Florida bridge collapse solved... | Page 3 | GTAMotorcycle.com

Florida bridge collapse solved...

caboose56 said:
FEA software is only as useful as the person running it. If the constraints and wire mesh aren’t set properly it’s garbage in / garbage out.

Obviously with this bridge there were many oversights in the design process. The stress analysis may have been one of them.
Click to expand...

Once the parameters are set in the software it should tell the engineer where the stress problems are. That's the whole point of it. Only an idiot would rely entirely on the software to do this though. You can look at that bridge without any testing whatsoever and see there are problems that defy gravity: there's no arch to it, there's only one line of beams and no x-members, the top beam is ridiculously skimpy given the span, etc. Look at all the gesticulating twits in that engineering forum all pointing out thread after thread of theoretical problems and guessing at the pictures. It's scary that these highly schooled experts can't finger the problem. I would hazard to guess, as a layman, even if #11 didn't give way something else would have because the span simply is too long for the amount of structure used. Too much art, not enough science.
 
Roadghost said:
Once the parameters are set in the software it should tell the engineer where the stress problems are. That's the whole point of it. Only an idiot would rely entirely on the software to do this though. You can look at that bridge without any testing whatsoever and see there are problems that defy gravity: there's no arch to it, there's only one line of beams and no x-members, the top beam is ridiculously skimpy given the span, etc. Look at all the gesticulating twits in that engineering forum all pointing out thread after thread of theoretical problems and guessing at the pictures. It's scary that these highly schooled experts can't finger the problem. I would hazard to guess, as a layman, even if #11 didn't give way something else would have because the span simply is too long for the amount of structure used. Too much art, not enough science.
Click to expand...

If the engineer doesn’t set those parameters properly the results of the analysis are meaningless. It takes a lot of skill to properly set those parameters. It’s not as simple as just importing a 3D model into the FEA software and clicking “go”.

An arch, or lack there of, is not in an of itself an indication of good or a bad design. Many bridges or horizontal load bearing members do not have an arch.

I’m not going to jump to conclusions until I have had an opportunity to see the results of an actual investigation. It may have been a flawed design, it may have been damaged during construction, or both. Maybe it was a single big design flaw or several smaller flaws that compounded. Maybe a single part was damaged or many several parts were damaged that severely compromised the strength of the bridge.

Lots of moving parts. Not that easy to determine what exactly happened.
 
Roadghost said:
Once the parameters are set in the software it should tell the engineer where the stress problems are. That's the whole point of it. Only an idiot would rely entirely on the software to do this though. You can look at that bridge without any testing whatsoever and see there are problems that defy gravity: there's no arch to it, there's only one line of beams and no x-members, the top beam is ridiculously skimpy given the span, etc. Look at all the gesticulating twits in that engineering forum all pointing out thread after thread of theoretical problems and guessing at the pictures. It's scary that these highly schooled experts can't finger the problem. I would hazard to guess, as a layman, even if #11 didn't give way something else would have because the span simply is too long for the amount of structure used. Too much art, not enough science.
Click to expand...

Oh, the sad, sad irony.
 
Baggsy said:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_la_Concorde_overpass_collapse
It wasn’t that long ago that it happened here on a more conventional overpass
Click to expand...

That link reminded me of a job I was on, a brand new co-op building near 401 and Jane.

A resident with no technical training reported some concrete cracks to the property manager.

The property manager thought "What does that twit know" but went to look anyways and although not technically trained, she became concerned.

The property manager reported it to the builder who thought "What does that twit know?" but sent a technically trained person to check it out. He just about crapped his pants and immediately ordered dozens of floor jacks to prevent a collapse.

The structural engineer had designed for a typical load, missing the landscaping drawing that put ten to twenty feet of fill on top of the area. It was where the school bus picked up the kids.

All this happened in 24 hours. With the PQ bridge decisions were put off for weeks as the bridge gave off strong signals.

Sometimes you have to listen to the twits. Even broken clocks are right twice a day.
 
When one looks at some of the stunning structures found around the world, like the Viaduc de Millau:

161_1_164838.jpg


it's almost inconceivable that something as "simple" as a pedestrian bridge could have gone so wrong.
 
Blackfin said:
When one looks at some of the stunning structures found around the world, like the Viaduc de Millau:

161_1_164838.jpg


it's almost inconceivable that something as "simple" as a pedestrian bridge could have gone so wrong.
Click to expand...

Growing up in Manitoba a trip to play on the swinging bridge in Souris was always fun, feeling it bounce and swings as one walked.

Then one day it collapsed when too many people crowded onto it to watch an event in the river. No serious injuries but the bridge was rebuilt with massive anchoring, huge cables and multiple anti sway stabilizers.

It's far safer but no longer fun. Engineers take the excitement out of life.
 
NTSB has provided an updated report: https://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/AccidentReports/Reports/HWY18MH009-investigative-update.pdf

Photos starting on page 4 show cracks in the structure that were observed after the bridge was placed in position.

I am not a structural engineer, but hooo-leeee crap.

Discussion on the engineering forum starts with a post dated 9 Aug 18: https://www.eng-tips.com/viewthread.cfm?qid=440072

In there is a transcript of a phone message left by the engineer of record after inspecting the bridge following the move but before the collapse.

I am not a structural engineer ... but that wouldn't have been my reaction.
 
