|
The Modern Antiquarian Forum » Stonehenge » Stone Shifting 3 |
Log In to post a reply
|
|
|
|
| Topic View: Flat | Threaded | |
|
nigelswift 8112 posts |
Sep 01, 2003, 20:25
|
||
|
Right, this is the third instalment of Stone Shifting. If you want to know what went before go to Stone Shifting 2, which also summarises the original thread. Before the thread recommences I’d like to post the following from Siegfried Sassoon, which isn’t much help but it ain’t half good… What is Stonehenge? It is the roofless past; Man's ruinous myth; his uninterred adoring Of the unknown in sunrise cold and red; His quest of stars that arch his doomed exploring. And what is Time but shadows that were cast By these storm-sculptured stones while centuries fled? The stones remain; their stillness can outlast The skies of history hurrying overhead.
|
|||
Steve Gray 931 posts |
Sep 01, 2003, 23:12
|
||
No wonder I couldn't find it. You put it under General and not Stonehenge where the others were.
|
|||
jimit 1053 posts |
Sep 02, 2003, 00:15
|
||
Ta, Nige. Some of us access this site through Head Heritage (I think it looks prettier) so if the links don't work I have to go to the TMA site to find out what site people are talking about!
|
|||
|
Steve Gray 931 posts |
Sep 02, 2003, 00:52
|
||
|
I found these quotes on the web: "A bronze axe was recovered from the ditch fills of the henge monument in Dorchester known as Mount Pleasant. It was found with pottery dated to 2500 BC and shifted modern thinking on dating the 'Bronze Age'. " - BBC Timelines. "The Sarsen Trilithons (photo) appear to be stratigraphically earlier than the Bluestone Oval/Horseshoe and have produced three results. Analysis of these provide a best estimate for the date of construction of this setting of 2440-2100 cal BC" - English Heritage. Putting two and two together, I would say that it is entirely possible (even likely) that the people who raised the trilithons could have had bronze axes with which to cut down and shape logs for building towers. I know stone tools could have been used for this purpose, but bronze is more versatile and they might have had chisels, adzes, or even saws and drills.
|
|||
FourWinds 10943 posts |
Sep 02, 2003, 06:42
|
||
|
"... but bronze is more versatile and they might have had chisels, adzes, or even saws and drills." Axes definitely. Chisels I think so. Adzes possibly. I don't think any bronze saws or drills have been found though, certainly not from 2500 bce. Planks recovered from this time are split and drills where probably stone tipped. Within the next two weeks I am visiting the museum in Longford where they have a stretch of Bronze Age 'togher' (wooden road across a bog) preserved. I'll have a good look at the construction methods used there. Obviously it won't tell us what they could have done in 2500 bce, but it will tell us what the couldn't do in 200 bce.
|
|||
|
GordonP 474 posts |
Sep 02, 2003, 07:24
|
||
|
Health and Safety. Re Lever platforms. According to my sketchy knowledge of building site regs, platforms under 6m high are free of regs. Can anyone confirm
|
|||
ocifant 1758 posts |
Sep 02, 2003, 08:33
|
||
|
There's a whole bunch of stuff (including 'Working at heights') available from the HSE web site - http://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/conindex.htm I don't have time to read it all I'm afraid - work beckons...
|
|||
|
Steve Gray 931 posts |
Sep 02, 2003, 08:35
|
||
I think your 6m rule is likely to be "old-hat". I was speaking to a builder friend of mine yesterday about health and safety in relation to scaffolding. He said that there is a legal "duty of care" requirement on any structure (temporary or permanent) that can be used by people. This means that whoever erects the stucture can be held liable in law for any injury that somebody using the structure might sustain. He suggested that we talk at a very early stage of the plan to the health and safety inspectorate, let them know that it is a critical part of the project that we maintain historical accuracy as much as possible and ask them for advice on the matter. He said this is much better than going with a finalised plan of our own and having to argue with them.
|
|||
|
nigelswift 8112 posts |
Sep 02, 2003, 08:51
|
||
|
You beat me to it Steve, but I'll post it anyway... Can’t confirm or deny 6 metres I’m afraid though I know inspectors are encouraged to make their own on the spot assessments based on how they see it, which is why they’re loved so much. A fall from 6 metres would still be very bad so I think we ought to assume they’ll be strict. It’s a real jungle, eg. BS EN 361,363,354,355 and 358 cover full body harnesses, fall arrest systems, lanyards, energy absorbers and work positioning systems and since this will be a high profile job I can imagine them erring on the side of being extremely irritating. There’s also a whole raft of guidelines on erection of falsework here http://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/cis56.pdf I think the plan ought to be to work out the method and then get them to lay out precisely what they want, if they will. Then we can send it to the insurers. One good thing – it’ll be the same Department that was involved with the BBC. Maybe we should employ a consultant if/when we have the money, and have done with it.
|
|||
|
Steve Gray 931 posts |
Sep 02, 2003, 09:04
|
||
|
Interesting. Reading through the first document (falsework) and the one on access scaffolding, I think we can comply with the requirements provided we do a proper design with loading calculations and have a qualified engineer on site to supervise construction and dismantling. There doesn't seem to be anything relating to materials, so I think we'll be OK using wood. I know a structural engineer. He and I used to tune up minis together in the early 70's, but I haven't seen him for a long time. Still it's worth a try. The working platforms worry me. They have to be raised as building progresses and will need to have guard rails. If we construct the working platforms out of wood using the log crib principle, how do we implement a safety rail which is strong enough for its purpose, yet can be easily removed and raised to the next level? One idea that I'm sure will occur to Gordon, is to lever up the entire top platform (complete with guard rails) and shove a few more logs underneath. Trouble is where do these lever operators stand? We also have the problem with the main structure of inserting the new logs while the stone is being lifted. If the levers are 20 feet long and the support logs are 12 feet long, they can't be inserted from the working platforms. Ladders are recommended only for access to platforms or for "light work". I don't think pushing a 12 foot log under a 40 foot stone would be classed as "light work". Maybe we would have to "bridge" the gap between the working platforms and the main towers using something like a portable ships gang plank (with handrails of course).
|
| Pages: 15 – [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 | Next ] | Add a reply to this topic |
|
|
|
| The Modern Antiquarian Forum Index | |
