Lots of photos in yesterdays papers about the burst 32 inch water main
in London and the effect on an underground carpark.

For those who didn't see it (or hear the Jermey Vine phone-in),
this was reported as 'polystyrene expanded after being
submerged by a massive flood). I think not !!!. Do people
not know about buoyancy these days ?, or the reason why
massive metal ships don't sink ?.

The upwards force of the water was sufficient to lift the carpark
floor and the vehicles parked thereon, jamming them into the
ceiling. There seemed to be an awful lot of EPS under that floor.
It cannot have been there as a thermal insulation (car park),
so maybe there was a problem with the soil. Or maybe the builder
had a load of EPS left over and wanted to avoid disposal fees.
May be the builder bought the EPS and was told by building
control that it was the wrong stuff - get rid of it ?.

There used to be a website hosted by TML the chunnel builders,
and how they built the Sangatte side. Essentially this is
a massive concrete-lined hole, presumably below the water table,
and to stop it popping back up, something like 160,000 tons
of concrete were poured to cover it.

On Tuesday, 11 October 2016 08:17:12 UTC+1, Andrew wrote:
For those who didn't see it (or hear the Jermey Vine phone-in),
this was reported as 'polystyrene expanded after being
submerged by a massive flood). I think not !!!. Do people
not know about buoyancy these days ?,

The Guardian don't:

polystyrene insulation under the car park floor in south-east London appeared to swell ...
Upset woman said "we were told we cannot move it because there is a possibility with the pressure of the car there could be a blast because of the gas inside, or something. It can blow up the whole building.
"The problem is who to contact. Someone has said the car insurance might not cover it because it didnt happen from the driver him or herself. We are in really, really bad shape.€�

Good thing she didn't have to cope with the Blitz or she might have streaked her mascara.

The Independent are a bit confused too:

floodwaters raise polystyrene floor of car park

when insulation for an underground car park absorbed flood water and became swollen

But the Indy's commenters appear to understand more than the journalists

Owain

I did wonder why it was there as well, and so did a number of the people
interviewed who lost their cars from what I heard on the radio. I suspect
somebody is going to be liable for a large amount of dosh for this, for
whether it expanded or floated, neither should have been possible in such a
building. It does make one wonder what the rest of the building is like for
construction and stability.
Brian

--
----- -
This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...

Blind user, so no pictures please!
"Andrew" wrote in message
...
Lots of photos in yesterdays papers about the burst 32 inch water main
in London and the effect on an underground carpark.

For those who didn't see it (or hear the Jermey Vine phone-in),
this was reported as 'polystyrene expanded after being
submerged by a massive flood). I think not !!!. Do people
not know about buoyancy these days ?, or the reason why
massive metal ships don't sink ?.

The upwards force of the water was sufficient to lift the carpark
floor and the vehicles parked thereon, jamming them into the
ceiling. There seemed to be an awful lot of EPS under that floor.
It cannot have been there as a thermal insulation (car park),
so maybe there was a problem with the soil. Or maybe the builder
had a load of EPS left over and wanted to avoid disposal fees.
May be the builder bought the EPS and was told by building
control that it was the wrong stuff - get rid of it ?.

There used to be a website hosted by TML the chunnel builders,
and how they built the Sangatte side. Essentially this is
a massive concrete-lined hole, presumably below the water table,
and to stop it popping back up, something like 160,000 tons
of concrete were poured to cover it.

Brian Gaff wrote:

I did wonder why it was there

Big hole to fill? Concrete £100/cubic metre, EPS £15/cubic metre ...

In message , Andy Burns
writes
Brian Gaff wrote:

I did wonder why it was there

Big hole to fill? Concrete £100/cubic metre, EPS £15/cubic metre ...

Trenches in clay would be sided with foam to allow for movement. Don't
know about oversite concrete as block and beam are preferred for
domestic situations.



--
Tim Lamb

On 10/11/2016 9:55 AM, Andy Burns wrote:
Brian Gaff wrote:

I did wonder why it was there

Big hole to fill? Concrete £100/cubic metre, EPS £15/cubic metre ...


That was my thought too. Supporting a concrete floor with negligible
tie-in to the walls? One hopes the walls were built on proper foundations!

In article ,
Chris Hogg wrote:
It's a measure of the technical competence of media reporters: they
haven't any; they're technically illiterate!

It would be unreasonable to expect any reporter to be an expert on all
things technical. So most are merely reporting what they've been told - or
have to make it up if they can't find a true expert.
A better one might question something he finds unexplainable - but as you
say not all are going to have any technical knowledge at all.

But it simply backs up what I've said for ages. Because you've read or
heard something in the meja doesn't make it accurate. If only so many on
here who quote newspaper articles to back up their bigoted views would
understand this.

--
*War does not determine who is right - only who is left.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

newshound wrote:

Andy Burns wrote:

Big hole to fill? Concrete £100/cubic metre, EPS £15/cubic metre ...

That was my thought too. Supporting a concrete floor with negligible
tie-in to the walls? One hopes the walls were built on proper foundations!

Don't know if everyone's been looking at similar pics, but looks like 2"
of screed on top of at least 3' of polystyrene, assuming those two
floors were level beforehand ...

https://static.independent.co.uk/s3fs-public/styles/story_large/public/thumbnails/image/2016/10/09/16/crayford-flooding.jpg

On 11/10/2016 11:20, Huge wrote:
On 2016-10-11, Tim Lamb wrote:
In message , Andy Burns
writes
Brian Gaff wrote:

I did wonder why it was there

Big hole to fill? Concrete £100/cubic metre, EPS £15/cubic metre ...

