Seppe
Structural
- Mar 8, 2016
- 53
Continue...
Previous thread (Part 06)
[link ]
[/url]
Previous thread (Part 06)
[link ]
[/url]
Continue to Site
microwizard said:[
I am open to the idea of roof-first collapse, it is a valid possibility but still have seen no evidence for it. The security video that shows the collapse does not show the penthouse collapsed, but the whole building collapsing. At least without the first frames (which indeed are missing), the video is not definitive and can be (and is) interpreted both ways. The roof-first theory also requires a longer sequence of coincidental events. The garage collapse theory only requires chronic fatigue of garage level columns, and given the evidence of water encroachment into the basement, remains the simplest and most likely theory./quote]
Microwizard, I will have to challenge your quote for contrast but I do so respectfully and with an open mind as well. I am going to make a few points on here then let it be and let time tell what we all have spent hours trying to conclude.
Before I stumbled onto this thread, I had my own preliminary theories on the “core” trigger point due to a trajectory of poor decisions and almost laziness to act on extensively documented structural deterioration, avoiding the intentional act to ensure that this building was even safe for occupants to live in. And I still feel firm in knowing that the “core” priority of immediate construction needed to actually be focused on the “core” of the building itself. The foundation, the structures where, at its core, was screaming through years of water damage, evidence, and recent conclusion that the lower pool area/parking deck concrete, reshoring, and reinforcement MUST be first and foremost focused on and invested in NOW. And the simple fact that during the board meeting focus was actually being honed in on the ROOF first, which for reiteration of “simple”, also heeded the lack of guidance that with all the evidence of concrete deterioration and warnings of structural integrity, guidance and enforcement of ensuring the fundamental strength and integrity of the foundation and “core” MUST be completed FIRST before any consideration above thereof.
And making the executive decision to work on the roof as a top priority was the initiating event that continued feeding the history of “putting lipstick on a pig” except more like “putting more Jenga blocks on top.”
I digress.
I will make my 4 points now.
1) We only tangibly have few “witness” accounts from those who lived deeper in Champlain South, and unfortunately, we will never be able to hear more about the experiences of those who lived on higher floors. But the few accounts given seemed that the residents were very stoic and matter of fact - Not given in sheer panic due to the aftermath of a crisis situation, but more so given in firm and clear communication about the integrity of the building as a result of the recent roof work ensuing with a common concern about the present and future of the building in what seemed to be a “duty to warn”.
-” Fiorella Terenzi who lived in Champlain Towers East and who had a clear view to CTS, was quoted in an NYT article, “Ms. Terenzi said she had seen heavy equipment on the roof of the south tower for the past two weeks.”
- Pablo Rodriguez, said his mother called him to report "creaking noises" she heard a day before the building collapsed.
- Douglas Berdeaux gave an account of how Sabino was very concerned about the roof construction and “said it was vibrating her unit”. “She even went up to talk to the construction manager and told them whatever they were doing was making her rooms vibrate. She said she was worried that the ceiling was going to collapse on top of her bed. She also said she heard water around the elevator. A manager went up to her unit with her and looked around, and told her they’re doing some work, but everything was okay.”
-There was also significant water damage on the roof, right above the failed column in the garage, and Sabino clearly heard water around the elevator to the extent of where she knew it was substantial enough to report, and from there not being corrected or alerted for it doesn’t seem like it was a “normal” event to be occurring at the time.
Roof results of significant water damage documented:
2) Crashing was reported initially as being from above - if individuals attested for crashing coming from above, wall cracking coming from above, it was probably coming from above. Now talk about simple conclusions. (Quote: In a video interview her 15-year-old daughter Chani said, “I went to take a shower and I came out of the shower dried myself and I was about to get dressed and hear like a big boom and I was like oh no something’s not right and I just ran out of the bathroom and I checked and I thought the whole ceiling was like collapsing.” )
The wall appears to have been torn at an angle of destruction, given the triangle hole, and restating from a post a few weeks back, a cantilever and/or balcony area could have actually torn away from that spot, given a roof anchor was just test loaded :
Ironically, a roof anchor crashed into the still-standing adjacent 8th-floor hallway wall which indicates that the "roofing event" dislodged from above could have stayed almost flush to collapsing straight down into that nook along the wall - hitting the compromised pool deck - but again, the initial boom event was probably not watched due to the time of day. And unfortunately, those who may have seen the roof event and have the answers were not able to make it out in time.
3) The building collapsed the day after the roof anchor permit was given to test load. The building had structural issues deep within its core of stability, and the many years of deterioration and what seems like an extensive and progressive weight being added to each floor (heavier cars, marble here, marble there (see link to the penthouse photos) wood, stainless steel appliances with grandiose furniture, heavier HVAC units and recent work) which over time due to the increase in occupants’ “heavier lifestyle” paired with the systemic digression of structural integrity, the building finally gave in and the roof work and load testing was the straw that finally broke the building’s back. Simple facts.
4) Now for my conclusion, I believe the parking deck failure event and roof failure event HAPPENED AT THE SAME TIME. Instead of either/or, its a contiguous and.
From the initial crashing sound as a warning of what was to come, it was only a short matter of time this almost 40-year old building could "hold on" and displace weight without adequate rebar steel reinforcement & sheer wall support.
And im out. Thanks for reading if you made it this far!
It's not just up and down this building. It's up and down this coastline.Thermopile said:
JAKLED (Electrical) said:
![[conehead]](/data/assets/smilies/conehead.gif "[conehead] [conehead]")
