Investigating a vibrating building

(This is not an East Coast ghost story)

(The following is one in a series of cases I have investigated that illustrate the different forensic engineering methods I use to investigate the cause of failures and accidents that result in civil litigation.  Knowledge of simple frost heave was important in this case)

The investigation of the vibrating building is reported under the following main headings with several sub-headings:

  • The case (A description of: 1. The building and the problem experienced by the owner; 2. The building’s foundations, and the problems with the building, 3. The legal/technical issues, and, 4. My client)
  • Forensic engineering investigation of the problem and the methods used
  • Findings of the investigation (conclusions with respect to the technical issues)
  • Resolution
  • Lessons learned

The case

Description of the building and the problem 

The building was a large, well appointed mobile home in the Halifax area that vibrated quite noticeably during the winter months.  The vibration occurred when the owner and his family walked the length of their home from one room to another.

The owner also wanted to know why the interior partitions at some locations were separating from the ceiling.

Legal/Technical Issues

The main issues were the cause of the vibration and the cause of the gaps at the tops of the partitions.

Client

I was retained to investigate the problem by the company who placed the mobile home on the site.

Forensic engineering investigation

My forensic engineering investigation involved the following methods:

  1. Take a briefing on the problem from the owner.
  2. Visually examine the building and the site it was on.
  3. Examine and determine how the building was supported and the foundations constructed.
  4. Sample and determine the type of foundation soils underlying the building site and their physical properties.
  5. Analyse the data collected during these examinations.

Investigations and Findings

Briefing  The owner was quite clear in describing how the building vibrated in winter in walking from one end of his home to the other.  He also described the gaps at the top of the partitions.  The building did not vibrate during the summer.

I wasn’t on site during the winter but saw and measured gaps of about 1/4 to 1/2 inches during my visit.

Visual examination:  The home was on a sloping site with the length of the building aligned up the slope.

Examine foundations:  I crawled under the building and established that the mobile home was supported on two continuous steel beams running the length of the mobile home.  The beams were in turn supported by concrete block piers at regular intervals.  The piers were supported on the sloping ground a few inches below the surface.

Because of the sloping ground, the height of the piers and the home above the ground gradually increased from 1.5 feet at the upslope end to 3.5 feet at the downslope end.

Test foundation soils:  I took samples of the soils supporting the piers and had the samples tested in a laboratory.  I also researched the soil geology of the area – the surficial geology.

The tests and research established that the foundation soils comprised a dense, silty glacial till typical of the many drumlins in the area.

Drumlins are teardrop shaped glacial soil deposits.  The Citadel in Halifax is on a drumlin.

Analyse data: The fact that the mobile home vibrated in winter but not in summer was interesting, and took some reflection on my part.

The shallow depth of the pier foundations supporting the mobile home – a few inches, was not typical for foundations in this area.

We dig our foundations down typically about 3.5 to 4.0 feet in the Halifax area to get below the depth of frost penetration and the effects of frost heave.

A characteristic of the fine grained soils found beneath the piers is that they are very frost susceptible – water collects in the soils easily and freezes in winter.  The mixture of water and soil expands on freezing – frost heave to everyone.  The more soil freezes – the greater the depth of freezing, the greater the frost heave.

The pier foundations would have heaved in winter for certain considering they were only a few inches below the ground surface, not 3.5 to 4.0  feet..

The depth to which the soil freezes depends on the severity of the winter.  Deeper in cold winters, shallower in warmer winters.

A source of heat from an external source other than the weather can also affect the depth of frost penetration in the ground and the amount of frost heave.

Regardless of how well we typically insulate our homes, heat is lost in winter to the surrounding air.  The air is warmed in the process and in turn warms other surfaces in contact where it is protected from the wind.

That was the case at the upslope end of the mobile home where the building was closer to the ground – 1.5 feet.  The depth of frost penetration and heave could be expected to be less at this end of the building than at the downslope end where the home was 3.5 feet above the ground.  It was also exposed to the wind at this downslope location.

Frost was penetrating the ground to an increasing depth from the 1.5 foot end of the mobile home to the 3.5 foot end.

All the piers along the length of the home would heave due to frost action but not necessarily a proportionate amount.  This is because conditions at each pier could be expected to vary a little: Foundation soil conditions could vary, also heat loss from the mobile home, protection from the wind, etc.