Trenches in clay would be sided with foam to allow for movement.

If you've ever driven up the A1(M) through Hatfield, the walls of the tunnel
under the shopping centre are full of expanded polystyrene. I watched
it being built.

Pilars for concrete bridges are often built with concrete poured around
an EP core

Malcolm

On 11/10/16 11:55, Andy Burns wrote:
newshound wrote:

Andy Burns wrote:

Big hole to fill? Concrete £100/cubic metre, EPS £15/cubic metre ...

That was my thought too. Supporting a concrete floor with negligible
tie-in to the walls? One hopes the walls were built on proper
foundations!

Don't know if everyone's been looking at similar pics, but looks like 2"
of screed on top of at least 3' of polystyrene, assuming those two
floors were level beforehand ...

https://static.independent.co.uk/s3fs-public/styles/story_large/public/thumbnails/image/2016/10/09/16/crayford-flooding.jpg


Thanks for a very clear picture.

That hasn't expanded (stupid journalism).

I reckon it's either floated (assuming there's a lot more underneath) or
the water leak was under it and it's acted like a ginormous piston.

On Tue, 11 Oct 2016 11:07:08 +0100, "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:

In article ,
Chris Hogg wrote:
It's a measure of the technical competence of media reporters: they
haven't any; they're technically illiterate!

It would be unreasonable to expect any reporter to be an expert on all
things technical. So most are merely reporting what they've been told - or
have to make it up if they can't find a true expert.

Yeahbut are there really people out there [1] that don't know that
expanded polystyrene floats (and very well, as I suspect most here
found out as kids?). I only saw a glimpse of it on the TV news when it
first happened and I then explained to the Mrs *what* had happened
(that the concrete car-park floor floated up on the polystyrene and
crushed the cars against the roof). What I didn't know was why so much
EPS was there in the first place but I guessed it might be something
to do with a large unwanted void that needed filling cheaply? No
wonder 'the world' is such a complete mystery to many of them. ;-(

A better one might question something he finds unexplainable - but as you
say not all are going to have any technical knowledge at all.

sigh

But it simply backs up what I've said for ages. Because you've read or
heard something in the meja doesn't make it accurate.

Or you simply don't believe it in the first place (because it simply
doesn't make sense), like the whole 'it expanded' thing.

I wonder if the same people watched that Grand Designs recently where
they built a *house* beside a river but built it on a large 'float'
so it would rise up if there was any flooding?

If only so many on
here who quote newspaper articles to back up their bigoted views would
understand this.

Quite. ;-(

Cheers, T i m

[1] I know there are but ... ;-(

On 11/10/2016 12:06, Tim Watts wrote:
On 11/10/16 11:55, Andy Burns wrote:
newshound wrote:

Andy Burns wrote:

Big hole to fill? Concrete £100/cubic metre, EPS £15/cubic metre ...

That was my thought too. Supporting a concrete floor with negligible
tie-in to the walls? One hopes the walls were built on proper
foundations!

Don't know if everyone's been looking at similar pics, but looks like 2"
of screed on top of at least 3' of polystyrene, assuming those two
floors were level beforehand ...

https://static.independent.co.uk/s3fs-public/styles/story_large/public/thumbnails/image/2016/10/09/16/crayford-flooding.jpg



Thanks for a very clear picture.

That hasn't expanded (stupid journalism).

I reckon it's either floated (assuming there's a lot more underneath) or
the water leak was under it and it's acted like a ginormous piston.


It's strange that the EPS is so strong. There's a fair bit of weight on
top, but the EPS doesn't appear to have deformed, even where the wheels
of the car are. The surface on top may be spreading the load, ofc, and
the side with the range rover seems a bit lower than under the smaller
cars.

Still, I'm used to the EPS used for packaging, and builders' EPS may be
proper 'ard stuff.

On Tuesday, 11 October 2016 12:40:05 UTC+1, T i m wrote:
On Tue, 11 Oct 2016 11:07:08 +0100, "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:

In article ,
Chris Hogg wrote:
It's a measure of the technical competence of media reporters: they
haven't any; they're technically illiterate!

It would be unreasonable to expect any reporter to be an expert on all
things technical. So most are merely reporting what they've been told - or
have to make it up if they can't find a true expert.

Yeahbut are there really people out there [1] that don't know that
expanded polystyrene floats (and very well, as I suspect most here
found out as kids?).

Yes I know EPS floats but I didn;t know carparks used it for hardcore.
There'll be plenty of samsung galaxy 5s availabe for hardcore too soon :-)

On Tue, 11 Oct 2016 04:59:21 -0700 (PDT), whisky-dave
wrote:

On Tuesday, 11 October 2016 12:40:05 UTC+1, T i m wrote:
On Tue, 11 Oct 2016 11:07:08 +0100, "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:

In article ,
Chris Hogg wrote:
It's a measure of the technical competence of media reporters: they
haven't any; they're technically illiterate!

It would be unreasonable to expect any reporter to be an expert on all
things technical. So most are merely reporting what they've been told - or
have to make it up if they can't find a true expert.

Yeahbut are there really people out there [1] that don't know that
expanded polystyrene floats (and very well, as I suspect most here
found out as kids?).

Yes I know EPS floats but I didn;t know carparks used it for hardcore.

