North Stand Construction Discussion

ssskies said:
Had to Coatigan, just thought if we could see the lines at a different angle it might make it any easier. Lots of photos at the end of the video and who doesn't love Top Gun cheers
Click to expand...
Just watched it, hilarious mate. Well played.
 
Genuine question now, for the wonky brigade. Do you find yourselves thinking that it is

a) the western beam that is too high
b) the eastern beam too low
c) each segment itself is fine, but the two halves of the roof back to separate quadpods are slightly misaligned, and the discrepancy incrementally tops in the middle bay.
 
Just to clarify, I have zero construction experience. I know we have banter on here about the roof but surely to God the structural engineers at Sisk are all over the integrity of the build on a constant basis. I do have experience from Aerospace where a great deal of the workload is independent verification/testing of other people's work. Is that not the same in construction.
 
I'm not sure if the Wonky Roof Brigade has considered how projects like this are detailed for erection. All the individual pieces will have been detailed and fabricated from a 3D Model to absolute precision. It just wouldn't fit otherwise, I doubt there was any drilling of connections up on a cherry picker, if it didn't; each piece would have to align and fit as modelled.

Attached a video link of the probable software used and how it is done.

 
I asked GPT, it came came back with this lot, and it is unthinkable that the structural engineers are not doing all this type of stuff...

A stadium roof is one of the most challenging structures to build accurately due to:

Complex 3D geometry
Long unsupported spans
Interconnected structural behaviour

Maintaining integrity throughout the process depends on:

Early control network establishment
High-frequency, precision surveying
Digital verification tools (BIM, point clouds)
Real-time deflection and tension monitoring

I suppose it's a bit like 115 and the law, we can all have an opinion but as they say opinions are just like arseholes, everyone's got one.
 
Last edited:
simdog said:
I'm not sure if the Wonky Roof Brigade has considered how projects like this are detailed for erection. All the individual pieces will have been detailed and fabricated from a 3D Model to absolute precision. It just wouldn't fit otherwise, I doubt there was any drilling of connections up on a cherry picker, if it didn't; each piece would have to align and fit as modelled.

Attached a video link of the probable software used and how it is done.

Click to expand...


The caps on top of the quad pods didn’t fit and took a lot of retrofitting to make them fit so there’s no guarantees.
 
LeonardoDaVnci said:
I asked GPT, it came came back with this lot, and it is unthinkable that the structural engineers are not doing all this type of stuff...

A stadium roof is one of the most challenging structures to build accurately due to:

Complex 3D geometry
Long unsupported spans
Interconnected structural behaviour

Maintaining integrity throughout the process depends on:

Early control network establishment
High-frequency, precision surveying
Digital verification tools (BIM, point clouds)
Real-time deflection and tension monitoring

I suppose it's a bit like 115 and the law, we can all have an opinion but as they say opinions are just like arseholes, everyone's got one.
Click to expand...

Great.
 
Coatigan said:
Genuine question now, for the wonky brigade. Do you find yourselves thinking that it is

a) the western beam that is too high
b) the eastern beam too low
c) each segment itself is fine, but the two halves of the roof back to separate quadpods are slightly misaligned, and the discrepancy incrementally tops in the middle bay.
Click to expand...
To my eye most of them are out, but only slightly, you're right the middle two should be level with each other, with each pair as you go outwards on either side also level with each other, but they don't seem to be. I had been assuming that it would all be leveled up sometime near the end of construction, but I'm not a builder.
 
LeonardoDaVnci said:
Just to clarify, I have zero construction experience. I know we have banter on here about the roof but surely to God the structural engineers at Sisk are all over the integrity of the build on a constant basis. I do have experience from Aerospace where a great deal of the workload is independent verification/testing of other people's work. Is that not the same in construction.
Click to expand...

simdog said:
I'm not sure if the Wonky Roof Brigade has considered how projects like this are detailed for erection. All the individual pieces will have been detailed and fabricated from a 3D Model to absolute precision. It just wouldn't fit otherwise, I doubt there was any drilling of connections up on a cherry picker, if it didn't; each piece would have to align and fit as modelled.

Attached a video link of the probable software used and how it is done.

Click to expand...


With all the 3d modelling and monitoring that goes on, things can still and do misalign here and there at times. And get fixed, packed, trimmed, plated, tigtened, loosened, etc.

These beams are some 65-68m long. Installed at a height of 45m above ground, off cranes and cherry picjers on temporary rails on a raked old roof. Tied back to a structure 80m away on the diagonal, which is itself about 70m tall. The tiniest incriment of a differential tolerance at one end, over that length can exponentially vary at the other.

But as a few keep pointing out, some way to go yet. And significant structural pieces to be added yet.
 
lyonfish said:
To my eye most of them are out, but only slightly, you're right the middle two should be level with each other, with each pair as you go outwards on either side also level with each other, but they don't seem to be. I had been assuming that it would all be leveled up sometime near the end of construction, but I'm not a builder.
Click to expand...
Hang the kippax pigeon from the middle to balance it out ... sorted
 
Coatigan said:
With all the 3d modelling and monitoring that goes on, things can still and do misalign here and there at times. And get fixed, packed, trimmed, plated, tigtened, loosened, etc.

These beams are some 65-68m long. Installed at a height of 45m above ground, off cranes and cherry picjers on temporary rails on a raked old roof. Tied back to a structure 80m away on the diagonal, which is itself about 70m tall. The tiniest incriment of a differential tolerance at one end, over that length can exponentially vary at the other.

But as a few keep pointing out, some way to go yet. And significant structural pieces to be added yet.
Click to expand...
Must be a nightmare assembling without preassembly jigs to make the complex possibly winding angles of similar but different components fit.
Over distance, with gravity to take into consideration, it can look wrong and what appears out of shape becomes perfect when fixed to a distant datum and gravity is supported fully.

I remember a visit to a chieftain tank assembly rof plant many years ago and being informed that the long tube that serves to fix the shell firing was actually machined with a bow in it simply to allow for gravity when assembled into the turret area of each tank.
 
They should have contact the Gene Kelly stand erectors before starting on the roof.
 
Kink Lad Cee said:
It seems like I opened up a can of worms with my post on the 5th of July.
If work has been stopped by Sisk because of things highlighted on the drone footage I don't think they should be too upset. If we'd not had a week and a half of debate on here and CP and SS hadn't highlighted it then the build might have been much nearer to completion before Sisk noticed the slope. It could have been fully insulated with the long single piece finishing strips all fastened down. It would be a lot more difficult to adjust with all that in place.

View attachment 163204
Click to expand...
Can't they just get all the pie eaters to sit on one side and after a few poznans it'll be right.
 
Coatigan said:
With all the 3d modelling and monitoring that goes on, things can still and do misalign here and there at times. And get fixed, packed, trimmed, plated, tigtened, loosened, etc.

These beams are some 65-68m long. Installed at a height of 45m above ground, off cranes and cherry picjers on temporary rails on a raked old roof. Tied back to a structure 80m away on the diagonal, which is itself about 70m tall. The tiniest incriment of a differential tolerance at one end, over that length can exponentially vary at the other.

But as a few keep pointing out, some way to go yet. And significant structural pieces to be added yet.
Click to expand...
A rubic cube looks a mess till it's finished. The Structual Engineers know what they are doing, let them do what they are good at and not tell them they are doing wrong. After all they spend 4years getting a degree, then have years on very difficult design projects. Then people come on here trying to say the have done it wrong.
 
WARBABY said:
A rubic cube looks a mess till it's finished. The Structual Engineers know what they are doing, let them do what they are good at and not tell them they are doing wrong. After all they spend 4years getting a degree, then have years on very difficult design projects. Then people come on here trying to say the have done it wrong.
Click to expand...
I don't think anyone was suggesting they don't know what they are doing pal. I myself have literally been saying the opposite, this is part of the parcel sometimes.
 
Coatigan said:
That's not true. The two central ones should be. Level with each other that is, making the middle bay flat (along the front edge).

Both logically, in a symetrical curve of with an uneven number of segments. But also as per the multiple drawings of it.
Click to expand...
You are absolutely correct.

You don't have to be an engineer to see the roof is wonky the naked eye and human brain tell you it is.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top