Part of I-85 collapses in Atlanta after massive fire

originally posted by: jefwane
I've seen it said that there was pvc pipe orv electrical conduit stored under that bridge. I don't know how in the hell you'd ignite either, especially the pvc. I could see the conduit generating the heat necessary to weaken steel and concrete, but am at a loss for how someone could get it ignited in the amount necessary to get it all burning especially accidentally. I really can't envision that amount of conduit being stored in an unsecured location. There is a huge problem with copper theft in the state of Georgia. If it was electrical conduit, the only accidental ignition i could see is maybe some type of accident with something like an oxy- acetaline cutting torch. Likec someone using the torch to cut copper into moveable chunks igniting their tank and starting a fire hot enough to get the conduit burning.

Things just ain't making much sense with this right now.

Conduit being stored under the bridge would have been the 'sheathing' only. It was HDPE pipes, no copper onsite.

Seems to be some homeless people decided to have a fire, remains to be seen if they set the pipes on fire intentionally or not. They'll have a warm place to sleep for a few years I would think now.

a reply to: Staroth

The only way a chair on fire atop a shopping cart started this is if someone were spraying gasoline over the conduit at the same time. It's obvious to me that there was something in those drums that nobody wants to talk about.

TheRedneck

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: Staroth

The only way a chair on fire atop a shopping cart started this is if someone were spraying gasoline over the conduit at the same time. It's obvious to me that there was something in those drums that nobody wants to talk about.

TheRedneck

Depends on how hot the chair was burning and if that was sufficient to initiate combustion in the HDPE pipes. A hydrocarbon accelerant would not necessarily have to be used. Not ruling it out that they didn't set the blaze with an accelerant, just saying it might hot have been needed.
Doubt there will be enough left at the fire scene to ever be able to tell.

He's been in and out of jail for years. Lots of stuff happens in jail. Like radicalization? Do we know anything about him? Like others, I get that it can burn hot -but only after it gets burning - which is hard to do. And the fact that the whole thing was one hour and done is just bizarre. One video I posted has a guy in real time saying he hears explosions.

a reply to: D8Tee

The heat produced from a burning chair might be sufficient to start that much HDPE to smoldering. There's no way it could have started combustion at that scale, even if burning as intensely as possible. A very effective accelerant had to be used, and the intermittent flames I saw looked like highly flammable hydrocarbons.

That does not mean it was gasoline per se, but it had to be almost explosive.

TheRedneck

Why is someone with such a heavy arrest record, many of which involve violent crime walking around free and able to burn bridges down?

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: D8Tee

The heat produced from a burning chair might be sufficient to start that much HDPE to smoldering. There's no way it could have started combustion at that scale, even if burning as intensely as possible. A very effective accelerant had to be used, and the intermittent flames I saw looked like highly flammable hydrocarbons.

That does not mean it was gasoline per se, but it had to be almost explosive.

TheRedneck

I have to agree I think something else is at play. I saved these pics out right when it happened. I had a hard time finding them online tonight, if you even can.

So...up first is the view of the storage under the bridge before the fire...not sure how long before.



Next is the baffling picture....this is right after the fire started, as you can see it is NOT big at all, and there are Atlanta PD on site. So...WTF? They just sat there and let it burn? I mean this pic is right when it got started....barely burning.

a reply to: Vasa Croe

The flame in that last picture is NOT HDPE burning. That is some sort of hydrocarbon or accelerant. The flames are far too high, and there's nowhere near enough smoke.

TheRedneck

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: Vasa Croe

The flame in that last picture is NOT HDPE burning. That is some sort of hydrocarbon or accelerant. The flames are far too high, and there's nowhere near enough smoke.

TheRedneck

What gets me about the last pic is those guys were on scene before it was raging, so why isn't the Fire department there and how did it spread so fast? I mean it appears they could have used something to push whatever is burning out of the reach of the stockpile of flammable....

a reply to: Vasa Croe

That's the point Vasa. HDPE will burn, yes, but it burns slowly with a lot of smoke. If you throw a piece of it in a bonfire, you will not notice a difference in the flames, but you will see sudden black smoke pouring out, and it will still be burning after all the normal fuel is gone.

The plumes of black smoke in the videos were from the HDPE. The flames leaping out weren't. They were from something much more flammable... not concrete, it doesn't burn.... not steel, it melts and rusts... not the fencing, it's metal... not the spools, they're just wood and have a moderase burn rate. That picture shows flames leaping out of what appears to be a 55-gallon drum; what was stored in the drum?