The steel beams could be expected to be lifted off the piers completely at some locations – and “suspended” between adjacent piers, because of the disproportionate amount of heave at the adjacent piers.

Steel beams deflect between piers.  The greater the suspended distance between piers providing support to a mobile home the greater deflection.  Walking along a floor supported on such beams causes the floor and the beam to deflect and vibrate.  I think a good many of us have walked along wooden planks supported at each end and felt the deflection and vibration.

Conclusion

I concluded that the mobile home was vibrating as much as it was because it was not properly supported by the piers in the winter time.  Because of the magnitude of the vibration, I believed that the mobile home was only supported by the piers at the ends of the two beams.

The gaps formed at the top of the partitions because the joints between the tops of partitions and the ceiling are relatively weak and would separate when the supporting beams deflected.  I suspect that small gaps would have formed at the bottom of the partitions as well but went unnoticed.

Resolution

I recommended digging and founding the piers deeper and below the depth of frost penetration and heave.

Lessons learned

  1. Always look at the weather conditions along different parts of a foundation when unusual problems are occurring in the structure above.

 

 

 

 

 

Experts on the wane?

I don’t think so..!!  

Certainly not in the forensic engineering field where ‘small-data’ is the rule and where there will always be a need for the subject-area expert – a well experienced, knowledgeable person in a particular field of study.

Someone who can gather engineering data and facts, for example, then bridge the gap between these facts and the formulation of an opinion on cause.  Finally, someone who can help civil litigation lawyers and the judge understand the technical cause of a failure or accident in the built environment (Ref. 1).

But, exciting things are happening in the Big-Data world

But, there does appear to be exciting things happening in the ‘big-data’ world as suggested in a recent item in the Globe and Mail. (Ref. 2)  The item – headed up ‘Experts on the wane?’, quotes the authors of a recent book (Ref. 3) who predict “Data-driven decisions are poised to augment or overrule human judgement”.  The new big-data way will “…let the data speak.”

(The book is a very good read – a study to some extent, with much insight on what can be learned from large amounts of data, and also how we are being monitored with today’s technology.  There is an extensive bibliography)

No excitement in the Small-Data world

That may be the case as far as big-data is concerned but there’s nothing new there in the ‘old’, small-data world.  Practitioners of forensic engineering investigation have been “letting the data speak” all along and following the evidence where it leads.

Definition of big-data with a good example

Big-data refers to the ability of society to harness huge amounts of data in novel ways with today’s computers, and analyse the data to produce useful insights on people, or goods and services of significant value. (Ref. 3)

For example, Amazon now regularly analyses tens of thousands of customers’ book purchases to predict what related topics any one us will be inclined to purchase next, and then offer it to us.  The experts who did this in the past were all laid off.

Engineers go outdoors and get dirty – fortunately for the justice system

In spite of this ability of today’s technology, it will still be necessary for an engineer to go on site and get his hands dirty and mud on his boots examining a foundation failure or measuring skid marks at the scene of a traffic, or slip and fall accident.  And crawling over the debris of a collapsed structure.

We engineers in North America are known overseas for our interest and willingness to go on site and get data firsthand.  And the justice system appreciates that hands-on approach.  The big-data way won’t cut it in the investigation of a failure in the built environment.

The justice system still wants to know the cause of a problem

As well, gathering large amounts of data and analysing the data with computers focuses on establishing correlations rather than causes.  Identifying the what of a problem rather than the why – the cause of a problem. (Ref. 3)  That would never do in forensic engineering where the cause of a problem must be determined before you can fix it, and before the justice system can determine damages.

The old, small-data way solves problems in the built environment

All the problems that I experience in my forensic engineering practice – requiring the gathering and analysis of small-data by an expert, or that I hear about from my colleagues in their practices, and see in the literature, are from the built environment.

Problems and failures in the built environment to do with the planning, design, construction, performance, and maintenance of structures like industrial, commercial, institutional, and residential low- and high-rise buildings.  Also civil engineering structures like bridges, roads, airport runways and taxiways, dams, drainage systems, earthworks, harbour works, and hydraulic works.

And included is the plant and equipment in these structures and the infra-structure.  Also the traffic, industrial, and slip and fall accidents that occur in and around these structures.

The big-data way can’t solve these problems because these problems in the built environment are not characterized by a gazillion amount of data.  There are a lot of data sometimes but not that much.  These problems are characterized by small amounts of data appropriate to the small-data way of an expert – who then applies his judgement to formulate an opinion as to cause.

