Always a difficulty determining an acceptable life of something. Our wall was guaranteed another 50 years ( don't know how they calculated that) through catholic protection.
Far be it for me to say how to construct a wall that can withstand those conditions, but I have observed. When a wall fails it would seem you have plenty of evidence of what has happened, particularly at low tide and after some excavation. We can only judge on a few pictures (excellent they may be)..
It seems critical steel had rusted and failed in the topping and within the vertical panels, these vertical panels have broken some way down but leaving the bottoms vertical and steady in the canal floor.
Leaving the beam aside, it would seem they would have failed on their own, so I hope the replacements are of better life. And as I see it, it was the water behind the wall releasing its weight when the water on the other side of the wall in the canal receeded to its normal or even lower level at that "no water" surge.
This means two things to me. One: the water could not drain quick enough from behind the wall. And two: these panels perhaps should have supports at where they had broken, at some distance down from the top. Because I suspect this level is at the average water height, the zone where greatest corrosion occurs because of the oxygen available above and at a small distance below the waterline. The same principle where steel water tanks rust through at the top, at waterline level, rather than at the bottom where they are always submerged with water.
Just my "civil engineering" thoughts, because not all failed through "age".
Far be it for me to say how to construct a wall that can withstand those conditions, but I have observed. When a wall fails it would seem you have plenty of evidence of what has happened, particularly at low tide and after some excavation. We can only judge on a few pictures (excellent they may be)..
It seems critical steel had rusted and failed in the topping and within the vertical panels, these vertical panels have broken some way down but leaving the bottoms vertical and steady in the canal floor.
Leaving the beam aside, it would seem they would have failed on their own, so I hope the replacements are of better life. And as I see it, it was the water behind the wall releasing its weight when the water on the other side of the wall in the canal receeded to its normal or even lower level at that "no water" surge.
This means two things to me. One: the water could not drain quick enough from behind the wall. And two: these panels perhaps should have supports at where they had broken, at some distance down from the top. Because I suspect this level is at the average water height, the zone where greatest corrosion occurs because of the oxygen available above and at a small distance below the waterline. The same principle where steel water tanks rust through at the top, at waterline level, rather than at the bottom where they are always submerged with water.
Just my "civil engineering" thoughts, because not all failed through "age".
Comment