Now, I'm not a CRT basher. But...

[cuthound]

5 hours ago, Mike the Boilerman said:

 

No it wouldn’t. I’m pretty unsympathetic towards people who need wrapping in cotton wool at my expense so they don’t hurt themselves on blindingly obvious hazards. 

 

Jeez I’m turning into nick Norman!

 

I think that we should wrap up summer boaters in cotton wool.

 

So much of it that they can't escape from it and go boating, thus making the canals quieter for everyone else ?

[Alan de Enfield]

15 minutes ago, cuthound said:

I think that we should wrap up summer boaters in cotton wool.

Cling Film Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm……………………………..

[cuthound]

3 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

Cling Film Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm……………………………..

 

Yup, even better ?

[TheBiscuits]

7 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

Cling Film Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm……………………………..

Nah, it would get stuck round the prop after they fall in.

[Rob-M]

6 hours ago, furnessvale said:

Does ANYONE put their full weight on things like handrails without testing them first?

 

I am thinking particularly about handrails on lock ladders.  I always test before trusting my weight to them.

 

George

I had a moment at a lock last year where as I stepped back holding the lock ladder handrail it lifted off. Fortunately I hadn't fully committed to leaning back and was able to steady myself. I didn't feel compelled to moan about it or report it just carried on moving the boat.

Same yesterday at Atherstone where one lock ladder was missing half the handrail, carefully descended the ladder using the bit of remaining handrail.

[Mike Todd]

On 08/09/2018 at 09:48, Athy said:

Fortunately

No, because it's obvious that paddle gear could cause harm, with its heavy and rapidly moving parts. One expects a handrail to stay in the same place.

I am sure that any experienced H&S person in industry, public sector or anywhere really will tell you that 'obvious' is not a useful or usable criterion in dealing with risk. What may be obvious to you may well not be obvious to someone else. In any case, accidents frequently happen to people who knew that the hazard was there but momentarily forgot about it. The only really useful criterion is 'reasonableness' - or, in another viewpoint, proportionality. 

 

It is when folk lose sight of these that we get the 'it must not happen again' headlines in tabloids and sometimes similar from people such as coroners. Just look at what happened on south Staffs and Worcester locks. In the end it becomes a political/economic argument based on what level of risk is considered acceptable - some risk is always present and 'never' is just not achievable in risk assessments. All budgets are finite and we all have to learn to balance whether a risk is 'worth'taking and also whether budgets are being set criminally low.

 

I have not seen the Thrupp handrail so really cannot comment and am usually reluctant to criticise the judgements of those on the ground who ought to have a better understanding, but I do tend to feel that if the handrail is seriously an issue and really likely to fail then it ought to have a high priority. If the handrail is not absolutely necessary for the reasonable operation of the bridge then it is perhaps one of the few cases where, in the short term, a clear warning notice is called for (in general they are not considered a responsible response to an assessed risk. Perhaps someone has taken the view that although the handrail condition might alarm someone by being extra 'wobbly' it si also unlikely to fail in the immediate future. (Lost of people confuse stress and strain - structural engineers will understand)

[MtB]

12 minutes ago, Mike Todd said:

(Lost of people confuse stress and strain - structural engineers will understand)

 

Great typo!

 

But yes, people generally use the two terms indiscriminately. Stress (loosely speaking) is the force and strain is the deflection. And stress divided by strain = Young's Modulus, IIRC. 

[Captain Pegg]

17 minutes ago, Mike the Boilerman said:

 

Great typo!

 

But yes, people generally use the two terms indiscriminately. Stress (loosely speaking) is the force and strain is the deflection. And stress divided by strain = Young's Modulus, IIRC. 

Half a mark only for each of those descriptions Mike. 

[TheBiscuits]

27 minutes ago, Mike the Boilerman said:

But yes, people generally use the two terms indiscriminately. Stress (loosely speaking) is the force and strain is the deflection. And stress divided by strain = Young's Modulus, IIRC. 

 

Quote

stress
The confusion caused when ones mind overrides the body’s natural desire to choke the living shit out of some asshole that desperately needs it.

https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Stress

Quote

strain

refers to the hybrid/breed of cannabis

https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=strain