Experts on the wane?  No, they’re not.  There will always be a need for experts as long as there are failures and accidents in the built environment.

References

  1. The Globe and Mail, Thursday April 11, 2013, page S8.  A relevant item, an obituary of a man, Martin B. Wilk, scientist, statistician, sage, who thought of statistics as a beautiful blend of science and art, bridging the gap between mathematical facts and human understanding.
  2. The Globe and Mail, March 6, 2013, page L10.  See ‘Experts on the wane?’
  3. Mayer-Schonberger, Victor and Cukier, Kenneth, Big Data: A Revolution That Will Transform How We Live, Work and Think, Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, New York, 2013.

Investigation of a fatal Bahamian aviation accident

(The following is one in a series of cases I have investigated that illustrate the different forensic engineering methods I use to investigate the cause of failures and accidents that result in civil litigation. 

This is a good case for illustrating how simple an engineering investigation can sometimes be, and how knowledge of the geology of an area can form the basis of informed comment.

The investigation of the fatal aviation accident is reported under the following main headings with several sub-headings:

  • The case (a description of the fatal aviation accident, the legal/technical issues, and my client)
  • Forensic engineering investigation of the failure and the methods used
  • Findings of the investigation (conclusions with respect to the technical issues)
  • Post mortem (resolution and lessons learned)

The case

Description of fatal aviation accident 

Ms. Jane Doe was killed when her plane crashed on take-off from an international airport on one of the family islands in the Bahamas.  The accident occurred near a runway where I had completed a geotechnical/foundation investigation prior to construction of the runway several years previously.

Legal/Technical Issues

The main issue was whether or not the propeller on the starboard side of the aircraft – the right side for landlubbers, could penetrate several inches into the ground at the crash scene, and this not occur on the port side – the left side.

Client

I was retained by a U.S. aviation accident reconstruction expert on the advice of the Public Works Department in Nassau, Bahamas and a law firm practicing in Nassau.  Both were involved in the case.  The Department was my client for the earlier geotechnical investigation.  The law firm knew of my work as a professional engineer in the Bahamas.

Forensic engineering investigation

My forensic engineering investigation and advisory services involved the following methods:

  1. Taking a telephone briefing on the aviation accident by the U.S. reconstruction expert
  2. Studying photographs of the crash scene e-mailed as attachments
  3. Reviewing my geotechnical/foundation investigation report for the runway design and construction
  4. Briefing the U.S. expert on the geological processes on the Bahamian island and the degree of probability that the propeller on the starboard side penetrated the ground where the port propeller did not

You will note that this forensic engineering investigation was a simple document review and my knowledge of the published geology of this particular Bahamian island.  An extremely simple investigation.  There would have been no advantage to me flying to the island and examining conditions at the crash site because these would have changed since the accident.

Conclusion

I was able to advise the U.S. aviation expert with considerable certainty the degree of probability that the propeller penetrated the ground several inches on the starboard side.  I’m not at liberty to state that degree of probability.

Resolution

The case may still be in litigation.

Lessons learned

  1. Do the most thorough and reliable engineering work possible every time because you never know how the data you collect will want to be used for a different purpose in the future.
  2. Worthwhile forensic engineering investigations of serious incidents, e.g., fatal aviation accidents, can be carried out at a distance based on a simple document review.  And sometimes that’s all that is possible, as in this case, because site conditions had changed since the accident.

 

 

Forensic engineering investigation of a fatal MVA

(The following is one in a series of cases I have investigated that illustrate the different forensic engineering methods I use to investigate the cause of failures and accidents that result in civil litigation.  The methods are listed in this blog and described in some detail in a future posting)

The investigation of the fatal motor vehicle accident (MVA) is reported under the following main headings with several sub-headings:

  • The case (a description of the fatal MVA, the legal/technical issues, and my client)
  • Forensic engineering investigation of the failure and the methods used
  • Preliminary findings of the investigation
  • Post mortem (resolution and lessons learned)

The case

Description of fatal motor vehicle accident (MVA)

The accident occurred a few years ago on a remote, snow-covered highway along the top of a seaside cliff in eastern Canada.  A jeep-like vehicle travelling along the highway at dawn struck a pile of soil-like material left in the travel lane.  The driver lost control of the vehicle and drove over the cliff and into the sea.  The driver died in the accident.  Passengers in the vehicle survived.

