Minneapolis Bridge Collapse

[sms]

The bridge was in service for 40 years, and the news reported that it had been inspected about a year ago.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20079534/?GT1=10252

My questions are:

I assume an inspector would have to be a PE and would have to have stamped the inspection. What is his/her exposure a year later? Is he/she going to jail? I don't know much about how the civil structural world works in this regard.

Second, are there possible defects in such a structure that could have been unobservable/unmeasureable/uninspectable such that an inspector would be not have any liability in such a failure?




"Why don't you knock it off with them negative waves? Why don't you dig how beautiful it is out here? Why don't you say something righteous and hopeful for a change?" Oddball, "Kelly's Heros" 1970

Please see FAQ731-376 for tips on how to make the best use of the Eng-Tips Forums.

 

[dcasto]

Its going to be a long time before we can get to a postion to answer your questions. I'm sure the inspection records are under police (or agency) protection right now. If the paperwork is found to be fabricated, yes their will be penalties.

Yes, things can be missed during an inspection or unseen with the customary tools. I would imagine that evry person doing the inspections is not a 30 year PE with 1000000 perfect inspections under their belt.

Finally, politics will enter this tragic incident and run it, hech it was probabilly Bush's fault anyway.

 

[SylvestreW]

Sad to say but it's usually true that the lowest guys on the blame chain get the most heavily punished.

-
Aercoustics.com

 

[KENAT]

thread507-193858 has a lot more detail/information

KENAT, probably the least qualified checker you'll ever meet...

 

[JStephen]

Inspecting a bridge doesn't necessarily constitute a guarantee of the bridge's adequacy. For example, you could have all kinds of design and construction flaws that are simply not detectable in an inspection. When you do find problems, most of them can vary as to the extent of the problem, so it's still not a clear-cut go/no-go situation. I think it would be a standard assumption in the inspection that the original construction was adequate, that it was not on the verge of collapse when built.

As to liability here, I expect it will amount to "who has the money".

 

[RossABQ]

First reports are that the bridge had "structurally deficient" rating, fatigue cracks that were being monitored, some repairs previously. Scored 50 out of 100 on their rating system, but was considered "safe" nonetheless. Looking at the recently released video of the failure, something appears to have happened at the end connections, causing the spans to fall into the river nearly intact. Whenever there is a contractor working on something and it fails, what is your first thought??

 

[graybeach]

Working for an owner of aging infrastructure, I am often called upon to look at various deficiencies and make judgments as to what needs to be done. This is not easy. I can't just cry wolf over every ugly thing I see. I have to figure out what is important to fix right away and what can wait. It's a very fine line. The Minneapolis collapse sends a chill down my spine.

 

[doberdorks]

"Whenever there is a contractor working on something and it fails, what is your first thought??"


Basically "it sucks to be them" because regardless of whether they had anything to do with it, they're hooped.

-SLH

 

[PBroad]

The one thing in favour of the PE who designed the Minneapolis bridge is that he/she was registered by a State licence, not by a self regulating one, so when the State (of Minnesota) declaired the engineer to be competent the state board became liable for any failure!

My bet, removing the roadbed weakened it, but why not close the bridge while work was being done. Don't say that the bridge was essential and could not be closed. It's closed now isn't it!!

What I do wonder with you PE's in the good old US ofA, who takes care of bridges that cross state lines, and thus fall under no State licensure body??

 

[JAE]

so when the State (of Minnesota) declaired the engineer to be competent the state board became liable for any failure!

Not so. The engineer is always liable for their own actions regarding their designs and ethical behavior. The state is simply licensing engineers to verify that they have met the set minimum requirements to help the public know who has proper qualifications.

who takes care of bridges that cross state lines, and thus fall under no State licensure body??

The two state DOT's coordinate the inspections of those bridges - it is done. Simply shared responsibilities.

 

[HgTX]

"The one thing in favour of the PE who designed the Minneapolis bridge is that he/she was registered by a State licence"

Yeah, that and a minor detail that said PE was given a particular traffic loading to design to, and there's about double the anticipated traffic on that bridge now. It was designed as a four-lane bridge, not eight.

And the other minor detail that said PE is probably dead by now.

Hg

Eng-Tips policies: faq731-376

 

[jorton]

As engineers we are personally liable for our neglect. However, we are not perfect and we cannot tell the future. Placing a stamp on plans does not guarantee or warranty the structure on the plans. It does mean we have met the standard of care that other competent engineers in the same area would meet given the same circumstances during the same time period. This is not a loophole for engineers. It properly recognizes that we have bounded knowledge when we prepare plans.

As to the inspection, see JStephen's post above.

 

[bridgebuster]

"What I do wonder with you PE's in the good old US ofA, who takes care of bridges that cross state lines, and thus fall under no State licensure body??"

For a bridge crossing between two states the engineer would have to be licensed by the state that owns the bridge. In some cases interstate bridges are owned by a bi-state agency, in which case the engineer would have to be licensed in one of the two states unless the agency's policy is to follow the design standards of one particular state. Been there, done that.

"why not close the bridge while work was being done"

Have you ever worked on a transportation project in an urban area? The most important thing from the political standpoint: Keep the public happy. I've been there too.