this post was submitted on 02 Feb 2024
175 points (98.3% liked)

Technology

59402 readers
2981 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] mle86@feddit.de 24 points 9 months ago (3 children)

I'm no expert on inspecting bridges, but I'd think that you still would need a professional inspector to do the inspecting, only that they would save the time of actually travelling out to the bridge themselves and instead could do it in their office, no?

And then there are probably things which still need to be done on site, such as non-visual inspections (ultrasound, X-Ray, Vibration testing, Tourque measuring on bolts, paint thickness,...? IDK)

[–] linearchaos@lemmy.world 12 points 9 months ago

Not just travel time, but also climbing around on the bridge itself.

at the very least they would identify all the parts that need to be looked at in person.

The amount of time it takes a body to hand inspect every inch should be the lions share of the time. if it's not, you need a new bridge :)

[–] moistclump@lemmy.world 6 points 9 months ago

Visual inspection is an important starting point to determine if you need more extensive testing. You get a sense of the area, bridge type, and age of the bridge. This would be great for younger bridges that are low risk but should have a visual once over every couple years or so.

[–] dvtt@lemmings.world 1 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

30% cost reduction vs current drone systems which can't tolerate wind. I'm guessing more air+recharge time, damaged drones, skilled pilots, etc. all add up