?

To quote the article:
Built for a century

Sunshine Coast Council structures and asset management engineer Simon Prytherick says 17 of the region's existing 138 vehicle bridges are constructed from timber.

"It's a material that, with proper care and maintenance, can last up to 100 years," he says.

"Timber is a fantastic choice for bridge construction, due to its sustainability."

"It can be recycled and reused, has a low carbon footprint, and even stores carbon, making it an environmentally friendly option."

Mr Prytherick says the council accounted for the challenges of termites, rotting and corrosion around bolts and fittings, and had preventative measures for each.

He says council undertakes annual inspections and maintenance, with more detailed cross-sectional inspections every five years.

[–] TheCriticalMember@aussie.zone 4 points 4 days ago (1 children)

IPWEA (Institute of Public Works Engineering Australia) Bridge Guide. I'm a bridge engineer. That "proper care and maintenance" line is doing a lot of heavy lifting. Sure, you can make timber last that long, but it's maintenance-intensive.

[–] TimePencil@infosec.exchange 3 points 3 days ago

@TheCriticalMember
Ah! Cool!
Thanks for clarifying.

When that article was being written and edited, I'll bet there was a moment someone said, "You can't remove that line; that's a load-bearing phrase."