An exterior wood framed wall with typical brick veneer has failed (pushed out from loading up too many shingles)and needs to be temporarily shored up. Picture attached. It looks like they at least attaching the shoring to the framing but they are using the slab on grade to prevent the studs from kicking out. Anyone seen a similar situation or have a better alternative?
Eng-Tips is the largest engineering community on the Internet
Intelligent Work Forums for Engineering Professionals
Temporary Shoring of Failed Exterior Wall 1
- Thread starter kmart30
- Start date
-
1
- #22
Parroting what oldestguy is referencing:
I was on a jobsite years ago and signed in at the gate, and then drove directly to the rear left corner of the property for my project. I passed by an excavation totally unrelated to me. Later, while I was on site, an accident occurred at the excavation. The attorney sees an engineer was on site during the accident because of the gate log. I was then questioned in a deposition.
The questions went kind of like this:
-Were you onsite at this time? Answer-Yes
-Did you review the excavation to see it was being done safely? Answer-No.
-So you admit you failed to ensure the excavation was being done safely. Answer-No.
-I thought you just said you did not confirm it was being done safely. Answer-That is correct. I did not.
We bounce back and forth repeating this scenario 2 or 3 times.
I finally stated, "the fact I did not confirm it was safe does not mean I failed to do it."
-Besides not doing this that day, I had a bunch of things I failed at that day. I failed to cure world hunger. I failed to bring peace to the world. I failed to cure cancer. But, just like the issue, I was not expected to do ANY of these things that day. The word "failed" indicates I was reasonably expected to this do this, I was not expected to do what you are talking about.
The attorney only wanted me to say "I failed to do this." At that point he would have added me to the lawsuit. I would have won in court, but it would have cost my insurance about $15,000 to $20,000. So, they would have settled for $7,000 and my insurance probably would have paid it.
Litigation is treacherous. We think in terms of integrity and honesty, civil law thinks in terms of net $$$.
I was on a jobsite years ago and signed in at the gate, and then drove directly to the rear left corner of the property for my project. I passed by an excavation totally unrelated to me. Later, while I was on site, an accident occurred at the excavation. The attorney sees an engineer was on site during the accident because of the gate log. I was then questioned in a deposition.
The questions went kind of like this:
-Were you onsite at this time? Answer-Yes
-Did you review the excavation to see it was being done safely? Answer-No.
-So you admit you failed to ensure the excavation was being done safely. Answer-No.
-I thought you just said you did not confirm it was being done safely. Answer-That is correct. I did not.
We bounce back and forth repeating this scenario 2 or 3 times.
I finally stated, "the fact I did not confirm it was safe does not mean I failed to do it."
-Besides not doing this that day, I had a bunch of things I failed at that day. I failed to cure world hunger. I failed to bring peace to the world. I failed to cure cancer. But, just like the issue, I was not expected to do ANY of these things that day. The word "failed" indicates I was reasonably expected to this do this, I was not expected to do what you are talking about.
The attorney only wanted me to say "I failed to do this." At that point he would have added me to the lawsuit. I would have won in court, but it would have cost my insurance about $15,000 to $20,000. So, they would have settled for $7,000 and my insurance probably would have paid it.
Litigation is treacherous. We think in terms of integrity and honesty, civil law thinks in terms of net $$$.
- Status
Similar threads
- Question
- Locked
- Question
- Locked
- Question