Continue to Site

Eng-Tips is the largest engineering community on the Internet

Intelligent Work Forums for Engineering Professionals

  • Congratulations waross on being selected by the Eng-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!

Engineer charged in roof collapse 8

Status
Not open for further replies.

a2mfk

Structural
Sep 21, 2010
1,314
This guy sounds like he was telling the client what they wanted to hear, instead of the truth, and knew very well the roof was in bad shape. If this is proven to be true, then throw the book at him. Also, with something of this much importance, why this wasn't all in writing is very suspicious in and of itself. Even if I discover problems with a structure accidentally, I disclose this in writing to the owner and the building department.
 
Replies continue below

Recommended for you

dik,

Thanks for your list - I think it is a great reminder to all practicing engineers of how we can improve our own reports. I noted many similarities between this list and the 3 Powerpoint presentations that you have previously posted elsewhere in regards to this investigation report.

Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds - Albert Einstein
 
Thanks for the list, very informative. Most of what you wrote here seems to be related to sloppy legal/technical language and presentation. Would you consider any of the "technical" errors to be of a serious nature?
 
Technical errors can be the death of a report. I've not testified where one of my statements has been technically incorrect, but, I suspect as an expert witness you could become really uncomfortable. Some of the interesting statements with [page]:

“In addition, both options would require removal of unsound concrete from the soffit of the hollow core panels…” [19]

“According to Clinkett, the typical way to balance out HCS panels in order to achieve the desired slope in the roof was to place Masonite pads under them.” [32]; this went unchallenged.

“Precast hollow core panels are manufactured in a plant where the strands are prestressed and they are cast in forms and assembled in various incremental sizes…” [76]

“Current OBC requirements state that any major renovations to a roof assembly (involving substantial removal of existing material) require the renovated assembly to conform with “all other Parts” – which refers to the balance of OBC.” [64] This is incorrect; the OBC has a Part 11 for renovations to existing structures.

The scope of the report is not well defined... it is stipulated to be several things within the report. The report makes the same error that the engineer charged makes; it does not provide for exclusions.

“The design of the roof assembly…can be said to narrowly meet the requirements of Part 4 of the OBC (1975)…” [67]. Within the body of the report it lists nearly a dozen items that do not comply. This could be a significant error and open to challenge. Three notable ones: “The second is the structural insufficiency of the HCS.” [v]
“The flexural capacity of the beam [at the failed connection], when evaluated using CSA S16-1969 and using the 120 psf and 130 psf loads on either side of the beam is found to be insufficient by 13%.” [77]. “The design drawings do not clearly state what the design superimposed dead and live loads are.” [72] THis is a code requirement.

Dik






 
Why did the OPP hire an Architectural firm to conduct/write the report on a Structural Engineer's work? Were they trying to appear impartial, or as having taken a holistic view?

While I am not as experienced as other's in the forum (Dik for example), I have done a fair amount of Forensic work... I've yet to meet an Architect who knows much about the field, or who practices regularly therein. Even building science is normally Engineers!
 
NORR has an engineering group... but, the firm is predominantly Architectural. They are a 'spin-off' of the Parkin group... one of the more famous Architectural Firms in Ontario/Canada. The problem is that if the building envelope and parkade is deemed Architectural, then there may be some insurance issues where the Architect (OAA) may be liable. I'm not aware if they have 'a statute of limitation'.

Dik
 
Sweet,

My pleasure. I've decided that if I can't be a good engineer at least I can sit around reading poetry.[bigsmile]
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Part and Inventory Search

Sponsor