Apartment Building Collapse 46

[dik]

"A six-story apartment complex partially collapsed Sunday evening in the city of Davenport, Iowa, authorities said. It was not immediately clear if there were any fatalities or how many people may be missing or trapped in the building.

Davenport Mayor Mike Matsen said there were "several people unaccounted for," but did not give a specific number or range.

The collapse happened shortly before 5 p.m. local time, Davenport fire chief Mike Carlsten said. The cause of the collapse was not immediately clear."

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/davenport-iowa-building-collapse/

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

 

[Sym P. le]

It seems the building was resting on the boiler or masonry wall it sits beside for some time.

I skewed the lower post collapse image to overlay the Google Maps image and the windows map exactly.

Edit: I tuned up the images to reflect the boiler location better.

 

[Tomfh]

didn’t think that Challenger was going to explode, and the engineers at FIGG didn't think the FIU bridge would collapse. But all of these people were certainly risking people's lives with their decisions

In those examples there were prior written warnings. Hence the shredding of documents, and erasing of phones that followed, as people attempted to cover up the warnings they’d received.

The engineer here seems to have missed that the building was about collapse, but there doesn’t seem to be any evidence he was warned by others about what was happening. It’s not like he was told the building was falling down, and instead he chose to ignore it.

 

[JAE]

I just don’t understand this mindset of engineers immediately going for the kill when another engineer misses something.

The reports referred to the potential for facade collapse, not building collapse.

I certainly hope you didn't read into my big post above that I was "going for the kill". I only repeated the lawsuit language and then suggested that there's a lesson here for we structural engineers not to take a 117-year-old bulging, fractured, brick wall lightly when multiple floors depend on it.

The engineer knew there were some serious issues with the wall requiring exterior facade support as well as interior beam support.
In looking at the photos (yes yes hindsight) I would have been very concerned with the situation based on my own years of working with old brick buildings.

So I think you are correct that the engineer's main focus was that this was a local exterior veneer/facade issue and not necessarily a potential for a full wall collapse.

 

[JAE]

It may also be germane to the situation that this was in Davenport, Iowa, and the engineer was located in Cedar Rapids, Iowa, some 80 miles away so I get the impression that they weren't there at the building everyday.

 

[dragon6172]

It may also be germane to the situation that this was in Davenport, Iowa, and the engineer was located in Cedar Rapids, Iowa, some 80 miles away so I get the impression that they weren't there at the building everyday.

That engineering firm has an office in Bettendorf, IA, which is right next to Davenport. The engineer whose name appears on the documents appears to be at the Bettendorf office.

 

[Factoter]

Code of Hammurabi

https://sourcebooks.fordham.edu/ancient/hamcode.asp

228. If a builder build a house for some one and complete it, he shall give him a fee of two shekels in money for each sar of surface.

229 If a builder build a house for some one, and does not construct it properly, and the house which he built fall in and kill its owner, then that builder shall be put to death.

230. If it kill the son of the owner the son of that builder shall be put to death.

231. If it kill a slave of the owner, then he shall pay slave for slave to the owner of the house.

232. If it ruin goods, he shall make compensation for all that has been ruined, and inasmuch as he did not construct properly this house which he built and it fell, he shall re-erect the house from his own means.

—Did the building owner take up the role of *builder*? —-by making repairs, re-building, as his own agent, as owner-contractor? This appears to be the crux of the matter; not the engineer, but the owner getting in over his head — but he had this right, to execute his own affairs. Better that the building fell on him.!

 

[chris3eb]

The engineer here seems to have missed that the building was about collapse, but there doesn’t seem to be any evidence he was warned by others about what was happening. It’s not like he was told the building was falling down, and instead he chose to ignore it.

We don't know what happened yet which is why I was only trying to comment on kissymoose's implication that the engineer couldn't have known the building would collapse because he would have run away, therefore he couldn't have been risking people's lives. That creates a false dichotomy in that either there is zero risk or there is 100% risk. I think we have all experienced situations where we thought things would probably be ok, but acknowledged that there was some risk. If you decide to climb up a tall ladder and reach out, you obviously don't think you will fall or else you wouldn't do it, but you certainly know that there is elevated risk and you are taking a gamble. In that situation, you are putting yourself at risk. The situations that I presented are all about putting other people at risk.

