Lock gate damage Worcester

[Man 'o Kent]

Poor 'ol Isaac must be positively spinning in 'is grave getting blamed for all this "n" stuff!

Thought we'd left them there continentals to their Napoleonic metrical machinations.

Bring back good 'ol pounds, feet, furlongs, £sd and 12 times tables, they'll be changing the distance between wickets to 20 metres next!

Wot's a b****y "n" worth in proper money anyways?

[ditchcrawler]

1 minute ago, Man 'o Kent said:

Poor 'ol Isaac must be positively spinning in 'is grave getting blamed for all this "n" stuff!

Thought we'd left them there continentals to their Napoleonic metrical machinations.

Bring back good 'ol pounds, feet, furlongs, £sd and 12 times tables, they'll be changing the distance between wickets to 20 metres next!

Wot's a b****y "n" worth in proper money anyways?

They still cover a few furlongs 

[BWM]

Where the ironwork has entered the oak it has caused decay and i'd hazard a guess that someone has opened the paddles and left the gate to slam shut, causing the beam to fail at the weak point. 

[magnetman]

The "ironwork", which is actually welded steel, seems to be a recent design which is incompatible with a wooden balance beam. To introduce that sort of weakness just at the point of maximum stress is bad design. 

 

I'm sure the previous lock gate and beam arrangement would not have had that lot bolted from the top with the bolts going all the way through the wood vertically. 

 

Asking for trouble really. 

 

 

Edited April 1, 2020 by magnetman

[Slim]

2 hours ago, cuthound said:

 

One of my party tricks when I was an eight stone teenager was to rip a telephone directory in half (when telephone directories were 2 or three  inches thick, not the thin pamphlets of today).

 

It always impressed the girls and drove the boys mad when they couldnt do it.

 

The trick was to break the spine and rip from spine to open pages. Most people try to rip from open pages towards the spine.

In my early 20s I showed a young 'slight' girl at work how to do that. The word got around and the big chief, a dragon of a woman, got to hear. She was impressed. When I told her how it was done she actually smiled. It was the first time I ever sw her smile. 

 

[Detling]

30 minutes ago, Man 'o Kent said:

Poor 'ol Isaac must be positively spinning in 'is grave getting blamed for all this "n" stuff!

Thought we'd left them there continentals to their Napoleonic metrical machinations.

Bring back good 'ol pounds, feet, furlongs, £sd and 12 times tables, they'll be changing the distance between wickets to 20 metres next!

Wot's a b****y "n" worth in proper money anyways?

My wife who was a teacher for 40 years until retirement in 2012 has never taught feet and inches but always taught metric since 1973. She has assisted her pupils trying to understand this old fashioned imperial stuff, which has gone the way of the empire, working as I did for an american company they started using metric in the 1990's and we kept being told how good it was because bolts were all the same thread and it was easy to scale up and down.

 

[max's son]

Latest report Golf buggy causes damage

 

https://www.worcesternews.co.uk/news/18352318.stolen-buggies-golf-club-may-wrecked-canal-lock/

 

surprised it got to the Commandery after and didn't end up in the canal

[Mike Todd]

I'm not at all sure that CaRT have the resources to do internal tests of all assets, including lock gates and balance beams. As I showed in an earlier photo, there was no obvious imminent failure when we passed through early March and if, as I suspect, CaRT asset monitors (and, yes, they do actually monitor all their assets, presumably on a risk based schedule) they can only afford a quick visual check then there would have been no requirement to schedule maintenance, which in this case would have to be an expensive balance beam replacement. To go further would require all of the relevant staff to be equipped with suitable portable NDT devices, assuming they exist for internal decay, and for the time to make the measurements and interpret them. Most NDT testing does require a level of interpretive skill to translate the readings into a failure risk. Of course, we all rail at CaRT whenever there is a failure to our beloved network but, you know folks, stuff happens and you just have to get on with it. Working out which is best - scheduled routine replacement (like they used to do with street lights) or failure replacement is a non-trivial calculation and we all expect CaRT to make the 'best' use of their limited resources. I am guessing, but I would readily expect that if we spotted CaRT replacing an apparently healthy balance beam then there would be call outs on all the relevant social media, inc here. All managers take risks, it is what it is about, it is what is written on the tin. If a bad thing never happened then it is not a risk. Flood protections schemes may have been designed or 100 year flood levels, but it did not stop them being overwhelmed a couple of years later.

[Heartland]

I thought there was a program of replacing lock gates to a specific time span. For a lock beam to become rotten, without replacement, would seem to indicate that either that the gate and beam had not reached the expected time for replacement. Yet there has been a policy since BW times to retain certain heritage values and those values might affect the life span of the gate, perhaps. And, that factor could be put into the lock gate replacement program.

