Jump to content

A complete Idiot


luggsy

Featured Posts

1 hour ago, howardang said:

Well spotted. Maybe 13 or the final part of 50 may be more appropriate if it is decided to take action against the boater?

 

Howard

Reading Byelaw 50 suggest that boaters are not allowed to operate locks at all, or, does having a licence 'grant authorisation' ?

Maybe we are all guilty of contravening the Byelaws ?

 

 

Interference with locks, bridges, vehicles, etc.
50. No person, unless authorised by the Board so to do, shall
operate or interfere with any lock
, lockgate, sluice, by-pass, dam,
weir, bridge or any other work connected with affecting or forming
part of any canal or with any locomotive, vehicle, vessel, crane,
jigger, hoist, capstan or other machinery or working appliance
upon any canal or except in case of emergency with any fire
fighting or life saving apparatus or any rope, tarpaulin, chain or
other equipment of the Board.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, ditchcrawler said:

If he had got it open and got his bows in how long do you think it would have taken for the levels to equalise so he could get out again and would it have lead to over topping further downstream?

 

With the force that is against those gates, the best he could do is open a crack and just let a tiny bit of water through before the force of the water closed them again.

 

Lets just say he did manage to open then even an inch, moving water has so much more force than people realize it would have slammed them shut. The V shape of the locks is take advantage of all pressure to push and seal the gates together.

 

Edited by Kudzucraft
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Kudzucraft said:

With the force that is against those gates, the best he could do is open a crack and just let a tiny bit of water through before the force of the water closed them again.

 

Lets just say he did manage to open then even an inch, moving water has so much more force than people realize it would have slammed them shut. The V shape of the locks is take advantage of all pressure to push and seal the gates together.

With the force that is against those gates, the best he could do is open a crack and just let a tiny bit of water through before the force of the water closed them again.

 

Lets just say he did manage to open then even an inch, moving water has so much more force than people realize it would have slammed them shut. The V shape of the locks is take advantage of all pressure to push and seal the gates together.

I know the practical aspect, it was more the hypothetical one,

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Mike Todd said:

I would not advise anyone on assuming that m'lud would see it that way - they are not known for being that informed about boating niceties, are they?

 

I too suspect a judge might notice the flood gates are structurally identical to lock gates and rule they in fact ARE lock gates and Rule 25 (A) still applies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Alan de Enfield said:

I very much doubt if he has 'broken the law' as Rule 25 (A) states ;

 

Operation of locks

25. No person shall:
(a) Open or close or attempt to open or close the gate of any lock
except by the means provided for that purpose or before the
water is level on both sides of the gate.

 

The gates he was trying to open were not lock gates.

 

The intent is obviously there, but, the law relates to 'LOCKS', it does not appear to refer to "flood-gates" (it would cover a flood-lock' but these are just a single pair of gates, similar to several others along the Trent).

 

A single set of gates at a flash lock would still be lock gates. I'm not sure that flood gates are sufficiently different for 25(a) not to apply.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, David Mack said:

 

A single set of gates at a flash lock would still be lock gates. I'm not sure that flood gates are sufficiently different for 25(a) not to apply.

 

 

 

 

I agree, I once read (can't find it now) that lock gates lock off one section of water from an adjoining section.

On canals all sections are pounds separated by gates. 

They may be pounds between locks miles apart, or lock pounds between gates 70 feet apart 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, zenataomm said:

I agree, I once read (can't find it now) that lock gates lock off one section of water from an adjoining section.

On canals all sections are pounds separated by gates. 

They may be pounds between locks miles apart, or lock pounds between gates 70 feet apart 

And if I remember correctly, there’s an 18mile stretch on the Shroppie that’s still a pound, 

and Bratch Locks are not a staircase because there’s a pound between them, even though the pounds are just a couple of feet. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Have I got this right? The guy was trying to open gates that were being held shut by water pressure from that section of river behind him, so in effect trying to go downhill? What was the difference in height between the side we can see and the other side? Not that it would make much difference. Even an inch of water over hundreds of yards equates to huge amounts of water pressure. There's no way a boat engine would pull the gates open against all that pressure even with longer ropes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, ditchcrawler said:

It goes to those two side pounds to the left of the canal as seen on the screen shot

 

 

1 minute ago, ditchcrawler said:

It goes to those two side pounds to the left of the canal as seen on the screen shot

 

Ok. 