No, nor did specifically I but I knew it was used for underfloor
insulation so also knew it was capable of supporting some fairly heavy
loads (like under kitchens etc). ;-)

Cheers, T i m

On 10/11/2016 12:52 PM, GB wrote:
On 11/10/2016 12:06, Tim Watts wrote:
On 11/10/16 11:55, Andy Burns wrote:
newshound wrote:

Andy Burns wrote:

Big hole to fill? Concrete £100/cubic metre, EPS £15/cubic metre ...

That was my thought too. Supporting a concrete floor with negligible
tie-in to the walls? One hopes the walls were built on proper
foundations!

Don't know if everyone's been looking at similar pics, but looks like 2"
of screed on top of at least 3' of polystyrene, assuming those two
floors were level beforehand ...

https://static.independent.co.uk/s3fs-public/styles/story_large/public/thumbnails/image/2016/10/09/16/crayford-flooding.jpg




Thanks for a very clear picture.

That hasn't expanded (stupid journalism).

I reckon it's either floated (assuming there's a lot more underneath) or
the water leak was under it and it's acted like a ginormous piston.


It's strange that the EPS is so strong. There's a fair bit of weight on
top, but the EPS doesn't appear to have deformed, even where the wheels
of the car are. The surface on top may be spreading the load, ofc, and
the side with the range rover seems a bit lower than under the smaller
cars.

Still, I'm used to the EPS used for packaging, and builders' EPS may be
proper 'ard stuff.





The actual floor will be a concrete screed with a rebar mesh, that
spreads the load. The EPS doesn't have to be all that strong, if you
work out the average floor loading.

On 11/10/16 13:26, newshound wrote:
On 10/11/2016 12:52 PM, GB wrote:
On 11/10/2016 12:06, Tim Watts wrote:
On 11/10/16 11:55, Andy Burns wrote:
newshound wrote:

Andy Burns wrote:

Big hole to fill? Concrete £100/cubic metre, EPS £15/cubic metre ...

That was my thought too. Supporting a concrete floor with negligible
tie-in to the walls? One hopes the walls were built on proper
foundations!

Don't know if everyone's been looking at similar pics, but looks
like 2"
of screed on top of at least 3' of polystyrene, assuming those two
floors were level beforehand ...

https://static.independent.co.uk/s3fs-public/styles/story_large/public/thumbnails/image/2016/10/09/16/crayford-flooding.jpg





Thanks for a very clear picture.

That hasn't expanded (stupid journalism).

I reckon it's either floated (assuming there's a lot more underneath) or
the water leak was under it and it's acted like a ginormous piston.


It's strange that the EPS is so strong. There's a fair bit of weight on
top, but the EPS doesn't appear to have deformed, even where the wheels
of the car are. The surface on top may be spreading the load, ofc, and
the side with the range rover seems a bit lower than under the smaller
cars.

Still, I'm used to the EPS used for packaging, and builders' EPS may be
proper 'ard stuff.





The actual floor will be a concrete screed with a rebar mesh, that
spreads the load. The EPS doesn't have to be all that strong, if you
work out the average floor loading.

Indeed. I have driven a car onto blue high density foam no problems. It
takes the weight. Spread the tyre contract patch out and white foam is
fine too.

My guess is that this was a bad build - they over excavated and used
foam to fill.



--
No Apple devices were knowingly used in the preparation of this post.

In article ,
T i m wrote:
It would be unreasonable to expect any reporter to be an expert on all
things technical. So most are merely reporting what they've been told - or
have to make it up if they can't find a true expert.

Yeahbut are there really people out there [1] that don't know that
expanded polystyrene floats (and very well, as I suspect most here
found out as kids?). I only saw a glimpse of it on the TV news when it
first happened and I then explained to the Mrs *what* had happened
(that the concrete car-park floor floated up on the polystyrene and
crushed the cars against the roof). What I didn't know was why so much
EPS was there in the first place but I guessed it might be something
to do with a large unwanted void that needed filling cheaply? No
wonder 'the world' is such a complete mystery to many of them. ;-(

I do agree Tim. You'd certainly think that most would have noticed this.
But I'm constantly surprised how little some apparently clever people even
notice such things. Let alone transfer it to a practical application.

--
*Bigamy is having one wife too many - monogamy is the same

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
T i m wrote:
Yes I know EPS floats but I didn;t know carparks used it for hardcore.

No, nor did specifically I but I knew it was used for underfloor
insulation so also knew it was capable of supporting some fairly heavy
loads (like under kitchens etc). ;-)

Mate's 80s house is built on a concrete slab. With 4" poly on top, and
chipboard on that for the floor.

--
*One nice thing about egotists: they don't talk about other people.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On 11/10/2016 13:26, newshound wrote:

The actual floor will be a concrete screed with a rebar mesh

I hadn't realised there'd be rebar in it to spread the load. Thanks!

On 11/10/16 12:52, GB wrote:
On 11/10/2016 12:06, Tim Watts wrote:
On 11/10/16 11:55, Andy Burns wrote:
newshound wrote:

Andy Burns wrote:

Big hole to fill? Concrete £100/cubic metre, EPS £15/cubic metre ...

That was my thought too. Supporting a concrete floor with negligible
tie-in to the walls? One hopes the walls were built on proper
foundations!

Don't know if everyone's been looking at similar pics, but looks like 2"
of screed on top of at least 3' of polystyrene, assuming those two
floors were level beforehand ...

https://static.independent.co.uk/s3fs-public/styles/story_large/public/thumbnails/image/2016/10/09/16/crayford-flooding.jpg




Thanks for a very clear picture.

