Well...What can I say. Mark has replied to my recent message, assuring me that he had in fact been in the middle of answering my original letter.

I have since replied and apologised to mark for my outburst.

All throughout the eight or so years that I have been working on this project, I have suspected from the beginning that I was on to something that had been overlooked for a long time. And there were obvious reasons WHY it had been overlooked. - I had earlier on came across a simple double layer of webbing whilst playing around with various models using pvc conduit and piano wire as the main construction materials, which give you a good 'feel' for it. - It was not until some time later, after exploring single layer warren type trusses, that I found that a double layer of webbing was the only way to get more strength, and to control sag.

I am not a certified engineer, but upon making this discovery, naturally assumed that an engineer would be the first to realise the simplicity of it all. - The further you go with single layer trusses the more SAG there is, until eventually, the structure cannot even support its own weight and will collapse. - Any bridge builder knows that. The addition of a second layer of webbing will not only get rid of the sag, but also tighten the top chord to the point where VERTICAL SWAY is also controlled.

I will not go into any more detail at this stage, as I would like to give Mark another go at it. - He states that there were also a few questions that he had for me, which is a rare event from past communications with engineers, here anyway, as they seem to think that it has all been fully explored before.

To explain my outburst a little more, I had on the same day prior to writing to Mark, undergone yet ANOTHER rejection from an engineer here that is supposebly top in the field, who also insists that double layer has been FULLY explored before. In fact, he assures me that he also did a full semester on it at a local university some years ago. - Biggest problem he says, is that steel will weaken in a fire???? He hasn't kept any work on the subject though, but will TRY to dig up something for me...yeah right!

I don't know how it is in America, but here in Australia, anyone you talk to about engineers will always tell you that they haven't got their feet on the ground, that they are all UP themselves. - I noted that in one of your guests comments, the person writing, who would soon qualify to be an engineer, would prefer to be called a 'bridge builder'

Here are some other replies from starting from 1994;

1) I'm sure it's been done before.

2) I understand it completely.

3) They did some work on this thing before....Interesting though.

4) There are places where it can be improved.

5) You would need extra cables to control uplift.

6) Your drawings need to be more presentable.

7) For larger structures (domes) the hoop numbers would have to be increased....Therefore becomes too dense at pivotal areas.

8) The depth of the truss would have to be a metre over 25.

9) The tubing would have to be a metre in diameter to span 50 metres in a full arch.

10) You look too young! (I'm 47)

11) Even if it were endless spanning....What could I use it for?

12) For bridgework, fatigue is the worst problem.

13) It won't be any stronger in an arch!

14) Take it to British Aeronautics....Put my name on your list too! (Colin Kay, University of Physics Newcastle)

15) Send more money.

16) Ingenious, extremely lightweight....Interesting.

17) We'll make it happen!

18) It'll fall over....I'm an engineer.

19) We already have our own system.

20) Vertical load was spectacular.

21) Outstanding engineering limits.

22) Very good simple design....but we don't do fabrication.

23) Wish I'd have known about it 10 years ago!

24) Erm....Interesting....I'll get back to you in the morning!

25) Stop it. Please stop it!.. Any engineer, which obviously you are not, will tell you that the material would have to be at least a thousand times stronger for an endless bridge!!

26) I think the closed web has some merit. Open web...heat is the biggest problem.

I'll leave you with those thoughts, but once again, Mark, I sincerely apologise for my harsh words to you, and you may edit this letter to any way you see fit.

Kind regards, David Ratcliff.

PS Tower to 3.5km high...Bridge 4km or endless. - If I am wrong, then so what? But if I'm right???

Good webpage you have here, and best greetings to you all And You Are --> WELCOME <-- To Visit My Webpage as well -->

Awesome site!

Robosubmit BannerExchange

• Back Home
  
• Guestbook Scripts based on those created by Matt Wright that can be found at Matt's Script Archive

This page has taken     hits.