 

Yet is not clear how much rot was there and how the structural strength of the beam was affected. Being hit by a golf buggy no doubt travelling at speed may well equally damage a sound beam!

 

It certainly is another bit of waterways news. In Walsall they do not bother with golf buggies, they simply saw of the beams!

 

That the Worcester & Birmingham Canal beam was rotten inside must be of concern and it is another item, no doubt, to add to the  increasingly long list of work to be done.

 

[Keeping Up]

Not at Worcester this time, this was on the Monty, but an example of just how rotten a lock beam can get and yet still not be scheduled for replacement.

 

[tree monkey]

18 hours ago, Mike Todd said:

I'm not at all sure that CaRT have the resources to do internal tests of all assets, including lock gates and balance beams. As I showed in an earlier photo, there was no obvious imminent failure when we passed through early March and if, as I suspect, CaRT asset monitors (and, yes, they do actually monitor all their assets, presumably on a risk based schedule) they can only afford a quick visual check then there would have been no requirement to schedule maintenance, which in this case would have to be an expensive balance beam replacement. To go further would require all of the relevant staff to be equipped with suitable portable NDT devices, assuming they exist for internal decay, and for the time to make the measurements and interpret them. Most NDT testing does require a level of interpretive skill to translate the readings into a failure risk. Of course, we all rail at CaRT whenever there is a failure to our beloved network but, you know folks, stuff happens and you just have to get on with it. Working out which is best - scheduled routine replacement (like they used to do with street lights) or failure replacement is a non-trivial calculation and we all expect CaRT to make the 'best' use of their limited resources. I am guessing, but I would readily expect that if we spotted CaRT replacing an apparently healthy balance beam then there would be call outs on all the relevant social media, inc here. All managers take risks, it is what it is about, it is what is written on the tin. If a bad thing never happened then it is not a risk. Flood protections schemes may have been designed or 100 year flood levels, but it did not stop them being overwhelmed a couple of years later.

The internal check is relatively easy as has been pointed out by @cuthound earlier, use of a sounding hammer, it's what I and my colleagues use every day and it can be surprisingly accurate 

[Chewbacka]

3 hours ago, tree monkey said:

The internal check is relatively easy as has been pointed out by @cuthound earlier, use of a sounding hammer, it's what I and my colleagues use every day and it can be surprisingly accurate 

But first you will have to train the CRT desk jockey which end of the hammer to hold as well as convincing the other H&S desk jockey that their risk assessment does not require the use of ear defenders.

[Mike Todd]

19 hours ago, Heartland said:

I thought there was a program of replacing lock gates to a specific time span. For a lock beam to become rotten, without replacement, would seem to indicate that either that the gate and beam had not reached the expected time for replacement. Yet there has been a policy since BW times to retain certain heritage values and those values might affect the life span of the gate, perhaps. And, that factor could be put into the lock gate replacement program.

 

Yet is not clear how much rot was there and how the structural strength of the beam was affected. Being hit by a golf buggy no doubt travelling at speed may well equally damage a sound beam!

 

It certainly is another bit of waterways news. In Walsall they do not bother with golf buggies, they simply saw of the beams!

 

That the Worcester & Birmingham Canal beam was rotten inside must be of concern and it is another item, no doubt, to add to the  increasingly long list of work to be done.

 

I would have thought that a golf buggy running into a balance beam, even one with internal decay, would come off decidedly the worse! The ones I have seen are not the more robust of transport vehicles. After all, they are not licenced for road use and normally would only encounter the occasional misplaced tee flag.

[Keeping Up]

Remember that damage due to vandalism, or accident, or boater mis-use, is classified in a different category from failures due to inadequate maintenance. Given that certain CRT managers' annual bonus payments depend on them meeting their targets in the latter category, it is hardly surprising that strenuous efforts are put into finding ways to classifying all damage as being due to one of the former causes even if this means leaking silly stories to the press and social media.

 

I fondly remember how my boss once said to me "I wish you were as good at your job as you are at writing your annual bonus objectives"

[Heartland]

I wonder if the risk-assessment for the replacing beams includes:

(1) Part of beam falling off on workman

(2) Danger of equipment used injuring workmen

(3) Falling in lock

(4) Getting splinters 

(5) being hit by golf buggies, cyclists, motorcyclists or people on pogo sticks.