See what your saying. 

But between lock gates there’s a few feet? Ain’t there? 

So unlike a staircase you don’t go from one chamber straight to the next but cross a pound of a few feet between. 

 

  • Happy 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, blackrose said:

Have I got this right? The guy was trying to open gates that were being held shut by water pressure from that section of river behind him, so in effect trying to go downhill? What was the difference in height between the side we can see and the other side? Not that it would make much difference. Even an inch of water over hundreds of yards equates to huge amounts of water pressure. There's no way a boat engine would pull the gates open against all that pressure even with longer ropes.

We’ll never know. I imagine he was trying to pull against more than a couple of inches. 

I wish whoever filmed it had shown more of the gates than the boat,

and a peak over the gates might have helped 

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, blackrose said:

Have I got this right? The guy was trying to open gates that were being held shut by water pressure from that section of river behind him, so in effect trying to go downhill? What was the difference in height between the side we can see and the other side? Not that it would make much difference. Even an inch of water over hundreds of yards equates to huge amounts of water pressure. There's no way a boat engine would pull the gates open against all that pressure even with longer ropes.

The height difference between either side of the gates is what  matters. The length of the pound does not affect the forces on the gate, although it will affect how long it takes for the levels yo equalise once the gates are open. 

  • Greenie 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Scholar Gypsy said:

The height difference between either side of the gates is what  matters. The length of the pound does not affect the forces on the gate, although it will affect how long it takes for the levels yo equalise once the gates are open. 

 

Doesn't an inch of water over 500 yards exert more pressure on the gates than an inch of water over 1 yard? 

 

Maybe not, but just seems counter intuitive.

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, blackrose said:

Have I got this right? The guy was trying to open gates that were being held shut by water pressure from that section of river behind him, so in effect trying to go downhill? What was the difference in height between the side we can see and the other side? Not that it would make much difference. Even an inch of water over hundreds of yards equates to huge amounts of water pressure. There's no way a boat engine would pull the gates open against all that pressure even with longer ropes.

The length of the pound is irrelevant. What determines the force on the gates is the submerged area  of the gates and the difference in water level above and below them.

 

MP.

 

Edited by MoominPapa
  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, blackrose said:

Have I got this right? The guy was trying to open gates that were being held shut by water pressure from that section of river behind him, so in effect trying to go downhill? What was the difference in height between the side we can see and the other side? Not that it would make much difference. Even an inch of water over hundreds of yards equates to huge amounts of water pressure. There's no way a boat engine would pull the gates open against all that pressure even with longer ropes.

The length of the pound not relevant.

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, blackrose said:

 

Doesn't an inch of water over 500 yards exert more pressure on the gates than an inch of water over 1 yard? 

 

Maybe not, but just seems counter intuitive.

As others have said, the answer to your Q is no. One way of demonstrating this, perhaps, is to imagine stop planks being put in at the next bridgehole upstream, with the water at the same level on both sides. This won't change the forces on the lock gate. If you pump out the water on the other side of the stop planks then that also doesn't change the forces on the lock gate. Therefore the forces on the lock gate are independent of the length of the pound.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Scholar Gypsy said:

As others have said, the answer to your Q is no. One way of demonstrating this, perhaps, is to imagine stop planks being put in at the next bridgehole upstream, with the water at the same level on both sides. This won't change the forces on the lock gate. If you pump out the water on the other side of the stop planks then that also doesn't change the forces on the lock gate. Therefore the forces on the lock gate are independent of the length of the pound.

Or join two different sized open vessels together with a pipe at the bottom of each. If the greater volume of liquid in the larger vessel exerted more pressure it would move along the pipe and increase the level in the smaller vessel. That doesn't happen. 

  • Greenie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, stegra said:

Or join two different sized open vessels together with a pipe at the bottom of each. If the greater volume of liquid in the larger vessel exerted more pressure it would move along the pipe and increase the level in the smaller vessel. That doesn't happen. 

 

But it does happen if the volume of water in either vessel is higher than the other.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.