That hasn't expanded (stupid journalism).

I reckon it's either floated (assuming there's a lot more underneath) or
the water leak was under it and it's acted like a ginormous piston.


It's strange that the EPS is so strong. There's a fair bit of weight on
top, but the EPS doesn't appear to have deformed, even where the wheels
of the car are. The surface on top may be spreading the load, ofc, and
the side with the range rover seems a bit lower than under the smaller
cars.

Still, I'm used to the EPS used for packaging, and builders' EPS may be
proper 'ard stuff.

It's good for a good few tonnes/m2 and yes, the concrete slab on top is
spreading the load (or it would crack).

T i m wrote:

I wonder if the same people watched that Grand Designs recently where
they built a *house* beside a river but built it on a large 'float'
so it would rise up if there was any flooding?

I did hear somewhere that large swimming pools sometimes have a
special valve fitted so that if the water table rises whilst it
is empty it doesn't just pop out of the ground.

Chris
--
Chris J Dixon Nottingham UK


Plant amazing Acers.

On Tuesday, 11 October 2016 08:17:12 UTC+1, Andrew wrote:
Lots of photos in yesterdays papers about the burst 32 inch water main
in London and the effect on an underground carpark.

For those who didn't see it (or hear the Jermey Vine phone-in),
this was reported as 'polystyrene expanded after being
submerged by a massive flood). I think not !!!. Do people
not know about buoyancy these days ?, or the reason why
massive metal ships don't sink ?.

The upwards force of the water was sufficient to lift the carpark
floor and the vehicles parked thereon, jamming them into the
ceiling. There seemed to be an awful lot of EPS under that floor.
It cannot have been there as a thermal insulation (car park),
so maybe there was a problem with the soil. Or maybe the builder
had a load of EPS left over and wanted to avoid disposal fees.
May be the builder bought the EPS and was told by building
control that it was the wrong stuff - get rid of it ?.

There used to be a website hosted by TML the chunnel builders,
and how they built the Sangatte side. Essentially this is
a massive concrete-lined hole, presumably below the water table,
and to stop it popping back up, something like 160,000 tons
of concrete were poured to cover it.

I saw that too.
There seemed to be an enormous amount of expanded polystyrene had floated up.
Looked to be at least 1200mm thick??????
Why would anyone put any expanded polystyrene under the floor of a car park exposed to outdoor elements?
Weird!

On Tuesday, 11 October 2016 12:59:24 UTC+1, whisky-dave wrote:
On Tuesday, 11 October 2016 12:40:05 UTC+1, T i m wrote:
On Tue, 11 Oct 2016 11:07:08 +0100, "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:

In article ,
Chris Hogg wrote:
It's a measure of the technical competence of media reporters: they
haven't any; they're technically illiterate!

It would be unreasonable to expect any reporter to be an expert on all
things technical. So most are merely reporting what they've been told - or
have to make it up if they can't find a true expert.

Yeahbut are there really people out there [1] that don't know that
expanded polystyrene floats (and very well, as I suspect most here
found out as kids?).

Yes I know EPS floats but I didn;t know carparks used it for hardcore.
There'll be plenty of samsung galaxy 5s availabe for hardcore too soon :-)

When I was involved, unwanted holes like that were made up with a cheap weak concrete mix.
Ie very little cement.

On 11/10/2016 08:17, Andrew wrote:
Lots of photos in yesterdays papers about the burst 32 inch water main
in London and the effect on an underground carpark.

For those who didn't see it (or hear the Jermey Vine phone-in),
this was reported as 'polystyrene expanded after being
submerged by a massive flood). I think not !!!. Do people
not know about buoyancy these days ?, or the reason why
massive metal ships don't sink ?.

The upwards force of the water was sufficient to lift the carpark
floor and the vehicles parked thereon, jamming them into the
ceiling. There seemed to be an awful lot of EPS under that floor.
It cannot have been there as a thermal insulation (car park),
so maybe there was a problem with the soil. Or maybe the builder
had a load of EPS left over and wanted to avoid disposal fees.
May be the builder bought the EPS and was told by building
control that it was the wrong stuff - get rid of it ?.

There used to be a website hosted by TML the chunnel builders,
and how they built the Sangatte side. Essentially this is
a massive concrete-lined hole, presumably below the water table,
and to stop it popping back up, something like 160,000 tons
of concrete were poured to cover it.

Not exactly a novel concept in civil engineering, at least in Norway:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geofoam

--
Rod

pamela wrote
Andy Burns wrote
Brian Gaff wrote:

I did wonder why it was there

Big hole to fill? Concrete £100/cubic metre, EPS £15/cubic metre ...

It may be cheaper but I wonder if it meets
requirements for the insurance to be valid?

No reason why not given that that approach is used for concrete bridges etc.

"GB" wrote in message
...
On 11/10/2016 13:26, newshound wrote:

The actual floor will be a concrete screed with a rebar mesh

I hadn't realised there'd be rebar in it to spread the load. Thanks!

There isnt, the mesh is there to stop it cracking as it matures.

The polystyrene spreads the load perfectly adequately and
you can in fact drive cars on the polystyrene fine when it is
a continuous sheet.

"harry" wrote in message
...
On Tuesday, 11 October 2016 08:17:12 UTC+1, Andrew wrote:
Lots of photos in yesterdays papers about the burst 32 inch water main
in London and the effect on an underground carpark.