Legal/Technical issues

At issue, for purposes of the forensic engineering investigation, was the following:

  • Whether or not the pile of material on the highway was a hazard
  • If it was, determine the degree or severity of the hazard
  • Also, whether or not the pile of material caused the accident

Client

I was retained by the RCMP to investigate the accident and resolve the technical issues.

Forensic engineering investigation

There were no guidelines or well developed methods in the engineering literature on how to investigate this type of accident and resolve the technical issues.  The investigation was unique in this respect.

Fortunately, in researching the literature, I did find some very relevant scientific research that I was able to adapt to my problem with excellent results.

My forensic engineering investigation relied on the following methods.  The methods will be described in some detail in a future posting.  I believe the following listing of methods is quite informative by itself:

  1. Take briefing on the accident from RCMP
  2. Review documents on the accident provided by the RCMP including police reports and survivor’s statements
  3. Travel to the area and visually examine the scene of the accident
  4. Generate a picture of the accident scene using Photoshop as it might have been seen by the driver moments before the accident
  5. Research engineering literature for methods on the investigation of obstructions on a highway
  6. Research scientific literature on speed bump research and design
  7. Research transportation authorities in North America and Europe
  8. Design a full scale preliminary re-enactment of the accident on bare roads
  9. Plan a full scale re-enactment of the accident on a snow covered test site implementing refinements to the re-enactment including safety measures derived from the preliminary testing
  10. Design a videotaping and measuring of the re-enactment
  11. Construct a re-enactment site on an airport taxiway
  12. Re-enact and videotape the accident on the test site
  13. Analyse the videotape for evidence respecting the technical issues
  14. Edit the videotape to portray the re-enactment in a report
  15. Report on the preliminary findings including safety issues

Description of methods of forensic engineering investigation

(The methods will be described in some detail in a future blog posting)

Cause

(The findings of the investigation will be reported in a future posting)

Post mortem

The matter was settled out of court.

(Lessons learned from the investigation will be shared in the future blog posting)

References

1. “Technical” visual site assessments: Valuable, low cost, forensic engineering method.  My blog posted on this site, September 4, 2012

Gabion retaining wall collapse results in litigation

(The following is one in a series of cases I have investigated that illustrate the different forensic engineering methods I use to investigate the cause of failures and accidents that result in civil litigation.  The methods are described in some detail)

The investigation of the wall collapse is reported under the following main headings with several sub-headings:

  • The case (a description of the collapsed gabion wall, the legal/technical issues, and my client)
  • Forensic engineering investigation of the failure and the methods used
  • Cause (of the collapse)
  • Post mortem (an engineering “rule of thumb” might have prevented the collapse)

The case

Description of collapse

The gabion wall was on the shore of a harbour in eastern Canada.  The wall was 10 feet high and more than 100 feet long.  There were short wing walls to the main wall aligned shoreward.  A “gabion” is a wire basket about 3 feet by 3 feet in section and 10 feet long filled with course stone several inches in size.

The wall was being constructed to reclaim land on the seaward side of a quite large townhouse property.  The wall fell over just before construction was complete.  It was rebuilt before I was retained.

Legal/Technical issue

At issue was the cause of the wall’s failure.  This was in connection with a claim of damages against the designer and his insurance company.

Client

I was asked by the plaintiff, a property manager who was acting on behalf of a contractor, to determine the cause of the collapse.

Forensic engineering investigation

My forensic engineering investigation relied on the following methods.  The methods are described in more detail below:

  1. Examining the site of the rebuilt wall
  2. Studying photographs taken of the collapsed wall
  3. Studying a design sketch of the wall
  4. Interviewing two workers who were on the wall at the time it failed, including one who slid down with the wall on a piece of construction equipment as it fell over
  5. Interviewing the design engineer
  6. Reviewing design principles for coastal and marine structures
  7. Reviewing weather and sea conditions at the time of the failure

Description of methods of forensic engineering investigation

1. Examining the site of the rebuilt wall

This initial site visit and visual assessment is standard in an engineering investigation and an important initial task by a forensic engineer (Ref. 1).  Drawings and photographs are fine but picking up a concrete impression is important.  It’s well recognized that, “A picture is worth a 1,000 words”.  However, a visual assessment is invaluable.  This is so even if the collapsed structure has been rebuilt as was the case with the gabion wall.

