CN bridge fire

[greywolfretired]

More problems for CN Rail in Fraser Canyon in BC . I wonder if the heat from the burning ties will affect the stseel structure. That would mean the entire bridge would need replacing.



http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/story/2011/06/30/bc-railway-bridge-fire.html

 

[Euphod]

Whoa...that's quite a burn! Funny how that picture looks like a model railroad though...
In regards to your question, remember the 911 doubters have more or less stated that steel is not affected by fire or heat, so I'm sure the rest of the structure will be fine...

 

[JCitron]

This sure does look like a nice N-scale model railroad!

Steel doesn't burn, yeah right. All they need is concentrated heat to melt something then everything becomes like a banana.

I wonder if this will be an excuse to shutter that part of the line, and use trackage rights over the nearby CP. Remember the old New Haven bridge over the Hudson? Well the PC let the bridge deck burn on that one, and they closed it because it was deemed too unsafe and too dangerous for rail use. Sadly this killed the interchange traffic on the other end, and many companies went under because of it. I know this probably isn't going to happen, but knowing how company executives think, the bridge will remain closed for a very long time.

John

 

[northcornice]

They hope to have it back in service this weekend.

https://www.cn.ca/en/customer-service-railway-status.shtml

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/story/2011/07/01/bc-rail-bridge-fire.html

 

[NikkiA]

Whoa...that's quite a burn! Funny how that picture looks like a model railroad though...
In regards to your question, remember the 911 doubters have more or less stated that steel is not affected by fire or heat, so I'm sure the rest of the structure will be fine...

I think you mean the 'truthers', 'doubters' is vague and can refer to those of us that rationally consider and accept the 'official' word, or those that doubt the official word. Pretty much everyone knows what you mean by 'truthers' though.

Anyway, a wood fire simply won't burn hot enough to make any effect on a steel structure. 9/11 was a Jet-A fire, with a maximum temperature of about 1000 deg. C - not hot enough to melt unladen steel, but hot enough to soften it (heavily laden steel like the skeleton of a building is a different matter entirely, and some of the steel in the WTC may well have melted given the pressure + temperature). Wood ties on the other hand, will burn at ~609 deg. C like all wood. There may be some creosote in/on the ties, but not enough to significantly change the temperature of the fire.

Also the ties are burning on the top of the structure, thus any affect would be against fully unladen steel. Even if by some freak occurance, it did soften the steel, the location guarantee that it will not act as a domino effect on the rest of the structure.

 

[NikkiA]

Steel doesn't burn, yeah right. All they need is concentrated heat to melt something then everything becomes like a banana.

Nope, steel positively does not burn, if it did, the world would be a much different place.

As far as melting, structural steel starts to soften at 900 deg C, and melts at no lower than 1130 deg. C. Obscure non-structural alloys may melt at lower temps, but you're never going to find those in a building structure, since they're more expensive to produce and generally niche alloys.

A wood fueled fire isn't going to get anywhere near enough to either of those temperatures.

Heck, if it could, we'd never have had working steam engines unless we could afford to build them out of unobtainium instead.