For those who didn't see it (or hear the Jermey Vine phone-in),
this was reported as 'polystyrene expanded after being
submerged by a massive flood). I think not !!!. Do people
not know about buoyancy these days ?, or the reason why
massive metal ships don't sink ?.

The upwards force of the water was sufficient to lift the carpark
floor and the vehicles parked thereon, jamming them into the
ceiling. There seemed to be an awful lot of EPS under that floor.
It cannot have been there as a thermal insulation (car park),
so maybe there was a problem with the soil. Or maybe the builder
had a load of EPS left over and wanted to avoid disposal fees.
May be the builder bought the EPS and was told by building
control that it was the wrong stuff - get rid of it ?.

There used to be a website hosted by TML the chunnel builders,
and how they built the Sangatte side. Essentially this is
a massive concrete-lined hole, presumably below the water table,
and to stop it popping back up, something like 160,000 tons
of concrete were poured to cover it.

I saw that too.
There seemed to be an enormous amount of expanded polystyrene had floated
up.
Looked to be at least 1200mm thick??????
Why would anyone put any expanded polystyrene under the floor of a car
park exposed to outdoor elements?

For the same reason its done with concrete bridges etc. Much cheaper than
all concrete, stupid.

Weird!

Nope, very common indeed.

"harry" wrote in message
...
On Tuesday, 11 October 2016 12:59:24 UTC+1, whisky-dave wrote:
On Tuesday, 11 October 2016 12:40:05 UTC+1, T i m wrote:
On Tue, 11 Oct 2016 11:07:08 +0100, "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:

In article ,
Chris Hogg wrote:
It's a measure of the technical competence of media reporters: they
haven't any; they're technically illiterate!

It would be unreasonable to expect any reporter to be an expert on all
things technical. So most are merely reporting what they've been
told - or
have to make it up if they can't find a true expert.

Yeahbut are there really people out there [1] that don't know that
expanded polystyrene floats (and very well, as I suspect most here
found out as kids?).

Yes I know EPS floats but I didn;t know carparks used it for hardcore.
There'll be plenty of samsung galaxy 5s availabe for hardcore too soon
:-)

When I was involved, unwanted holes like that were made up with a cheap
weak concrete mix.
Ie very little cement.

And then those with even half a clue realised that polystyrene is much
cheaper.

On Tuesday, 11 October 2016 18:15:23 UTC+1, polygonum wrote:
On 11/10/2016 08:17, Andrew wrote:
Lots of photos in yesterdays papers about the burst 32 inch water main
in London and the effect on an underground carpark.

For those who didn't see it (or hear the Jermey Vine phone-in),
this was reported as 'polystyrene expanded after being
submerged by a massive flood). I think not !!!. Do people
not know about buoyancy these days ?, or the reason why
massive metal ships don't sink ?.

The upwards force of the water was sufficient to lift the carpark
floor and the vehicles parked thereon, jamming them into the
ceiling. There seemed to be an awful lot of EPS under that floor.
It cannot have been there as a thermal insulation (car park),
so maybe there was a problem with the soil. Or maybe the builder
had a load of EPS left over and wanted to avoid disposal fees.
May be the builder bought the EPS and was told by building
control that it was the wrong stuff - get rid of it ?.

There used to be a website hosted by TML the chunnel builders,
and how they built the Sangatte side. Essentially this is
a massive concrete-lined hole, presumably below the water table,
and to stop it popping back up, something like 160,000 tons
of concrete were poured to cover it.

Not exactly a novel concept in civil engineering, at least in Norway:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geofoam

--
Rod

Obviously they never put a drain under it.

Expanded polystyrene was being phased out when I was involved in favour of expanded polypropelene.

On Tue, 11 Oct 2016 14:47:24 +0100, "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:

In article ,
T i m wrote:
It would be unreasonable to expect any reporter to be an expert on all
things technical. So most are merely reporting what they've been told - or
have to make it up if they can't find a true expert.

Yeahbut are there really people out there [1] that don't know that
expanded polystyrene floats (and very well, as I suspect most here
found out as kids?). I only saw a glimpse of it on the TV news when it
first happened and I then explained to the Mrs *what* had happened
(that the concrete car-park floor floated up on the polystyrene and
crushed the cars against the roof). What I didn't know was why so much
EPS was there in the first place but I guessed it might be something
to do with a large unwanted void that needed filling cheaply? No
wonder 'the world' is such a complete mystery to many of them. ;-(

I do agree Tim. You'd certainly think that most would have noticed this.

Yup.

But I'm constantly surprised how little some apparently clever people even
notice such things.

I think this is down to how we 'see' stuff. Like, when I look at a car
I don't see the colour or the styling (particularly) but see it like
an exploded diagram. I do that because I am more interested in the
mechanics of something that I might have to fix. Access to (and the
price of) spares is right up there for me along with general
reliability.

And this 'interest' and practical (non arty) 'bent' is something I've
had since everyone who knows me can remember. Mum (who worked at my
primany school) would bring broken electrical stuff home for 'Tim to
take to bits' (because they knew I liked doing such things) and they
would often get them back the next day all cleaned up and working
again. A secondary school I had a Saturday job in a shop that bought
and sold pretty well anything (pre-boot sale days) and anything broken
or needed attention would be given to me to fix (and again, I often
did) and then resell.

Let alone transfer it to a practical application.