I was able to see how the toe of the gabion wall was constructed where it was exposed to the scour and erosive forces of wave action in the harbour.

I also saw the location of the townhouse with respect to the wall.  The contractor had expressed concern that construction of the wall as designed would undermine the townhouse.  A simple rule of thumb ruled this out.

2. Studying photographs taken of the collapsed wall

Photographs are important, and sometimes all we have.  They are particularly important when detailed photographs are taken during construction.  They are also important when taken of the failed structure that is subsequently removed before the forensic engineer gets there.  The latter was the case in this instance.

The photographs showed the actual wall construction and that it failed in a quite classic manner – it just tipped, tilted, leaned over along most of its length.  The exception was where the wall was tied in and anchored to the wing wall at one end.  It remained upright there.

3. Studying a design sketch of the wall

It goes without saying that a professional engineer investigating a failure would want to know how the failed structure was designed and intended to be built.  This is a standard task in a forensic investigaion.

The sketch showed how the design engineer originally wanted the base of the wall constructed and the toe of the wall protected against scour and erosion.  Simple rules of thumb suggested the base design was adequate.  The toe protection was less so.

4. Interviewing workers

Interviewing workers is a standard task in a forensic investigation.  The interviews sometimes provide quite valuable information on conditions at the moment of failure.

I interviewed two workers who were on the wall at the time it failed, including one, an equipment operator, who slid down with the wall on a piece of construction equipment as the wall collapsed.

In engineering analysis we speak at times about a “trigger” in a failure.  All conditions are present – or nearly so, for a structure, a wall, an earth slope, etc., to collapse.  The trigger pushes the structure over the edge in a sense.  Sometimes there is heavy rain – the trigger, just before a landslide.

The construction equipment just back of the gabion wall at the time was the trigger in this case, an extra surcharge/weight on the wall.

5. Interviewing the design engineer

We always want to talk with the design engineer when investigating a failure but often don’t have the opportunity during the investigative stage.  This lack of opportunity is particularly the case when the design engineer is the defendant in a civil action.

In this case, however, the design engineer was quite professional in agreeing to talk with me.  His design was okay in the short term.  It turned out that a change he approved during construction caused the problem.

The change involved reducing the width of the base from about six feet – 2/3 the height of the wall, to three feet – 1/3 the height of the wall.  The change was made because the contractor said he couldn’t build a six foot base.  He also expressed concern that the townhouse would be undermined.  Consideration of a simple rule of thumb would have raised an alarm that the wall would not be stable with a three foot base.  Another rule would have demonstrated that the townhouse was not endangered.

6. Reviewing design principles for coastal and marine structures

Reviewing the design prinicples applicable to a situation is standard fare in a forensic engineeing investigaion and I did this.  I was particularly interested in the requirements for protecting the toe of the wall against scour and erosion due to sea conditions.

7. Reviewing weather and sea conditions at the time of the failure

This is also standard fare during a forensic investigation and in this case it tied in with reviewing the design principles mentioned above.  Sea and weather conditions were calm at the time of the wall collapse.

Cause

I concluded, based on the evidence, that the wall failed because of a change in the design of the wall during construction.  The principle defect was that the base of the 10 foot wall was not wide enough at three feet.  I also found that the toe of the wall was not well protected against wave action in the harbour.

Post mortem

There is a rule of thumb in the design of conventional gabion retaining walls that the width of the base of the wall must be about 2/3 the height of the wall – about 6.5 feet in this case, not 3.0 feet as agreed during construction.  A design engineer starts off with this conventional wall geometry and then checks that the rule of thumb holds in the particular case.

There are lots of rules of thumbs in engineering,  They expedite matters but must always be checked.  And they should always be referenced when the pressure is on to change things during construction.

The matter was settled out of court.

References

1. “Technical” visual site assessments: Valuable, low cost, forensic engineering method.  My blog posted on this site, September 4, 2012

How Mother Nature may have her way with us

I read the item about the three-storey residential structure being built in Halifax collapsing in high winds – failing, in engineering terms.  The building’s frame fell down shortly after 1:30 p.m. last Thursday damaging a car parked below.  Workers had left the site shortly before.  See The Chronicle Herald, January 31, 2013.

High winds also caused construction scaffolding to blow down at another site.  The winds restricted access to the harbour bridges.  Gusts were clocked in excess of 85 kilometres per hour in the area, and up to 105 kilometres per hour on one occasion.

