Some thoughts on project management (FIU bridge in particular) 9

[spsalso]

I found many good points in this video examining the causes of the bridge failure--the "whys", not the "whats".

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YKiyb8S-Dq0

spsalso

 

[thebard3]

I followed this whole thing closely, even during the construction stage. I found it an intriguing method of building.
I'm also not a structural engineer and even I could tell the cracks were not normal. During the events recorded prior to the collapse, it seemed obvious to me that the structure had already failed, even before the collapse occurred. However, since I'm not a structural guy, I thought these guys must have known something that I didn't. Time proved that I was wrong about that.

Brad Waybright

The more you know, the more you know you don't know.

 

[Tomfh]

it seemed obvious to me that the structure had already failed, even before the collapse occurred

Hindsight bias.

 

[thebard3]

I would have refused to go out on that bridge to take the pictures we have sll seen. It seems to me that whoever did made the wrong decision. That's not an observation I made in hindsight.

Brad Waybright

The more you know, the more you know you don't know.

 

[dik]

It surprises me that no one is charges with criminal negligence.

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

 

[3DDave]

Brad - are you saying you were on the construction site before it was moved?

The suggestion of independent review and better oversight are great, but can be very difficult to manage. It is very easy to cross-contaminate the process; even a momentary comment can be enough to spoil the review. I have seen this in action many times and even when the danger is explained overcoming the reality distortion field can be impossible to pierce in a timely manner. Usually it involves cost, schedule, or promises made to others. When a typical "independent" reviewer comes in they are guided towards whatever the initial group thinks is a problem.

It is also tough to get through the interview with the words "I will do everything I can to destroy this project" and tough to get a recommendation if every decision was questioned and examined and the previous project went fine.

That no one asked "How is this strut being retained that it is now pushing out?" among everyone who saw it still stuns me, but I bet the majority had either never drawn a free-body diagram or last did 30 years before.

 

[Tomfh]

That's not an observation I made in hindsight.

Well then why didn't you alert the authorities that the bridge was in a state of collapse?

 

[TugboatEng]

Anybody can make an observation. That doesn't give them the confidence to share it or the qualifications act on it.

 

[hokie66]

I don't think any of us here (on this site) were involved with the design or construction of the FIU footbridge. As with most structural projects, the documents are closely held by those involved in the project. Only if a collapse occurs, or sometimes if a project is spectacularly successful, do the documents become widely available. So while many of us can opine about the failure, the only interest served is education to prevent a similar disaster.

 

[thebard3]

Good lord. Is everyone joking? We all saw the same report. We all saw the same photos. Of course I wasn't there to witness in real time. If I were perhaps there would have been a different outcome. I'm sorry my lack of civil engineering prowess doesn't qualify me to declare that a concrete member that is crumbling in slow motion has already failed. Never mind.

Brad Waybright

The more you know, the more you know you don't know.

 

[3DDave]

"I followed this whole thing closely, even during the construction stage" is what brought up my question.

 

[RVAmeche]

It's a stunning example of failures at multiple levels and not relying on "independent reviews" and whatnot as pure box checking exercises.

Figg's internal reviews didn't catch design errors. The 3rd party peer review didn't notice it/review it due to limited scope/budget. The construction management team during construction didn't stop construction or close the road when failure/major issues became evident.

The EOR doing a presentation on how everything was fine the morning before it failed, with cracks inches deep, is just...something.

 

[TugboatEng]

Was the EOR declaring everything to be fine despite knowledge of the cracks or presenting planned advertising about the project fed by management?

 

[spsalso]

There seem to be two elements:

One was the design mistake, and that no one caught it.

The other was that, even though things were falling apart (literally), no one said: "Hey, let's put this on hold and re-evaluate what we're doing." I'm talking day of the install, here.

spsalso

 

[RVAmeche]

During construction once the cracks and issues were becoming evident, up to the morning of the failure, the EOR repeatedly insisted there was no safety issue and it was all superficial cracking (inches deep??) that would be repaired later. They day of the failure the EOR instructed the construction team to start post tensioning and then left the site to fly home. The bridge collapsed as they did that exercise.

When the lawsuits happened he "accidentally" got his phone sent thru the washer/dryer and it wasn't able to be recovered. I think he continues to claim the calculations/design was not wrong but everything failed due to an incorrect roughness factor at the joints?

 

[JLNJ]

My contention from the beginning has been that it was hubris which led to the failure.

"We're FIGG. We can design anything well! And because we're FIGG it must be well-designed!"

Really? Even when you design a post-tensioned concrete truss node that you don't understand?

"No need to question our Engineer of Record. We're FIGG!"

 

[dik]

I think they really FIGGed up and are FIGGed!

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

 

[spsalso]

Have you noted that we talk a lot about bridge failures here? And that all of those bridges are "special".

Ya got this one, and the Tretten one, and the one in Hickory NC (though, to be fair, the actual bridge did NOT fail--nor was it "special").

Hubris is an excellent term to apply to these projects--poured on by the gallon for all concerned.

I sing the praises of the railroad bridge: the cheapest design that will do the job for at least 100 years. In particular, the generic through steel truss. And I especially like what is called the "steel trestle", as the strict geometry conforms to the land contours:

(and hardly ever falls down)


spsalso

 

[LittleInch]

In the Industry I work in (Petrochem) there is a lot spoken about how anyone has the power to stop the job if they feel or see or think something is a high risk of injury or failure. The reality though is far more difficult to enact, even for reasonably senior Engineers, never mind junior ones or construction guys, if the EOR "God" of the design is saying, "nothing to worry about here it's all ok - just needs a bit of tightening up and it'll be fine".

As you get into Senior positions or become the "tech authority" or expert or EOR, it is wise to regularly remind yourself that you are not God, that you can be wrong and you should listen to other people when they tell you something isn't right....

Remember - More details = better answers
Also: If you get a response it's polite to respond to it.

 

[Rabbit12]

LittleInch, I'm guessing Denny Pate even as the EOR would have had a hard time putting the brakes on that project. In theory, like you say, it's really easy to say he should have closed the road and what-not but there would have been some heat under him if he'd have done that. I'm going to guess even from FIGG's upper management. The financial implications of a decision like that are large and you can bet that they were a factor (maybe not spoken, but at least in the peripheral) in any decision that was made.