If you can't see something for it's component parts then it must be
difficult to then take that forward.

The thing is, we aren't born with such skills but we might be born
with an innate attitude to enquire. From that we learn and we can then
build upon that to learn (or predict) more stuff.

The problem being like that is the more you know you more you realise
you don't know. For all the others I guess it's 'ignorance is bliss'?
;-)

A mate has asked me to look at a hand basin he has in a new extension
he only had built 18 months ago. The basin is currently sitting on a
small wall mounted unit and that in turn is only held on the wall by
two small adjustable brackets. So, one of the brackets broke, the
whole lot was starting to collapse and a handyman has made up a couple
of wooden blocks to go between the bottom of the 'cabinet' and the
floor.

So, speaking to the suppliers of the basin it is *supposed* to be
fixed to the wall (and therefore self-supporting) and so the small
brackets on the under-basin cabinet wouldn't have to take that much
weight.

Now, the basin should be supported by two double ended 'studs', one
end has a long woodscrew and is supposed to be fixed securely into the
wall and the other a machine screw to take a nylon washer, steel
washer then nut. The problem is I have no idea what is behind holes
though the tiles where the fasteners should be and therefore how to
help him out of this situation.

Now, if there really is no studwork the only thing I can think of is
cutting a 'letterbox' type hole across the (stud) wall (the shower is
on the other side) under the sink and trying to get some battens
(vertically) or blocks behind the plasterboard to give us something
substantial to screw into and spread the load but all that is a big
unknown and carries some risk (plastic water / waste pipes + other
unknowns behind there).

I would much rather remove all of the tiles / plasterboard and
properly fix extra studwork to the existing but that's making the job
even bigger. ;-(

I think the first thing to do will be to get the basin and unit off
and see what my stud finder can pick up and go from there ... or find
a portable X-ray camera so I can get my mental 'exploded diagram' ...
;-)

Cheers, T i m

On Tue, 11 Oct 2016 15:41:50 +0100, Chris J Dixon
wrote:

T i m wrote:

I wonder if the same people watched that Grand Designs recently where
they built a *house* beside a river but built it on a large 'float'
so it would rise up if there was any flooding?

I did hear somewhere that large swimming pools sometimes have a
special valve fitted so that if the water table rises whilst it
is empty it doesn't just pop out of the ground.

Fascinating ... showing there is little difference between an empty
swimming pool and a concrete barge ... or a multi-story car park floor
and a pontoon or crude car ferry. ;-)

Cheers, T i m

harry Wrote in message:
On Tuesday, 11 October 2016 18:15:23 UTC+1, polygonum wrote:
On 11/10/2016 08:17, Andrew wrote:
Lots of photos in yesterdays papers about the burst 32 inch water main
in London and the effect on an underground carpark.

For those who didn't see it (or hear the Jermey Vine phone-in),
this was reported as 'polystyrene expanded after being
submerged by a massive flood). I think not !!!. Do people
not know about buoyancy these days ?, or the reason why
massive metal ships don't sink ?.

The upwards force of the water was sufficient to lift the carpark
floor and the vehicles parked thereon, jamming them into the
ceiling. There seemed to be an awful lot of EPS under that floor.
It cannot have been there as a thermal insulation (car park),
so maybe there was a problem with the soil. Or maybe the builder
had a load of EPS left over and wanted to avoid disposal fees.
May be the builder bought the EPS and was told by building
control that it was the wrong stuff - get rid of it ?.

There used to be a website hosted by TML the chunnel builders,
and how they built the Sangatte side. Essentially this is
a massive concrete-lined hole, presumably below the water table,
and to stop it popping back up, something like 160,000 tons
of concrete were poured to cover it.

Not exactly a novel concept in civil engineering, at least in Norway:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geofoam

--
Rod

Obviously they never put a drain under it.


Or the flood water came up through the drain under it...

A drain *through* it might have been better, just flooded cars in
a car park

Expanded polystyrene was being phased out when I was involved in favour of expanded polypropelene.

Wouldn't have made any difference.

--
Jim K


----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/

"T i m" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 11 Oct 2016 14:47:24 +0100, "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:

In article ,
T i m wrote:
It would be unreasonable to expect any reporter to be an expert on all
things technical. So most are merely reporting what they've been told -
or
have to make it up if they can't find a true expert.

Yeahbut are there really people out there [1] that don't know that
expanded polystyrene floats (and very well, as I suspect most here
found out as kids?). I only saw a glimpse of it on the TV news when it
first happened and I then explained to the Mrs *what* had happened
(that the concrete car-park floor floated up on the polystyrene and
crushed the cars against the roof). What I didn't know was why so much
EPS was there in the first place but I guessed it might be something
to do with a large unwanted void that needed filling cheaply? No
wonder 'the world' is such a complete mystery to many of them. ;-(

I do agree Tim. You'd certainly think that most would have noticed this.

Yup.

But I'm constantly surprised how little some apparently clever people even
notice such things.

I think this is down to how we 'see' stuff. Like, when I look at a car
I don't see the colour or the styling (particularly) but see it like
an exploded diagram. I do that because I am more interested in the
mechanics of something that I might have to fix. Access to (and the
price of) spares is right up there for me along with general
reliability.

And this 'interest' and practical (non arty) 'bent' is something I've
had since everyone who knows me can remember. Mum (who worked at my
primany school) would bring broken electrical stuff home for 'Tim to
take to bits' (because they knew I liked doing such things) and they
would often get them back the next day all cleaned up and working
again. A secondary school I had a Saturday job in a shop that bought
and sold pretty well anything (pre-boot sale days) and anything broken
or needed attention would be given to me to fix (and again, I often
did) and then resell.