Fox just showed a view of something under the overpass that resembled a slowly-burning pool of liquid. That's probably melted HDPE. But something had to melt it, and that something had to put out one heck of a lot of heat to do so, just as it took one heck of a lot of heat to collapse the overpass.

TheRedneck

originally posted by: [post=22089122]Vasa

What gets me about the last pic is those guys were on scene before it was raging, so why isn't the Fire department there and how did it spread so fast? I mean it appears they could have used something to push whatever is burning out of the reach of the stockpile of flammable....

Untrained bystanders that aren't trained in firefighting should do exactly that. You have no idea what to do, no protective gear, and no equipment. Leave the fires to the guys on the shiny red Truck.

Why do people think that this fire is out of the ordinary, that the damage is excessive or that the materials in that picture could not provide that much fire load?
People love to use the space under elevated roadways for all kinds of things. Storing garbage or in this case spools of conduit is frequent and once in a while one catches fire. If one looks, you'll find many fires where a span was compromised. It isn't unusual.
The combination of wood spools, the conduit material which will easily melt and burn with the wood spools stacked like chimneys of kindling and the roadway holding in the smoke and reflecting heat is a perfect storm of materials. You also have limitations on what operations are possible for fighting the fire since you have a large collapse zone and an enclosed area acting like an oven with all the heat reflecting. So you have a high fire load that burns effectively with the wood spools providing plenty of BTUs to help get the synthetics rolling and it is in an area that acts like an oven.
People get the land below the overpasses for cheap and often do things like recycle or transfer trash in these places. They catch fire with a certain frequency and sections of highway are severely damaged and closed a long time for repairs.

a reply to: LivetoFish

I took an industrial firefighting course, a two day event.

The first thing the instructor taught us was the safest method to deal with a large refinery fire.

The BBL method.

Beer, Binoculars and Lawn Chairs.

Leave the firefighting for the professionals.

It was the wisest advice I've heard in a long time.

Was fun to play fireman and put out hydrocarbon fires in a controlled setting, a real industrial scale blaze?

I'm heading the other way.

a reply to: D8Tee

We learned the rule of thumb, stand back and hold out your arm like you are giving a thumbs up. If your raised thumb doesn't cover and block the whole incident, move further away...

This was just another fire except it happened under a busy interstate. It wasn't powered by rocket fuel and the overpass wasn't necessarily deficient, just not designed for someone to turn it into a blast furnace. I know of a couple incidents over the years here in Jersey but it's anywhere that has overpasses and people that realize it's l8ke having a big roof for whatever dumb # they want to do.

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: Vasa Croe

The flame in that last picture is NOT HDPE burning. That is some sort of hydrocarbon or accelerant. The flames are far too high, and there's nowhere near enough smoke.

TheRedneck

Please explain what background or education was it that taught you this? There is a ton of smoke banking down along the bridge above but it's dark grey and so is the shadowed underside of the roadway causing it to be less obvious. That fire is in no way something that PD is gonna knock with an extinguisher. The smoke, volume of fire or color have no definitive bearing on the combustible. Materials will burn differently under different conditions. Ventilation, arrangement of the fuel, heat at the point it's burning all change. A piece of conduit may burn slowly or self extinguish if you just take a lighter or torch to it. That same conduit may burn vigorously if there is a massive heat source like the wooden spools, good airflow and a structure reflecting the heat back on the fire.

Subscribing to this thread.

Resurrecting this thread now that the I-85 repairs are nearly done. Highway is set to open on Monday - maybe even this weekend. It's pretty amazing actually. I thought this was going to take several months. Goes to show that even government can get a job done efficiently when throwing enough money at it. The construction company is in for a nice fat bonus for getting it done ahead of schedule.

Atlanta Journal

I-85 in Atlanta will reopen in time for Monday’s morning rush hour commute and probably sooner. The northbound lanes probably will be open sometime Saturday and the southbound lanes sometime Sunday, Georgia Department of Transportation Commissioner Russell McMurry said at a press conference Wednesday. That puts the bridge’s reopening at least a full month ahead of the original June 15 deadline. "This is a day of celebration,” Gov. Nathan Deal said at the press conference, adding: “It demonstrates the can-do attitude Georgia has." I

Contractor C.W. Matthews has been working round the clock since then and could earn up to $3.1 million in incentives for finishing early. GDOT has said the project will cost up to $16.6 million, including incentives. The construction process was sped up by the fact that there was only one full day lost due to rain, McMurry said. Though the bridge may have stripes and look ready now, there are still certain things that have to be done, McMurry said. Workers must install expansion joints between beams, complete the pouring of concrete side barriers, do electrical work in the median for street lights, clean up construction debris and finally restripe the roadways, he said.