Article in the Post showing severe rust and decay due to a lack of maintence to the Gateway Arch.
http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/metr ... ddb0d.html
http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/metr ... ddb0d.html
- 2,930
For all the fanfare over the Arch Grounds redux, do we by chance have an 800lb gorilla in the room? How serious is this / could this be?
- 11K
I guess the silver lining here is that we have to assume the National Park Service will do whatever is necessary to keep the Arch from becoming dangerous or falling. It shouldn't be this way, but if it becomes an emergency we can be sure it will be taken care of.
I have noticed this for a long time.
http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/metr ... ddb0d.htmlAs civic leaders reveled in last week's unveiling of grand plans to remake the Gateway Arch grounds, there was an ominous element not discussed.
Almost 45 years into its reign atop the St. Louis skyline, the 630-foot monument is suffering from growing rust and decay. And nobody knows how extensive.
Corrosion, some of it feared aggressive, and severe discoloration of the stainless steel skin have long been present, according to engineering reports reviewed by the Post-Dispatch.
The documents and interviews with metallurgists indicate that the remedy could be as minor as an "expensive" surface cleaning or as elaborate as a full-blown restoration. One report, completed in 2006, called for a deeper study, for which the National Park Service says it only recently obtained funding.
"This is not yet a health and safety issue," said Frank Mares, the deputy superintendent of the Jefferson National Expansion Memorial, which oversees the Gateway Arch. "(The report) says learn more about what's going on. It's something that requires further study."
The problems are increasingly evident, with streaks and spots marking the upper reaches of the Arch exterior.
- 3,235
I noticed the marks 5-6 years ago and they have since gotten worse.
The scary thing is the National Parks has no idea how to fix the corrosion or clean the surface. They were told the surface needs to be cleaned within 10 years in 2005. 5 years have gone by and they still have no idea how to clean the surface.
The other alarming thing is that it leaks badly. We all know when water seeps in where its doesnt belong there are going to be problems.
It would be a shame to have a nice new riverfront and no Arch.
The scary thing is the National Parks has no idea how to fix the corrosion or clean the surface. They were told the surface needs to be cleaned within 10 years in 2005. 5 years have gone by and they still have no idea how to clean the surface.
The other alarming thing is that it leaks badly. We all know when water seeps in where its doesnt belong there are going to be problems.
It would be a shame to have a nice new riverfront and no Arch.
The stains on the Arch actually don't bother me too much. It's kind of like patina on a piece of fine sculpture. If they lead to serious structural issues, of course, that's a different story.
Hate to say it, but my reaction was 'typical Post-Dispatch.'
I feel they sat on this story until the designs were unveiled just to rankle the public into a 'why are they wasting money on a fancy new park when...'
I feel they sat on this story until the designs were unveiled just to rankle the public into a 'why are they wasting money on a fancy new park when...'
- 6,775
All part of their grand plan to destroy the city.shadrach wrote:Hate to say it, but my reaction was 'typical Post-Dispatch.'
I feel they sat on this story until the designs were unveiled just to rankle the public into a 'why are they wasting money on a fancy new park when...'
- 6,775
But clearly this was a calculated move, which implies intent.Alex Ihnen wrote:You can destroy without intent.
Or perhaps we should have sat on it until a major defect caused the Arch to shut down. You know, like we did before the elevators broke a while back. (We knew about that, too, but we figured there would be a much higher degree of negative national publicity if we waited until someone got stranded.) 
Hey bonwich, if you're responding to me—
—that's why I wrote, "I feel they sat on this" as my personal feelings are purely subjective and can't be refuted because they are perceptions. I did not make an accusation. Yes, wiggle words, but chosen deliberately.
sorry for the insult!
—that's why I wrote, "I feel they sat on this" as my personal feelings are purely subjective and can't be refuted because they are perceptions. I did not make an accusation. Yes, wiggle words, but chosen deliberately.
sorry for the insult!
shadrach -- I took note of the marks and streaking several weeks ago. I sought out to find out what was causing it. I soon discovered a "corrosion investigation" study completed in 2006 -- and, to date, not followed up on. I was briefly allowed to see the study before the National Park Service cut off my access, citing national security concerns. (All of this was in the middle of the Arch grounds events.) It took time to file Freedom of Information Act Requests for other documents, get a response, report the story, and get it into the newspaper. The reason this story happened so close to the timing of the Arch ground unveiling is coincidental.
- 8,913
straight from the horses mouth (allegedly). Gotta respect that!
- 2,930
My sole understanding of this is seeing the marks on the steel. I'm intently curious in knowing how bad this is or may be. For anyone who has seen the reports (including perhaps our friends in the organized media), I'm curious to know how bad this really is right now, and how bad it can get, reasonably speaking, if not given the appropriate attention it needs by the Park Service.
