Home
Articles
Photos
Interviews
Forums
New posts
Search forums
Georgia Tech Recruiting
Dashboard
What's new
New posts
New profile posts
Latest activity
Chat
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Home
Forums
Georgia Tech Athletics
Georgia Tech Football
To Hell With Georgia
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="00Burdell" data-source="post: 53277" data-attributes="member: 5"><p>You are correct.</p><p></p><p>That arch is one of the most retarded pieces of "architecture" I have ever seen. However, it is a perfect metaphor for the school it represents.</p><p></p><p>Arches were created thousands of years ago because they allow one to span a distance without exposing any of the components to structural tension - everything is in compression. Stone, concrete and other early construction materials can bear compression but fail when exposed to even modest loads in tension. The only problem with an arch is the lateral thrust at the base of each side of the arch - it wants to flatten so must be "pushed in" from each side. For doorway arches, the lateral thrust is absorbed by the wall itself whereas for arched-shaped roofs, flying buttresses solved the problem (think Notre Dame in Paris). For free-standing arches in three dimensions (e.g., a dome), the ground absorbs the lateral thrust. </p><p></p><p>The third way to counter the lateral thrust of an arch is to, instead of pushing each end in from the outside, is to pull each end together from the inside. This is how the "genius" (by UGa standards, anyway) who designed the UGa arch solved the problem. However, this is completely retarded. First of all, the arch is a "figurative arch" which bears no load and therefore has no lateral thrust to absorb. So not only did the UGa doofus use the most retarded solution, he apparently didn't realize that a non-load-bearing arch <em>doesn't even need a solution</em>. But let's give the UGa clown who designed this thing the benefit of the doubt and imagine that he wanted the arch to <em>appear </em>as though it were supporting something other than its own weight. Only problem there is that he picked the absolute worst building material to use for an arch that is supposed to appear, like most UGa students and grads, to be doing something its not - its job.</p><p></p><p>About the only thing an iron arch could support is the academic reputation of the school it serves as a gateway to: <em>Nothing</em>.</p><p></p><p>And as if spanning a metal arch with a metal beam wasn't colossally stupid enough, the UGa mensa architect had one more design flourish up he sleeve. Now, I ask you - what is the only way to top the idea of clogging the simple beauty of an arch by using a beam you don't need to support a load that you don't have? I got it! Let's support the beam with no load with a column in the middle! I mean why stop at running a beam right through the arch - let's run a column right through it too!</p><p></p><p>Here's my final thought on this atrocity of an arch: as someone pointed out earlier, the arch was apparently inspired from a graphic used in the state seal. I get the idea. Its the same idea and comes across about as successfully as when a car dealership pays some loser to dress up like Sponge Bob for a sales event. The state seal graphic works as a graphic. Sponge Bob works as a cartoon. Its a sad day when you encounter the results of those who, apparently, don't understand the distinction between lines on a page or on a screen and reality. But this is pretty much par for the course for all things UGa - its all for show; ill-conceived, poorly executed and a parody of itself - just like the school it represents.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="00Burdell, post: 53277, member: 5"] You are correct. That arch is one of the most retarded pieces of "architecture" I have ever seen. However, it is a perfect metaphor for the school it represents. Arches were created thousands of years ago because they allow one to span a distance without exposing any of the components to structural tension - everything is in compression. Stone, concrete and other early construction materials can bear compression but fail when exposed to even modest loads in tension. The only problem with an arch is the lateral thrust at the base of each side of the arch - it wants to flatten so must be "pushed in" from each side. For doorway arches, the lateral thrust is absorbed by the wall itself whereas for arched-shaped roofs, flying buttresses solved the problem (think Notre Dame in Paris). For free-standing arches in three dimensions (e.g., a dome), the ground absorbs the lateral thrust. The third way to counter the lateral thrust of an arch is to, instead of pushing each end in from the outside, is to pull each end together from the inside. This is how the "genius" (by UGa standards, anyway) who designed the UGa arch solved the problem. However, this is completely retarded. First of all, the arch is a "figurative arch" which bears no load and therefore has no lateral thrust to absorb. So not only did the UGa doofus use the most retarded solution, he apparently didn't realize that a non-load-bearing arch [I]doesn't even need a solution[/I]. But let's give the UGa clown who designed this thing the benefit of the doubt and imagine that he wanted the arch to [I]appear [/I]as though it were supporting something other than its own weight. Only problem there is that he picked the absolute worst building material to use for an arch that is supposed to appear, like most UGa students and grads, to be doing something its not - its job. About the only thing an iron arch could support is the academic reputation of the school it serves as a gateway to: [I]Nothing[/I]. And as if spanning a metal arch with a metal beam wasn't colossally stupid enough, the UGa mensa architect had one more design flourish up he sleeve. Now, I ask you - what is the only way to top the idea of clogging the simple beauty of an arch by using a beam you don't need to support a load that you don't have? I got it! Let's support the beam with no load with a column in the middle! I mean why stop at running a beam right through the arch - let's run a column right through it too! Here's my final thought on this atrocity of an arch: as someone pointed out earlier, the arch was apparently inspired from a graphic used in the state seal. I get the idea. Its the same idea and comes across about as successfully as when a car dealership pays some loser to dress up like Sponge Bob for a sales event. The state seal graphic works as a graphic. Sponge Bob works as a cartoon. Its a sad day when you encounter the results of those who, apparently, don't understand the distinction between lines on a page or on a screen and reality. But this is pretty much par for the course for all things UGa - its all for show; ill-conceived, poorly executed and a parody of itself - just like the school it represents. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
What is the last name of the current Head Football Coach?
Post reply
Home
Forums
Georgia Tech Athletics
Georgia Tech Football
To Hell With Georgia
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top