publication last December of the FOM Order 3317/2010 of specific measures to improve efficiency in public works again demonstrates the inability of some technical engineers to drive the Ministry itself The English infrastructure development, new shortsighted sinning in the design criteria of infrastructure and of course not solve the problem of architectural contracts in civil engineering. any engineer geologist familiar with the design and construction of underground prescription FOM making the Order on the reduction in the number and length of rail tunnels and the recommendation of selecting a single tube type for these tunnels. It advocates the ground up, with what it means increasing the height of embankments and thus the deformability of the foundation layers of padding and stuffing himself. It does not help to exploit a high-speed single tube tunnel that should have a greater increase to meet the criteria section aerodynamic cross-trains, let alone security against accidents or the risks of instability during construction of the front sections so great. But gentlemen, if our high-speed trains go at 350 km / h how do we achieve with such unfortunate decisions?
course our leaders have looked to this new regulation. The sustainability of the railway infrastructure spend, as advocated by many English experts, among them Manuel Melis, the transition from ballasted track to slab track, given the high costs of maintenance medium and long term that carries this type of platform and this can only be achieved by limiting the deformability platform and therefore reducing the grade of the road, running long tunnels, filled with low height and simple structures (say in clear alignment with the technical criteria of that author).
Indeed, in this order FOM refers to the need to reduce costs in crossing structures such as viaducts, bridges, etc ... welcome this decision and expect to be left to tender contracts for the project assayer bridge (impossible to calculate) designed by architects or engineers egocentric, putting the functionality in second place and his "artwork" as a single solution for Customer .
It is true that we must make efficient large infrastructure projects but it seems clear that the perspective from which it has approached this problem by the Ministry of Public Works is clearly inadequate since it provides not only technical rigidities design engineers but absurd recipes economic sustainability that does not meet the projected transport infrastructure of a modern country.
0 comments:
Post a Comment