Are we just speaking of a couple steel covers needing polished? Do they need to be replaced? Or are we also speaking about corrosion inside the Arch itself, say along the steel fibers within the concrete? If there's a leak, is it new and/or something that the Arch wasn't designed to take?
I don't know if any of these guesses have any validity, and I'm not wanting to see rumors start up. If you have facts, please reply.
I also know that other major structures are frequently repaired with new replacement pieces, such as the Golden Gate Bridge having virtually every piece of its construction replaced with new metal and paint. Would such work be a viable fix?
Are we just speaking of a couple steel covers needing polished? Do they need to be replaced? Or are we also speaking about corrosion inside the Arch itself, say along the steel fibers within the concrete? If there's a leak, is it new and/or something that the Arch wasn't designed to take?
I don't know if any of these guesses have any validity, and I'm not wanting to see rumors start up. If you have facts, please reply.
I also know that other major structures are frequently repaired with new replacement pieces, such as the Golden Gate Bridge having virtually every piece of its construction replaced with new metal and paint. Would such work be a viable fix?
- 8,913
The arch is an national monument. It's not going anywhere. It will be repaired no matter what the cost.Downtown2007 wrote:
It would be a shame to have a nice new riverfront and no Arch.
Gone Corporate -- Yes, we are speaking about corrosion inside and out. We have a picture of rusting of the interior carbon steel on our website:
http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/metr ... b0d.html#4
So far, they still need to do more testing to see how severe the corrosion is between the interior and exterior steel skins.
http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/metr ... b0d.html#4
So far, they still need to do more testing to see how severe the corrosion is between the interior and exterior steel skins.
- 2,930
Thanks, didn't originally see that last picture.npistor wrote:Gone Corporate -- Yes, we are speaking about corrosion inside and out. We have a picture of rusting of the interior carbon steel on our website:
http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/metr ... b0d.html#4
So far, they still need to do more testing to see how severe the corrosion is between the interior and exterior steel skins.
OK, so how does this get fixed? Is it something as simple as polish and really good caulk, or are we talking about full replacement of panels and sandblasting (or something just as affrontive) of affected areas? Are we looking at quick fixes or years of repairs?
Also: How do modern buildings with steel & concrete construction repair themselves? Is this something unique?
Stainless steel does corrode and stain under the right conditions. The key is cleaning. Most modern buildings are cleaned. The Arch has a unique shape and height which makes cleaning difficult. It hasn't been cleaned since 1965.
But, if the Park Service doesn't fix the cause of the exterior staining (which is likely corrosion from the interior), cleaning will do no good. It will just keep coming back.
But, if the Park Service doesn't fix the cause of the exterior staining (which is likely corrosion from the interior), cleaning will do no good. It will just keep coming back.
It is likely that the main fix would not involve replacing the panels, but instead require rewelding the edges where they meet. This would most likely involve using a bit to cut along the old weld in order to place a new weld in the alignment. If the stainless steel surface is kept in good condition so that it is effectively seamless and water is not penetrating to the inner layers there should not be a structural problem. It does sound like it will take further investigation to be completely sure of where the leaks are forming in the metal skin and why they formed to minimize future recurrence.
The minor amount of surface discoloration is not what is causing long term problems, but the steel on the interior structure and bolts that are subject to much more significant rust or corrosion problem due to their composition. I also expect that the long term solution would include introducing a system to keep removing moisture and maintaining low humidity.
The minor amount of surface discoloration is not what is causing long term problems, but the steel on the interior structure and bolts that are subject to much more significant rust or corrosion problem due to their composition. I also expect that the long term solution would include introducing a system to keep removing moisture and maintaining low humidity.
- 2,930
Looks like the current policy on the Arch corrosion is to play ostrich & stick our heads in the sand. Dumb idea.
Arch Corrosion Continues Unabated
Source: http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/metr ... ml#Scene_1
I forecast some major effort to stave the corrosion, i.e. a scaffolding like the Statue of Liberty had around her in the mid-80s. Expensive, too. Hopefully some real intervention takes place before it gets too far done or someone gets hurt.
Silver lining: Here's an opportunity for some inventive engineer to come up with a genius way to regularly clean the Arch and make millions of dollars in the process, possibly an exclusive contract with the Feds in the process. It's a possible once-in-a-lifetime chance to preemptively get a RFP. Get creative, people; you'll get rich!
Arch Corrosion Continues Unabated
Source: http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/metr ... ml#Scene_1
I forecast some major effort to stave the corrosion, i.e. a scaffolding like the Statue of Liberty had around her in the mid-80s. Expensive, too. Hopefully some real intervention takes place before it gets too far done or someone gets hurt.
Silver lining: Here's an opportunity for some inventive engineer to come up with a genius way to regularly clean the Arch and make millions of dollars in the process, possibly an exclusive contract with the Feds in the process. It's a possible once-in-a-lifetime chance to preemptively get a RFP. Get creative, people; you'll get rich!
