CoastersRZ Posted October 24, 2010 Share Posted October 24, 2010 Speaking of Drop Tower's foundation. It is comprised of A series of piles driven into the ground with a pile cap on top of all the piles. In essence, both Drop Tower and WindSeeker are essentially large flag poles. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KIfan1980 Posted October 24, 2010 Share Posted October 24, 2010 I thought I spotted a soil coring location immediately off to the side of The Racer last Sunday, between the Red Racer and Vortex exit. Robbie - from your professional or theme park experience any idea how far from the expected ride location they'd take soil core samples to help design a foundation for a ride like WindSeeker? I know in my experience (warehouse type buildings), we've sampled a grid 50-100' from the building edge. Just wondering how things change as you go so much higher and to much more of a point load. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KIfan73 Posted October 24, 2010 Share Posted October 24, 2010 Speaking of Drop Tower's foundation. It is comprised of A series of piles driven into the ground with a pile cap on top of all the piles. In essence, both Drop Tower and WindSeeker are essentially large flag poles. Interesting. How big are the piles? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoastersRZ Posted October 24, 2010 Share Posted October 24, 2010 (edited) EDIT UPDATE: Drop Tower`s foundation was designed by Steven Schaefer Associated, a Cincinnati based structural engineering firm. The foundation utilized a 700 cubic yard concrete pile cap on top of 16 H-pile sections, which were driven 90 feet down into bedrock. As far as how far out the soil cores extend from the ride foundation depends on the soil conditions, ride design, aka the design loads. Edited October 24, 2010 by CoastersRZ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Interpreter Posted October 24, 2010 Share Posted October 24, 2010 Also known as there is no rule of thumb...site specific conditions and the purpose and needs of the structure to be erected govern. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HTCO Posted October 24, 2010 Share Posted October 24, 2010 I would assume that the Drop Tower and WindSeeker foundations will be a bit different. The forces exerted on Drop Tower are a lot more extreme than that on WindSeeker. Drop Tower mainly just has up and down forces, while WS has more lateral forces. So the foundation had to be a lot stronger for DT. Also, I agree with Terpy. Sorry this is poorly written! I'm heading out the door now! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tuskin Posted October 24, 2010 Share Posted October 24, 2010 As far as the pavers go did they say anything about the color? Are they going to be the same exact paver as the ones down by Vortex and company, or are they doing a different color or style for that matter? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KIBOB Posted October 25, 2010 Share Posted October 25, 2010 As confirmed by Jeff Gramke, WindSeeker will be located between Action Theater and Vortex. He mentioned that they considered another sight "about 150 feet away" but they found the soil conditions between Vortex and AT to be better suited for WindSeeker. Whether or not that means they considered the Flight Commander pad is up for debate. The Action Theater exit path will be modified to provide access to the new ride's entrance and exit. Also, the asphalt in Coney Mall will be removed and replaced with pavers over the off-season. Sounds good to me! I was just wondering around why the engineers decided to place WindSeeker where it will be located instead of the old Flight Commander spot, and I just remembered something, which I don't think was brought up before (please correct me if I am wrong), but wasn't Drop Tower/Drop Zone originally planned to go in the same said former location of Flight Commander, which we all thought would be the location of WindSeeker? However, the park also realized at that time, that the soil in that location was unsuitable for Drop Zone, so the ride was re-planned and opened in its current site in Action Zone. Flight commander was not nearly as tall, if not nearly even as heavy as Drop Tower/WindSeeker, and therefore probably did not require as pecise bedrock/ground specificatins as DT/WS, and could cosily accomidate that location. On the other hand, I am curious as to why the bedrock is not ideal in that location as compared to only a few feet away. Interesting soils we have here in Ohio! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Interpreter Posted October 25, 2010 Share Posted October 25, 2010 The drop ride that was to be located where Flight Commander was was substantially smaller and from a different manufacturer. When the park's long term plans changed, so did the acquisition of that drop ride...to my knowledge it had nothing to do with geographic suitability of the location of the ride. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoastersRZ Posted October 25, 2010 Share Posted October 25, 2010 It may have nothing in fact to do with the bedrock or soil conditions between the two sites. A bigger issue is that one of the sites is a brownfield site (the old Flight Commander site), and one is a green field site (relatively undisturbed site). The reason I say this is twofold. First, they may not have wanted to relocate the Eurobobble attraction elsewhere. Secondly, I think it is safe to say that when Flight Commander was removed, its foundations were not removed. As such, in order to put WindSeeker on that site, they would have to first remove the old FC foundations, and relocate any utilities in that area. Doing those things adds cost to the foundation/site work. Not saying it can`t be done, its just more expensive than doing it on a site that is say, next to Vortex without any utilities or existing conditions to worry about. That being said, I have not seen any civil drawings for that area of the park, so I don`t know what kind of utilities are in that area, or what the soil conditions are between the two sites. Whatever the final location of the ride, I`m sure it will still be popular. And it looks like at least a portion of Coney Mall which hasn`t seen much TLC lately will be getting some tender loving care. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KIfan73 Posted October 26, 2010 Share Posted October 26, 2010 EDIT UPDATE: Drop Tower`s foundation was designed by Steven Schaefer Associated, a Cincinnati based structural engineering firm. The foundation utilized a 700 cubic yard concrete pile cap on top of 16 H-pile sections, which were driven 90 feet down into bedrock. As far as how far out the soil cores extend from the ride foundation depends on the soil conditions, ride design, aka the design loads. According to my calculations, if the cap was 60 feet in diameter (I'm guessing, I may be way off)...That cap goes into the ground about 6.5 feet, on top of the H-pile sections 90 feet into the ground...whew! I think sometimes we forget that, although we're at an amusement park, we walk among some massive feats of engineering! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Interpreter Posted October 26, 2010 Share Posted October 26, 2010 Indeed, just look at Son of Beast... On the second thought... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HTCO Posted October 27, 2010 Share Posted October 27, 2010 Indeed, just look at Son of Beast... On the second thought... Son of Beast is a great piece of art. Horrible engineering... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Interpreter Posted October 27, 2010 Share Posted October 27, 2010 And I said "just look at Son of Beast." Terp, sometimes quite the literalist, who often says things for a reason Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoastersRZ Posted October 27, 2010 Share Posted October 27, 2010 Yes, it is amazing the amount of engineering and work the goes into these rides. Few people really appreciate the type of work that is required to generate rides and attractions and the number of disciplines involved. I have been fortunate to have worked on a couple of amusement park projects at a firm that I previously co-oped at. And I also have had the privilege of meeting an Imagineer down at Epcot and got some feedback from her. Maybe one day I will return to work in the industry, but for now, I am grateful to have a full time job at an architecture firm. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AZ Kinda Guy Posted October 27, 2010 Share Posted October 27, 2010 In my non professional engineering opinion, Son of Beast is engineered just fine. The park got what it asked for. The worlds tallest and fastest looping(at one time) wooden roller coaster. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Browntggrr Posted October 27, 2010 Share Posted October 27, 2010 Sorry that I did not read all 22 pages of comments, but Is the name of the ride going to be called WindSeeker, or is this just a generic name for the ride? Both. Welcome to Cedar Fair! Let's not pretend CF is the only company to do this. By my count, SF has/ had 12 coasters using the name "Batman" and 11 coasters using the name "Superman". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Browntggrr Posted October 27, 2010 Share Posted October 27, 2010 In my non professional engineering opinion, Son of Beast is engineered just fine. The park got what it asked for. The worlds tallest and fastest looping(at one time) wooden roller coaster. I would hope the park would have also asked to engineer a coaster that can operate efficiently and safely. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.