What happened?

Acts of God?  Mother Nature having her way with us?  Excessive structural loading?

Some people involved in civil litigation, and others in the insurance industry, might see such collapses as “acts of God”.  Many others might see the incidents as examples of Mother Nature’s wrath.

I see collapse of the residential building as quite possibly an example of wind loading that the structure was incapable of withstanding – the wind was just too strong.  The building structure was not designed to carry such wind loading – at least, at that unfinished stage of construction.  Or possibly the structure as designed was capable but wasn’t constructed according to the design.

When structures are “weak”

It’s not likely so well known to people, in general, that some structures are at their “weakest” when they are under construction – more susceptible to failure.  The design engineer sometimes needs to pay more attention to the construction phase than to the completed phase.  Nor is it likely well known that professional engineers are not always involved in the design and construction of residential buildings and other small or seemingly unimportant structures.

Mother Nature’s loads

The loads on a structure come from Nature.  I think an entire book could be written on the concept of “load” in engineering.  But, possibly, simply put, a load on a structure is anything that the structure must stand up to, or provide for, and still function as intended.

For example, obviously, the weight of the people using a building and the weight of the equipment in the building.  Less obviously, the weight of a structure – the structure must be able to hold itself up.  We now know about wind “load”, the pressure of the wind on a building, and, by extension, also on towers, and on traffic signs along highways.  But, what about earthquake loading – the shaking that all manner of structures in an earthquake prone area must provide for?  And frost action on retaining walls and garden pathways.  All loads from Mother Nature.

Here is more information on where loads on structures come from – sent by Mother Nature and to be dealt with by professional engineers.  They can be categorized as vertical or horizontal loads.  They might also be separated into loads above the ground, at the ground surface, and below the ground:

Vertical Loads

1. Dead loads

All materials in nature have weight, called dead weight when used to form a structure – it doesn’t move around once in place.  Materials like timber, steel, concrete, plastic, and earth.  Design engineers must ensure the structure can support itself; it’s own dead weight.  And that the foundation soil material below can support all the other materials above.  Dead weight is often the greatest weight on a structure.

2. Live loads

Live loads do not usually provide such heavy loads on a structure, but they are important because they often derive from the occupancy of a structure – people.  They can also be caused by vehicles, as in a parking garage.  Storage of materials in tanks and bins generates live loads.  These objects all have weight that can be moved around; they’re “live” loads.

3. Snow loads

In northern climes, snow is another heavy load on a structure.  This material doesn’t move around once it falls and drifts into place, usually on a roof.  The nice, light stuff is light; the wet stuff is very heavy, as we all know when we must shovel it.

4. Rain water

Rain water can impose quite a load on a roof if its removal isn’t provided for properly.  When it falls on accumulated snow on a roof the combination of snow plus rain is a considerable load on a building’s roof.

5. Frost action

When wet soil freezes, particularly saturated soil, it expands – about 9%, and imposes a very great load on any part of a structure with which it has contact.  It moves everything in its path, verticallly, horizontally, and everywhere in between.  It’s not practical to resist it, the forces are so great.  In some types of soils ice lens can form and the expansion is much greater than 9%.  Foundations below the ground, and structures at ground level, like retaining walls and highways are affected.  Design engineers provide for the load from frost action by ensuring it doesn’t develop in the first place.

6. Wind

We mentioned wind above.  We all know how wind can push things over.  Less is known about how the wind can “pull” things over – called suction pressure in engineering.  It acts in all directions.  It’s the kind of wind pressure that pulls sail boats across the water and causes air craft wings to lift.  It’s a load that is being applied every time the wind blows on a structure.  It’s certain to have been a factor in the collapse of the three-storey residential building.  Design engineers know about it and provide for it.

7. Earthquake loads

Earthquake loads are considered to act in both a vertical and a horizontal direction.  They can result in large forces on a structure.  Providing for these forces when Mother Nature sends them our way is not as well understood.  Design engineers do their best with the analytical tools that are available.

8. Temperature

Construction materials expand and contract as the temperature changes.  Provision must be made for this in design.  All bridge decks have a gap between sections of the deck to accommodate the expansion of the deck in warmer weather.  Otherwise, the bridge deck would buckle – an engineering failure.  Concrete floors in buildings have expansion joints for the same reason.