Let alone transfer it to a practical application.

If you can't see something for it's component parts then it must be
difficult to then take that forward.

The thing is, we aren't born with such skills

There is some evidence that some of us are.

I've always been able to look at basic mechanical stuff and
decide if its going to be strong enough. My dad was never
able to do that and even as a kid I knew that some of the
stuff he did just wasn't going to be viable. He was into
wood work and making cupboards and stuff like that.

I was also able to take a box of bits that one of the neighbours
kids had produced when he pulled a bike epicyclic gearbox to
bits and couldn't work out how to put it together again, and
was able to put it together myself without ever having seen
one in bits before I put it together again with nothing left over.

But I am completely hopeless about coming up with
good names for a company or product etc, let alone
painting picture or composing a tune etc.

but we might be born with an innate attitude to enquire.

Most kids are. Some are much more selective about
what they enquire about when they turn into adults.

There is quite a bit of evidence that some have a natural
talent for some stuff like mathematics and other never
seem to be able to grasp even the most basic concepts of
statistics and realise that just because a couple of things
happen at the same time doesn't mean that one caused
the other and that just because you grovelled to some
god or other and something you grovelled about happened,
says nothing useful about whether grovelling works.

From that we learn and we can then build
upon that to learn (or predict) more stuff.

The problem being like that is the more you know you more you realise
you don't know. For all the others I guess it's 'ignorance is bliss'?
;-)

A mate has asked me to look at a hand basin he has in a new extension
he only had built 18 months ago. The basin is currently sitting on a
small wall mounted unit and that in turn is only held on the wall by
two small adjustable brackets. So, one of the brackets broke, the whole
lot was starting to collapse and a handyman has made up a couple of
wooden blocks to go between the bottom of the 'cabinet' and the floor.

So, speaking to the suppliers of the basin it is *supposed* to be
fixed to the wall (and therefore self-supporting) and so the small
brackets on the under-basin cabinet wouldn't have to take that much
weight.

Now, the basin should be supported by two double ended 'studs', one
end has a long woodscrew and is supposed to be fixed securely into the
wall and the other a machine screw to take a nylon washer, steel
washer then nut. The problem is I have no idea what is behind holes
though the tiles where the fasteners should be and therefore how to
help him out of this situation.

Now, if there really is no studwork the only thing I can think of is
cutting a 'letterbox' type hole across the (stud) wall (the shower is
on the other side) under the sink and trying to get some battens
(vertically) or blocks behind the plasterboard to give us something
substantial to screw into and spread the load but all that is a big
unknown and carries some risk (plastic water / waste pipes + other
unknowns behind there).

I would much rather remove all of the tiles / plasterboard and
properly fix extra studwork to the existing but that's making the job
even bigger. ;-(

I think the first thing to do will be to get the basin and unit off
and see what my stud finder can pick up and go from there ... or find
a portable X-ray camera so I can get my mental 'exploded diagram' ...
;-)

On 12/10/2016 06:51, Rod Speed wrote:


"harry" wrote in message
...
On Tuesday, 11 October 2016 12:59:24 UTC+1, whisky-dave wrote:
On Tuesday, 11 October 2016 12:40:05 UTC+1, T i m wrote:
On Tue, 11 Oct 2016 11:07:08 +0100, "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:

In article ,
Chris Hogg wrote:
It's a measure of the technical competence of media reporters: they
haven't any; they're technically illiterate!

It would be unreasonable to expect any reporter to be an expert on
all
things technical. So most are merely reporting what they've been
told - or
have to make it up if they can't find a true expert.

Yeahbut are there really people out there [1] that don't know that
expanded polystyrene floats (and very well, as I suspect most here
found out as kids?).

Yes I know EPS floats but I didn;t know carparks used it for hardcore.
There'll be plenty of samsung galaxy 5s availabe for hardcore too
soon :-)

When I was involved, unwanted holes like that were made up with a
cheap weak concrete mix.
Ie very little cement.

And then those with even half a clue realised that polystyrene is much
cheaper.
What is the "foamed concrete" which get mentioned when sinkholes get
filled ?

In message , T i m
writes
On Tue, 11 Oct 2016 15:41:50 +0100, Chris J Dixon
wrote:

T i m wrote:

I wonder if the same people watched that Grand Designs recently where
they built a *house* beside a river but built it on a large 'float'
so it would rise up if there was any flooding?

I did hear somewhere that large swimming pools sometimes have a
special valve fitted so that if the water table rises whilst it
is empty it doesn't just pop out of the ground.

Fascinating ... showing there is little difference between an empty
swimming pool and a concrete barge ... or a multi-story car park floor
and a pontoon or crude car ferry. ;-)

The people who sold me a plastic pond liner were quite jovial about
Thameside dwellers finding their pools emptying as the local water table
changed.

--
Tim Lamb

On 12/10/16 20:38, Robert wrote:
On 12/10/2016 06:51, Rod Speed wrote:


"harry" wrote in message
...
On Tuesday, 11 October 2016 12:59:24 UTC+1, whisky-dave wrote:
On Tuesday, 11 October 2016 12:40:05 UTC+1, T i m wrote:
On Tue, 11 Oct 2016 11:07:08 +0100, "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:

In article ,
Chris Hogg wrote:
It's a measure of the technical competence of media reporters:
they
haven't any; they're technically illiterate!