I missed this update somehow, just found out about it elsewhere. Insurance company sees the writing on the wall and is trying to excuse themselves: https://www.equipmentworld.com/insurers-covering-figg-bridge-engineers-bridge-collapse/

Either way, starting to smell like something criminal happened, as those photos are all a good day before the collapse i.e. bridge was in failure, somebody obviously noticed it, and traffic was not stopped while work was performed which at that point was only going to serve to destroy the bridge
 
Brian P said:
NTSB has provided an updated report: https://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/AccidentReports/Reports/HWY18MH009-investigative-update.pdf

Photos starting on page 4 show cracks in the structure that were observed after the bridge was placed in position.

I am not a structural engineer, but hooo-leeee crap..
Click to expand...

Da fuq?? I'm with you. Not my area of expertise, but after seeing those cracks, I would be aborting my work and staying away from that structure. They had cracks large enough to allow displacement of the surrounding concrete.
 
TwistedKestrel said:
I missed this update somehow, just found out about it elsewhere. Insurance company sees the writing on the wall and is trying to excuse themselves: https://www.equipmentworld.com/insurers-covering-figg-bridge-engineers-bridge-collapse/

Either way, starting to smell like something criminal happened, as those photos are all a good day before the collapse i.e. bridge was in failure, somebody obviously noticed it, and traffic was not stopped while work was performed which at that point was only going to serve to destroy the bridge
Click to expand...

Interesting. Both policies exclude joint ventures unless some specific conditions are met.

https://www.courtlistener.com/docke...mpany-of-connecticut-v-figg-bridge-engineers/

I expected FIGG and MCM to collapse because of this, having no valid insurance coverage just speeds up that process. I wouldn't hire them for any work (regardless of my thoughts on competence) as I would have very little faith they would be a viable entity through the entire project. If the insurance companies win this action, I suspect FIGG and MCM will almost immediately cease to operate.

EDIT:
A lawyers analysis predicts awarded damages to victims and their families could exceed $90,000,000. Of that FIU chips in $300,000 and the rest would come from FIGG/MCM/Insurers/etc.

https://www.justinziegler.net/fiu-bridge-collapse-lawsuit-settlement/

Even if the worst-case amount is not awarded, the damages should vastly exceed the value of FIGG/MCM. They are better to walk away and start new companies (or retire).
 
Last edited:
Of course this is pure conjecture, but would be interesting if the timeline went like this:

-Project lead realizes they have ****ed up and built an unsalvageable bridge
-Project lead quietly reports this to higher up in hope of earning some mercy/leniency
-Higher up, in the process of planning for damage control, realizes they have ****ed up by having not bought adequate insurance and eating the cost will ruin them
-Tries to deliver a "completed" bridge to offload the problem on to someone else
 
TwistedKestrel said:
Of course this is pure conjecture, but would be interesting if the timeline went like this:

-Project lead realizes they have ****ed up and built an unsalvageable bridge
-Project lead quietly reports this to higher up in hope of earning some mercy/leniency
-Higher up, in the process of planning for damage control, realizes they have ****ed up by having not bought adequate insurance and eating the cost will ruin them
-Tries to deliver a "completed" bridge to offload the problem on to someone else
Click to expand...

If that turns out to be the process, I am glad we have the criminal justice system in addition to the civil justice system.

I would suspect that everybody's personal assets are at risk in the lawsuits (what would protect them?). If there was an active attempt to avoid alarm bells, anyone involved with that attempt will probably lose everything.
 
Just to finish off this thread.

TL: DW Huge design fail by bridge engineers. ****** peer review with insufficient scope. Complete and total F-up and complete lack of any common sense by all parties once cracks appeared. By design, it was going to fail (calcs off by ~90%) but they could have prevented loss of life by not being asshats once it was clear that the thing was falling apart (it gave them many days of notice).

I would also like the add that the &%*&^ pricks in charge of the project remain committed to covering their ***** and minimizing their financial damages to this day. They refuse to acknowledge that all of them were completely incompetent and should never be involved in supervising a construction project again. They had the balls to send the NTSB a letter signed by all of them asking the NTSB to delay reporting so they could finalize the lawsuits first.


Page not found

www.ntsb.gov www.ntsb.gov

EDIT:
In the wake of the NTSB report assigning blame and publicly exposing incompetence, FIGG was removed from some active jobs. FIGG is still blaming others for the failure. They say that the construction team should have roughened the joint even though they missed it in their drawings, missed it in their inspections and NTSB experts said the failure would have happened anyway as the calculations were so wrong. Anyone at FIGG that signed off of this bridge should never practice engineering again.

www.constructiondive.com

Texas DOT stops construction of $800M FIGG-designed Harbor Bridge

The agency is re-evaluating its projects after NTSB found that the firm that designed the bridge, which would be the U.S.' longest cable-stay span, likely made errors that contributed to the deadly FIU pedestrian bridge collapse.
www.constructiondive.com www.constructiondive.com

The construction company (MCM) also got booted from other jobs and filed for bankruptcy protection.

www.enr.com

Prior to Tragic Bridge Collapse, Contractor MCM Piled Up Losses

The contractor leading construction of the FIU pedestrian bridge was facing business challenges when the tragedy happened last March.
www.enr.com www.enr.com

FIU (University/Project Lead) has lost over $15,000,000 so far on this project.

The peer reviewing firm (Louis Berger) was swallowed by WSP.

The administration/inspection engineering firm (Bolton, Perez & Associates) doesn't seem to have been as dramatically affected (yet) as the rest of the players.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom