We would love to hear your thoughts about our site and services, please take our survey here.
London South East prides itself on its community spirit, and in order to keep the chat section problem free, we ask all members to follow these simple rules. In these rules, we refer to ourselves as "we", "us", "our". The user of the website is referred to as "you" and "your".
By posting on our share chat boards you are agreeing to the following:
The IP address of all posts is recorded to aid in enforcing these conditions. As a user you agree to any information you have entered being stored in a database. You agree that we have the right to remove, edit, move or close any topic or board at any time should we see fit. You agree that we have the right to remove any post without notice. You agree that we have the right to suspend your account without notice.
Please note some users may not behave properly and may post content that is misleading, untrue or offensive.
It is not possible for us to fully monitor all content all of the time but where we have actually received notice of any content that is potentially misleading, untrue, offensive, unlawful, infringes third party rights or is potentially in breach of these terms and conditions, then we will review such content, decide whether to remove it from this website and act accordingly.
Premium Members are members that have a premium subscription with London South East. You can subscribe here.
London South East does not endorse such members, and posts should not be construed as advice and represent the opinions of the authors, not those of London South East Ltd, or its affiliates.
Correction re 3.875m.
For this first part of the service shaft the temporary diameter is 8.2m:
"3.1.1.2 Use of a temporary concrete liner In order to prevent groundwater ingress from the sides of the excavation and for safety reasons, the sides of excavation will be covered with a temporary concrete liner as excavation progresses. The inside diameter of the temporary liner will be 8.2m to allow a secondary, more permanent, liner to be placed post completion. The outside diameter will be 8.7m and the excavation size will be as close to this as possible (<50mm anulus)."
Phase 10, NYM/2019/0203/CVC
http://planning.northyorkmoors.org.uk/northgate/documentexplorer/application/stream.aspx?target=http%3A%2F%2Flocalhost%2FNorthgate%2FDocumentExplorer%2FDocumentStream%2FDocumentStream.aspx%3Fname%3D2019-03-21%2BPublic%2B-%2BSupporting%2BInformation.pdf%26unique%3D814806%26type%3DNLP11GL1_DC_PLANAPP
so 4.1m radius.
GK.
Causal is piloting 'ol blue............ he was in Germany last Month......... ;()
near Kehl..........!
All the best (Honk Honk :)
Chesh.
It was the blue tractor parked outside that gave you away
Quite right Gertfrobe...........!
I allowed the mech fitters, to pick 'em up............ :()
All the best (thought I'd treat 'em to something technical :)
It can’t be you, there’s no cable ties.
My Spectrum 48K can't handle it Marty...............!
could you describe the footage in less than 10 words please............. :)
All the best (many thanks :()
Security footage from last night https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=emmett+brown+cable&client=safari&hl=en-gb&prmd=isnv&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwi-yOH_nJbkAhUOb1AKHfdGCKMQ_AUoAXoECA4QAQ&biw=1024&bih=666#imgrc=6iwgqNB6VNZPKM
What about me stone theory.............?
jeez, I nearly fell in timing that...........! lost count at 79.3m............ :)
All the best (yesterday :() night....! )
You can get these laser gizmos - they don't dent hardhats like stones do.
leave it to you Chesh - I can't run so fast as I used to
lol
Verde
I have to say that I haven't even seen this photo / video but are finding the detective work between you guys fascinating.
I'm just trying to figure out who's Poirot. Who's Columbo and who's Hetty Wainthrope amongst you.
I missed the start of the thread so unsure if there's a body at the bottom?
At the risk of spoiling the investigation has anyone thought of just calling head office to ask them? I've called them in the past about things and they've always been keen to help.
I'd walk there, dropped a stone, and time it.......!
You know........ listen for the plop...........!
All the best (last time I tried, I was tackled by security :)
didn't end well...... so ok though, Rita bailed me out...........! off through the fence next time :()
Hi PQ.
Yes I thought of trying that method....until I realised they were using a fisheye lens on this camera. These lens's image scales are always radialy nonlinear (eg like Google Streetview shots) and there is severe image scale distortion as you move towards the edge of the shot. This gives the apparent size of the lowest tear ring being some 40% larger than the one above. But from simple trig it is not possible that that ring is that ratio nearer if we assume the camera is at the centre of the shaft (3.875m) from the wall!!
So I went back to keeping it simple. The vent pipe is strapped every 5 segments and there are nine lengths between the straps. covers 45 of the segments, 5 more fully visible below, a 6th part visible. With the wall ~4m away from the camera and the lens fisheye there would be at most 2 more rings below to get to eye level horizontal with the height of the camera. That camera can be assumed to be 2m above te shaft floor.
Total rings comes to 54 in that analysis.....and everyone has now nodded off. Unsurprising, in depth analysis IS usually dull.................but here very necessary at times.
Meanwhile we wait....not long.
GK.
PQ2079
But it did sound like a good idea.........
Verde
"Sorry still not helping with the accuracy".............!
ermm......... lol :)
All the best (blew my mind mate :()
Its possible to estimate the height...
-If you take the lowest visible concentric ring in the hole and compare that to the ring at the very top of the whole you can get an idea for the opening angle of the lens used to take the picture. Low ring is 18m - at 1466 pix (using my screens resolution), high ring is 18m - at 184 pix. Therefore the cameras field of view at the top is approximately 143m wide.
- Now half the values to we can use basic trig and you can see that it all depends on how high above the ground the bottom ring in the image is. If the lowest complete ring that we see in the image is 5m above the ground then the tunnel is 39.9m deep..... but if the lowest ring is 10m above the ground then the hole is 79m deep.
Sorry still not helping with the accuracy
DGR clearly a boyscout! I had the same thought. 1st or 2nd class? , measure the height of a tree :O)
Similar triangles.
Brad, patrol leader, Seagull patrol.
Scotman,
Absolutely and I appreciate your comment and that post from a few days ago. I am but making an assumption and engaging in the conversation.
One things for certain, it’s an impressive looking hole in that picture. Long way down to go yet!
Oracle
That would be a very appropriate assumption OraclePoly4.
I would still however refer you to my post aimed at you a few days ago.
Tread carefully. The walls have ears!
Chrisatbirdies sorry not predictive text - stupidity, re my previous message
You either need two sides, or two angles, or an angle and one adjacent side to be able to calculate it.
Unfortunately with the image we can't meet any of those criteria
Hi Christabirdies - Molly here!
Aye, that predictive text is a nuisance. Yes, that is where my head started hurting trying to estimate an angle and reverse the formula to calculate the length but the mind is willing but the brain is weak!
Myo,
As the SBR parts are arriving in earnest would one not assume the service shaft pre SBR launch depth is complete and ready to take the SBR? That would make sense considering it looks like a rather deep hole now..
Oracle
Sorry molkys.
Predictive text
Hi molly's.
The angle depends upon the height,which is the variable that we needed in the first place. So it seems we are back to square one.
Hi Myo Ffc and others –
I went for a different approach – using trigonometry. We have known variables and unknown variables. We know the true measurement of the shaft diameter and by my picture on the screen the scaled version at 18mm. We can assume the photograph was taken from the centre and therefore the radius is 9mm and the perpendicular angle is 90 degrees. We also know that each ring is 1m tall which we may use to see if our answer is feasible. After several attempts at modelling, I have come out with a – headache. Are there any mathematicians out there who can estimate the missing angle to answer the question? Is it in fact possible to do it with mathematics?