Hard Rock Hotel under construction in New Orleans collapses... 119

[IceNine]

As structural engineers, a building collapse is our worst nightmare. When it happens, we all want to know why. When we have access to a signed and sealed set of drawings for the structure, I think it is perfectly acceptable to discuss them.
These were sealed permit drawings. When I submit a set of signed and sealed drawings for permit, the building official has every right to believe they are complete drawings that the building can be constructed with. These drawings raise a lot of red flags and I keep hoping there was a revised set, but in the end, the building collapsed and we should all try to learn from it.

 

[structuralengr89]

I have heard the Hyatt Regency collapse in Ethics Seminars over the years so many times, that I literally cringe when I hear a speaker bring it up. Mark my words, this will be the new Hyatt Ethics Seminar.

My hope is that somehow NCSEA and state MOs will use this to push state legislative bodies to adopt SE Practice Act requirements for structures that if designed improperly can do the public great harm.

I do not know the SER personally and he might be a great engineer. But the LA board of engineers lists his discipline (as indicated on his stamp) as CIVIL. I am a Louisiana licensed Professional Engineer with Disciplines of CIVIL and STRUCTURAL. I had to pass the 16 hr SE exam to get the Structural designation in LA.

But the Structural designation in LA means nothing...It is a title act state. Again, I do not know this guy and he may be an outstanding engineer. Maybe one of his EIT's designed it , put his Seal on it without his knowledge and submitted it to the city....but don't you think that a guy designing a 18 story building should at least have passed the 16 HR SE Exam?...which is just a minimum level of competence?

 

[msquared48]

Just on the internet:

https://www.yahoo.com/news/engineer-weighs-hard-rock-hotel-230112931.html

Mike McCann, PE, SE (WA, HI)

 

[itsmoked]

I keep thinking about what a slow, cautious, and dangerous process it's going to be to clean that up. Will they drop the whole thing and start over? Or, try to remove all the debris and continue? Probably depends on what the drawings show.

Meanwhile, everything around that place is now in limbo and off-limits.

Keith Cress
kcress -

http://www.flaminsystems.com

 

[NOLAscience]

My hope is that somehow NCSEA and state MOs will use this to push state legislative bodies to adopt SE Practice Act requirements for structures that if designed improperly can do the public great harm.

We have no way of knowing whether the collapse is even the fault of the EOR, so calls for changes to the state licensing requirement is a bit premature. It may be that the engineer is a terrific structural engineer, even though his stamp reads "Civil". There was no Structural Engineering test or licensing in this state when I passed the Civil Engineering exam in the 1990s.

 

[NOLAscience]

I keep thinking about what a slow, cautious, and dangerous process it's going to be to clean that up. Will they drop the whole thing and start over? Or, try to remove all the debris and continue? Probably depends on what the drawings show.

Meanwhile, everything around that place is now in limbo and off-limits.

Displaced tourists at the hostel next door:

https://www.wwltv.com/article/news/...apse/289-a9f851bd-8c0f-466a-be73-2c2d086a3d4a

 

[NOLAscience]

I agree that it is not be the size of the firm that indicates the quality of the work, but look at the EOR's Facebook page and see the scope of their other projects and ask yourself if you would hire them to build a 17-story building in a tight CBD area. Just seems out of scale.

https://www.facebook.com/heaslipeng...gradSTnqwB7kvwyohMymt221eJV7khXlB0UyiVHssw_KS

Hope the link works for you.

 

[NOLAscience]

Have we discussed the unusual framing in this portion of the structural drawings from 2018? I hope this was revised in the review process.

And let's not forget that this strange building was the creation of the architect. The structural engineer was simply trying to support the architect's beams and floors against the force of gravity.

 

[IceNine]

In looking at several of the photos on the NOLA site, it appears they used a Versa-Deck dovetail composite deck. If properly reinforced and shored during construction it can span 25+ feet.

 

[MTNClimber]

This is borderline doxxing by a bunch of junior detectives with limited evidence. Please tread lightly. Peoples lives and livelihoods are at stake.

 

[patswfc]

As JAE has pointed out, the corridor didnt have beams tying the steelwork on either side.
From looking at the layout drawings there are 3 steel braced cores all of which are on 1 side of the corridor, with no cores in the area that collapsed.
Obviously we dont yet know what triggered the collapse, but once something started, the lack of any tying back to a core around the perimeter (other than the metal deck slab) would explain the disproportionate collapse.

 

[PEinVA]

This is borderline doxxing by a bunch of junior detectives with limited evidence. Please tread lightly. Peoples lives and livelihoods are at stake.