Again, we really don't know what the engineer did know or what he should have known, and we don't know if he did identify an elevated risk, but decided to roll the dice, or if he didn't think there was any risk. But to say that there is no way he thought there was any risk because otherwise he wouldn't have proceeded isn't really logical.

 

[MacGruber22]

Here is my opinion, which will not be well-received by some individuals on this site. The obsessive haste to provide armchair engineering assessments is wholly unprofessional and inappropriate. Additionally, the act of promoting this type of pseudo-expert analysis through monetized YouTube channels is near the bottom of the barrel. If I were a member of a territory, state, or commonwealth's board of professional engineers, I would have a lot of interest in investigating these media outlets for potential violations of statutory ethics by registered professional engineers. Also, those who give the impression that they are practicing engineering without the necessary license would also be given scrutiny.

I find that one of the most meaningful and difficult tasks as a structural engineer is to write a report giving opinions regarding the evaluation of an existing structure. I scrutinize every paragraph and every word that I write. I reread my drafts numerous times looking for uncertainty in my understanding and where I maybe acting presumptuous. I worry about how others will receive my report and if there is the chance anything I state could mislead them. It is a painful process, and I am rarely ever 100% satisfied with my conclusions - yet I am the person who is most intimately knowledgeable about the situation. I find contrasting this responsibility with the gum flapping on the internet quite disturbing.

-Mac

 

[dik]

In these areas the legal term is 'constructor'.


That was a great link... The old masonry design text I had by Amrhein had that as the introductory note... fifty years back.

With the exception of a couple of religions, the world has moved past that. An eye for an eye, leaves the world blind.

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

 

[Jeff Ostroff]

Mac you need to make sure you go after all the news channels also offering speculation about collapse causes while monetizing their content as well. Sounds like you have a busy weekend ahead of you.

 

[spsalso]

[sarcasm]


Mac is entirely right when he says: "The obsessive haste to provide armchair engineering assessments is wholly unprofessional and inappropriate."

We should follow the lead of NIST in their investigation of the Champlain Towers, where they are taking years to puzzle out their thoughts. Indeed, even discussing any of these disasters is likely irresponsible.

We should instead be patiently waiting while the Authorities Having Jurisdiction deliver to us the approved truth.

It's the responsible thing to do.


[/sarcasm]


spsalso

 

[Sym P. le]

I certainly wouldn't want to challenge my own thoughts let alone anyone else's.

 

[Jeff Ostroff]

Well, then why is this web site allowed to be up? why is anyone here in haste allowed to post pictures and diagrams here an give opinions? If mac is right this whole eng-tips needs to be shuttered

 

[Sym P. le]

That's and and I've been known to attempt sarcasm on occasion.

 

[IRstuff]

The obsessive haste to provide armchair engineering assessments is wholly unprofessional and inappropriate.

Sorry, but that's just not correct; no one on this site, or even Jeff Ostroff, has any official capacity in the fault determination of the collapse.

While the Champlain Tower collapse thread(s) have gone into the weeds, this one has not, and is a good learning and interchange opportunity.

TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg

faq731-376 forum1529 Entire Forum list

http://www.eng-tips.com/forumlist.cfm

 

[hokie66]

Many of us, if not all, are perfectly capable of offering opinions about building collapses. This site, and this forum, are learning tools. If one engineer can learn something which may prevent a failure in the future, then our efforts are worth it. Many of the failures we see never result in official reports, at least reports that are made public. So waiting until the official version is released is a fool's errand in most cases.

 

[JAE]

I agree with IRstuff and hokie66.

 

[SWComposites]

Agree. There should be no issue with engineers on this site discussing these failures and trying to learn from them.

On the other hand, engineers posting speculative YouTube videos or making public statements on TV probably crosses the line into inappropriate behavior.

 

[pellucidar]

Speaking of videos we shouldn't presume to make, Joshua Porter (Building Integrity) has an excellent one up about this collapse, with a sequel coming soon:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=24Olee5DbOM

 

[Sym P. le]

I'll just dump these here. Hopefully they are self explanatory. I have to run.