It would be unreasonable to expect any reporter to be an expert on
all
things technical. So most are merely reporting what they've been
told - or
have to make it up if they can't find a true expert.

Yeahbut are there really people out there [1] that don't know that
expanded polystyrene floats (and very well, as I suspect most here
found out as kids?).

Yes I know EPS floats but I didn;t know carparks used it for hardcore.
There'll be plenty of samsung galaxy 5s availabe for hardcore too
soon :-)

When I was involved, unwanted holes like that were made up with a
cheap weak concrete mix.
Ie very little cement.

And then those with even half a clue realised that polystyrene is much
cheaper.
What is the "foamed concrete" which get mentioned when sinkholes get
filled ?

If its what I think it is, its what it says. Concrete with air or other
gas bubbles in it. Maybe they use baking powder as well as cement ;-)


--
New Socialism consists essentially in being seen to have your heart in
the right place whilst your head is in the clouds and your hand is in
someone else's pocket.

"Robert" wrote in message
...
On 12/10/2016 06:51, Rod Speed wrote:


"harry" wrote in message
...
On Tuesday, 11 October 2016 12:59:24 UTC+1, whisky-dave wrote:
On Tuesday, 11 October 2016 12:40:05 UTC+1, T i m wrote:
On Tue, 11 Oct 2016 11:07:08 +0100, "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:

In article ,
Chris Hogg wrote:
It's a measure of the technical competence of media reporters:
they
haven't any; they're technically illiterate!

It would be unreasonable to expect any reporter to be an expert on
all
things technical. So most are merely reporting what they've been
told - or
have to make it up if they can't find a true expert.

Yeahbut are there really people out there [1] that don't know that
expanded polystyrene floats (and very well, as I suspect most here
found out as kids?).

Yes I know EPS floats but I didn;t know carparks used it for hardcore.
There'll be plenty of samsung galaxy 5s availabe for hardcore too
soon :-)

When I was involved, unwanted holes like that were made up with a
cheap weak concrete mix.
Ie very little cement.

And then those with even half a clue realised that polystyrene is much
cheaper.
What is the "foamed concrete" which get mentioned when sinkholes get
filled ?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foam_concrete

On Wednesday, 12 October 2016 21:35:59 UTC+1, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 12/10/16 20:38, Robert wrote:

What is the "foamed concrete" which get mentioned when sinkholes get
filled ?

If its what I think it is, its what it says. Concrete with air or other
gas bubbles in it. Maybe they use baking powder as well as cement ;-)

Aluminium powder iirc


NT

On Wednesday, 12 October 2016 20:38:06 UTC+1, Robert wrote:
On 12/10/2016 06:51, Rod Speed wrote:


"harry" wrote in message
...
On Tuesday, 11 October 2016 12:59:24 UTC+1, whisky-dave wrote:
On Tuesday, 11 October 2016 12:40:05 UTC+1, T i m wrote:
On Tue, 11 Oct 2016 11:07:08 +0100, "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:

In article ,
Chris Hogg wrote:
It's a measure of the technical competence of media reporters: they
haven't any; they're technically illiterate!

It would be unreasonable to expect any reporter to be an expert on
all
things technical. So most are merely reporting what they've been
told - or
have to make it up if they can't find a true expert.

Yeahbut are there really people out there [1] that don't know that
expanded polystyrene floats (and very well, as I suspect most here
found out as kids?).

Yes I know EPS floats but I didn;t know carparks used it for hardcore.
There'll be plenty of samsung galaxy 5s availabe for hardcore too
soon :-)

When I was involved, unwanted holes like that were made up with a
cheap weak concrete mix.
Ie very little cement.

And then those with even half a clue realised that polystyrene is much
cheaper.
What is the "foamed concrete" which get mentioned when sinkholes get
filled ?

I've seen concrete made with blast furnace slag as aggregate.
The slag is full of gas bubbles and is a waste product hence very cheap.

"harry" wrote in message
...
On Wednesday, 12 October 2016 20:38:06 UTC+1, Robert wrote:
On 12/10/2016 06:51, Rod Speed wrote:


"harry" wrote in message
...
On Tuesday, 11 October 2016 12:59:24 UTC+1, whisky-dave wrote:
On Tuesday, 11 October 2016 12:40:05 UTC+1, T i m wrote:
On Tue, 11 Oct 2016 11:07:08 +0100, "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:

In article ,
Chris Hogg wrote:
It's a measure of the technical competence of media reporters:
they
haven't any; they're technically illiterate!

It would be unreasonable to expect any reporter to be an expert on
all
things technical. So most are merely reporting what they've been
told - or
have to make it up if they can't find a true expert.

Yeahbut are there really people out there [1] that don't know that
expanded polystyrene floats (and very well, as I suspect most here
found out as kids?).

Yes I know EPS floats but I didn;t know carparks used it for
hardcore.
There'll be plenty of samsung galaxy 5s availabe for hardcore too
soon :-)

When I was involved, unwanted holes like that were made up with a
cheap weak concrete mix.
Ie very little cement.

And then those with even half a clue realised that polystyrene is much
cheaper.
What is the "foamed concrete" which get mentioned when sinkholes get
filled ?

I've seen concrete made with blast furnace slag as aggregate.
The slag is full of gas bubbles and is a waste product hence very cheap.

Nothing like as cheap as polystyrene.