[Allan(nb Albert)]

On 02/04/2020 at 10:41, Mike Todd said:

I'm not at all sure that CaRT have the resources to do internal tests of all assets, including lock gates and balance beams. As I showed in an earlier photo, there was no obvious imminent failure when we passed through early March and if, as I suspect, CaRT asset monitors (and, yes, they do actually monitor all their assets, presumably on a risk based schedule) they can only afford a quick visual check then there would have been no requirement to schedule maintenance, which in this case would have to be an expensive balance beam replacement. To go further would require all of the relevant staff to be equipped with suitable portable NDT devices, assuming they exist for internal decay, and for the time to make the measurements and interpret them. Most NDT testing does require a level of interpretive skill to translate the readings into a failure risk. Of course, we all rail at CaRT whenever there is a failure to our beloved network but, you know folks, stuff happens and you just have to get on with it. Working out which is best - scheduled routine replacement (like they used to do with street lights) or failure replacement is a non-trivial calculation and we all expect CaRT to make the 'best' use of their limited resources. I am guessing, but I would readily expect that if we spotted CaRT replacing an apparently healthy balance beam then there would be call outs on all the relevant social media, inc here. All managers take risks, it is what it is about, it is what is written on the tin. If a bad thing never happened then it is not a risk. Flood protections schemes may have been designed or 100 year flood levels, but it did not stop them being overwhelmed a couple of years later.

 

On 03/04/2020 at 05:13, tree monkey said:

The internal check is relatively easy as has been pointed out by @cuthound earlier, use of a sounding hammer, it's what I and my colleagues use every day and it can be surprisingly accurate 

CRT's asset inspection procedures are well documented. Lock Gate Inspections (LGI's) include both visual inspection and the use of a heavy duty spike to determine rot.

 

 

 

[cuthound]

1 hour ago, Allan(nb Albert) said:

 

CRT's asset inspection procedures are well documented. Lock Gate Inspections (LGI's) include both visual inspection and the use of a heavy duty spike to determine rot.

 

 

 

Surely using a heavy duty spike to check for rot introduces holes into the balance beam for water to collect in and err cause rot? ?

 

A sounding hammer is non-destructive (unless of course you hit it way too hard).

[Tim Lewis]

https://www.dudleynews.co.uk/news/regional/18352318.stolen-buggies-golf-club-may-wrecked-canal-lock/?ref=fbshr

[tree monkey]

43 minutes ago, cuthound said:

Surely using a heavy duty spike to check for rot introduces holes into the balance beam for water to collect in and err cause rot? ?

 

A sounding hammer is non-destructive (unless of course you hit it way too hard).

Thank you, I was going to say that.

 

We do also use a micro drill thing called a resistograph, but only on trees of high amenity value.

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resistograph

There is debate about the issue of potentially breaking the trees natural defenses allowing oxygen in and the fungi free rein, the inventor is VERY defensive about this  

 

 

[Allan(nb Albert)]

Here is exactly what CRT say.

From Asset Inspection Procedures Issue 8.2 Section 5.6.2
 

Quote

Accessible timber and joints will be tested for rot (using a heavy duty proprietary spike), and gates checked for mitre over-sailing, differences in line or level, joint and strap security, gate flexing and torsion during opening and closing, and whilst under load).

 

[BEngo]

So, if the rot can be seen, poke it with a spike.  If rot is not accessible, perhaps because it is internal and originates from a mortise or a fastening,  don't look for it.

 

N

[Allan(nb Albert)]

49 minutes ago, BEngo said:

So, if the rot can be seen, poke it with a spike.  If rot is not accessible, perhaps because it is internal and originates from a mortise or a fastening,  don't look for it.

 

N

Perhaps that's where the flexing and torsion comes in ...
 

[Tracy D'arth]

I have never agreed with painting exterior timber.

 

Are CRT now to use stealth golf buggies to vandalise rotten lock gates so that they can claim vandalism? Is it a new policy? 

 

The balance beam on the bottom lock at Hillmorton fell off when a grandmother and her grand daughter [small ] sat on it. Is this vandalism by pensioner?

 

All the above is stupid as is the lack of maintenance we are suffering on the canals.

[BWM]

Looking at the picture again it is clear that there is a rectangular hole that has developed under the handrail fixing, matching the plate holding the bolts. A similar failure occurred at Denham deep, and i suspect both of these were caused by letting gates slam shut when opening paddles, combined with terminal rot.

[BEngo]

From the picture, the direction of failure on the Worcester beam is wrong for the damage having been done by slamming the gate shut.  The beam would fold toward the head of the lock, rather than the tail.  Either an attempt was being made to force the gate open or someone hit it hard from the uphill direction,  though I  doubt a golf buggy would have survived in a driveable state.

N