JAE pointed out what the point of this thread is earlier and it is absolutely fair that we hold each other accountable as engineers. We will wait to see what the investigation reveals but in reviewing available information - SIGNED AND SEALED PERMIT DRAWINGS - we have found many instances that raise an eyebrow. Many items that make you say "well it probably COULD have been done that way, but should it have been?"

When the bar continuously gets lowered and things are done simply because they can be, even when they shouldn't be, simply to meet unrealistic demands, we all suffer. Who knows if that is the case here, but looking at the available information it sure seems like there were a lot of corners cut. As has been said many times already in the thread, hopefully a revised set exists that cleans up a lot of these concerns...

I think most of the comments here are strictly related to the design itself. Yes there are a few pushing for changes and commenting on the designer as an individual and I think that is misguided with where we are in the process.

RC

 

[MTNClimber]

So you would say you have enough evidence to start calling out people's full name and their online accounts? What's the point? I understand the desire to know what went wrong, but not to start doxxing people based on "SIGNED AND SEALED PERMIT DRAWINGS". You don't have any of the RFI responses, general correspondence, or access to what the contractors did wrong (if anything). I'm not a mod but I'm asking some people here to reel it in a bit and be more professional as this is a very serious event and doxxing could lead to serious actions.

 

[PEinVA]

As has been said many times already in the thread, hopefully a revised set exists that cleans up a lot of these concerns...
I think most of the comments here are strictly related to the design itself. Yes there are a few pushing for changes and commenting on the designer as an individual and I think that is misguided with where we are in the process.

I did not see the linkedin profile link prior to this and think that is not helpful but I think my comment here agrees with your general sentiment. I'm only interested in commenting on the design.


RC

 

[spieng89]

JAE - sealed and signed does not equate to perfect or without error. It's okay to critique the drawings, but some of the comments are dangling on the edge of arrogance. The comment was for the benefit of all to remember, you're only one mistake away from scrutiny.

 

[OHIOMatt]

I am not commenting on what we should or should not be discussing on this forum, but is it really doxxing if all of the information being discussed is easily accessible to the public? There has been no hacking of e-mail, release of files by a rouge employee, releasing of personal information such as addresses, etc.

In terms of the release of revised drawings, RFI's responses, mark-ups on shop drawings, etc. Those likely exist. My one comment on this is as follow:

Issuing a signed and sealed set of documents to anyone is an indication of a final design. This is not a promise to "clean it up later". In fact, the following statement is on the documents

"These plans and specifications have been prepared by me or under my close personal supervision and to the best of my knowledge and belief they comply with all city, state and federal requirements and I am not providing contract administration" followed with the verbiage stating "Certified Correct".

While I really hope that what we have seen is not what was final and being used for construction, one must question the design represented in the signed and sealed permit set.

 

[IRstuff]

In the wider sense, publishing peoples' names and LinkedIn, etc., is doxxing. That's unnecessary for engineering analysis.

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

 

[JAE]

I'm not suggesting that things need to be perfect.
No one here is.
And doxing someone's LinkedIn site is probably going too far, I'd agree.

Yes, if I design a structure that fails then I'm also in the hot seat, which...is...how...it...should...be.

Keep in mind that our entire profession has historically been largely based on self-policing, self-reporting, etc.
So studying, analyzing, and commenting on the public signed plans is not something to avoid, but to embrace.

It is our responsibility as engineers to protect the public welfare and safety.
In this case safety was severely compromised and it is totally appropriate for other engineers to study, learn, and gain insight into what happened and why.

 

[MTNClimber]

Yes it is still doxxing if something wasn't hacked. Even if it is public information its not warranted on this forum. We all want to know what went wrong. Calling out companies or public entities involved is fair, but not their personnel. Their name or LinkedIn account adds nothing to this discussion and only provides any avenue for someone else to falsely accuse someone of wrong doing. The news already does a good job of ruining innocent people's lives. We don't need to add to it.

Edit: JAE and others - I'm not saying everyone here shouldn't be looking at the evidence that's available. I'm just saying don't make this personal by dragging team members names and online accounts with photos into it.

 

[Rabbit12]

Where I am at, it's common at the time of permit submittal we also supply a complete signed set of calculations. On the last project I completed I don't know how well the reviewer went through the calcs but I know he looked at them because he commented on how well they were put together. In fact on that particular project the plan reviewer wanted 100% PEMB drawings and calculations before they would issue the permit. I don't think this particular reviewer would have approved a plan set like the one for the Hard Rock.

For the most part plan reviewers check for IBC code compliance for occupancy, egress, fire protection and similar items and that's about it. Any sort of structural review is probably rare because the reviewers just have no clue what they are looking at. However, wouldn't it be a benefit that a reviewer can have at least enough knowledge to identify things that may be out of the ordinary and at least verify they are backed up by a calculation? Maybe that's opening Pandora's box and is an awful idea.