Royce and Bobette Haley

Mr obtuse

Tunnel is clearly defined both in engineering and common use it is not subjective because you want it to be. "Cut and cover Tunneling" is a TECHNIQUE NOT A DESIGN. The designs of "cut and cover tunnels" vary-arches, rigid frames, culverts stringers etc. I am finished with the Luke blog and bridge page. Kindly F.O.

"While the definition is subjective, listing the structure as a cut and cover tunnel would be a good compromise, as this design name sets it apart from a more standard bored tunnel."

No Mr. Obtuse, the definition is not subjective, hence the many sources that define tunnel the same way. "The design name"? it is called a box culvert or a steel stringer, both designs have been used for some time.

Luke how obtuse can you be. It does not fit the engineering definition of a tunnel as I posted. It does not fit the common usage definition of a tunnel. It is not a tunnel because someone calls it a tunnel. Clue in Mr. Obtuse Order follower

I posted the oxford engineering dictionary definition and the common usage dictionary. The FHWA does not accept it as a tunnel they accept the name of the technique as cut and cover tunnel and guess what gubment worker, because the gubment tells you don't make it right. I am sure as with most gubment crap it needs to be dumbed down for gubment people to understand they talking about a hole with a street in it. Steel beams on abutments are stringers MR. Obtuse

another cut and cover tunnel!

Luke, You strike me as a true life long government order follower. At the very least someone who spent most of their life in an industry that relies on government charity to survive. There is just a mind set in these people that is so enslaved.

Being correct is important in the ideas we express and what we want to communicate to others in these pages. You first cried I was some sort of anti engineering and I presented facts that engineering does not support what you said. the vast, vast majority of definitions for tunnel, including engineering definitions do not support your inaccurate assessment and still you argue (order follower mentality). You attack being accurate and correct on the pages?

Your links do not provide a definition of a tunnel.

This quote covers the basics of your links.

" The contents do not

necessarily reflect policy of the Department of Transportation. This report does not

constitute a standard, specification, or regulation. The United States Government

does not endorse products or manufacturers. "

Again, digging a ditch and throwing logs over it does not a tunnel make.

Calling it Almond milk does not make it Milk, no matter who calls it Almond milk or how many. There are generally agreed upon definitions for things, including tunnels, cut and cover does not fulfill the definition of a tunnel in any commonly associated definition of tunnel.

To finish off the conversation,

The FHWA has no accepted definition of a tunnel, (call what ever you like a tunnel), the AASHTO does not have an accepted definition of tunnel, only what defines weather it is a short or long tunnel.

https://www.ldoceonline.com/Engineering-topic/tunnel_2

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tunnel

The NFPA defines a tunnel as an "underground" structure longer than 75 feet

http://www.oxfordreference.com/abstract/10.1093/acref/978019...

on and on and on

http://bridgehunter.com/va/bedford/ns-goose-creek-trail/

It is a tunnel now

North Nash Street-Stringer-http://bridgehunter.com/scripts/bridge/add-nbi.cgi?fips=51013;id=000000000000069;v=2017;from=54502

Fort Meyer Drive-Stringer-http://bridgehunter.com/scripts/bridge/add-nbi.cgi?fips=51013;id=000000000000071;v=2017;from=54502

North Lynn Street-Stringer-http://bridgehunter.com/scripts/bridge/add-nbi.cgi?fips=51013;id=000000000000073;v=2017;from=54502

All draw bridges in front of castles are now tunnels when down.

Cut and Cover the Almond milk of engineering.

Not accessible to public, restricted access on Fort Belvoir

Duplicate of http://bridgehunter.com/va/fairfax/3300024U0000000/

Duplicate of http://bridgehunter.com/va/fairfax/3300024U0000000/

I thought tubes were tubes and stringers were stringers.

I suppose you could make an argument for the tubes as they are actually under something. This "tunnel" is not under anything, a pretty standard definition of tunnel. Otherwise do we start adding all the wide stringers as tunnels, cities are full of them, not to mention NBI (the gospel) lists it as stringers. And yea, the common and reasonable definition of something is generally best used, don't you think?

Royce

This is a duplicate of http://bridgehunter.com/pa/philadelphia/bh46188/

"even VDOT calls it a tunnel" LOL, well if the government says so it must be true.

This is not a tunnel