Horizontal Loads

1. Earth pressure

Earth – Mother Earth, can impose a pressure on a structure and must be allowed for in design.  An obvious example of a horizontal pressure due to the earth is the pressure on a retaining wall or a basement wall.

A less obvious example of a vertical pressure due to earth is the pressure on a sliding surface that, if too great, will result in a landslide.  It’s called overburden pressure in this situation.  Design engineers can provide for these earth pressures.

2. Water pressure

Water, one of Mother Nature’s great materials, can cause problems if not considered.  Dams forming reservoirs are an obvious instance where water pressure must be provided for when designing the dam.  Less obvious is the allowance that must be made for the pressure that results from the water that flows through an earth dam.  This happens and it’s normal.  Also less obvious, water pressure must be provided for in bridge design less it cause scour and erosion around the bridge piers.

3. Dynamic loading

I wonder how many readers know that bridge decks are designed to resist the dynamic load that results when a number of vehicles all put their brakes on at the same time?  This load is related to several factors including the weight of the vehicles – weight that is characteristic of all materials in Mother Nature’s realm.

 

Falling roof ice injures man

(The following is one in a series of cases I have investigated that illustrate the different types of structural failures and accidents that occur resulting in civil litigation, and the forensic engineering methods I used to investigate the cause.  The series is designed to assist counsel gain an appreciation of the engineering investigative methods used by forensic engineers.

The methods are most important for purposes of this illustrative series.  As such, I do not report on the analysis of the evidence uncovered during the investigation)

The investigation is reported under the following main headings with several sub-headings:

  • The case (A description of the accident and the scene, also, the client and the legal/technical issues)
  • Forensic engineering investigation (Building construction/snow and ice formation)
  • Cause (Addresses the legal/technical issues)
  • Resolution
  • Litigation
  • Post mortem (Binoculars were an important investigative tool)

The case

A man was walking along a sidewalk in a city in eastern Canada several years ago when a piece of ice fell from a building hitting him on the head and knocking him out.  The man regained consciousness some time later in an ambulance on his way to the hospital.  A doctor diagnosed severe head trauma.  The man took time off work and was treated for his injuries.

The three storey building had a mansard roof – a roof with two slopes, covering the upper level.  The roof had several dormer windows.  The building was several decades old.  The accident occurred on the sidewalk on the south side of the building below one of the dormers.

The man retained counsel to assist him claim damages associated with his injuries.

Client

I was retained by the counsel in connection with the claim for damages and asked to investigate the accident.

Legal/Technical issues

Counsel identified the following issues relevant to a resolution of the dispute by the court:

  1. The design and construction of a building and its roof in relation to safety issues concerning the accumulation of ice and snow.
  2. Alterations that could be made to a roof or safety precautions that could be taken to prevent accidents.

Forensic engineering investigation

Following is a list of some of the methods I relied on during my investigation of the accident.  The methods and tasks are separated according to the issues identified by counsel:

Building construction/Snow and ice formation

  1. Review documents in general as provided by counsel
  2. Study photographs of the building and the scene taken at the time of the accident, particularly those marking the location of the accident and the construction of the roof
  3. Visually examine the scene and the exterior of the building.  Note the formation and location of icicles on the roof
  4. Examine with binoculars details and features of the roof construction, and the general repair and condition of the roof
  5. Visually examine the formation and build-up of ice and snow on different buildings in other locations I travelled during the forensic investigation.  Reflect on the build-up of ice and snow on the roof of my home in the past
  6. Research the formation of ice and snow build-up on roofs
  7. Study victim’s statement of accident noting, in particular, what the victim heard at the time of the accident and the extent of the victim’s injuries
  8. Study a floor plan of the building
  9. Read the pleadings

Roof alteration

  1. Research methods of altering the roof at the scene of the accident to prevent the formation of ice and snow on the roof
  2. Examine products available in building supply stores for altering the roof
  3. Research safety precautions that could be taken to prevent accidents from falling ice

Cause

Building and roof construction, including collecting runoff from the roof, were typical for the city.  As such, as an older building, the conditions were present in our climate for ice and snow to form and collect on the south side of the building.  Inspection and maintenance of the roof drainage system would be necessary to prevent ice and snow falling on people below.

The roof could be altered by various methods, and the methods maintained, to prevent ice forming and snow accumulating.  These methods are sold in building suppy stores.  One method would involve lining the roof above the eaves with metal sheeting to prevent ice and snow accumulating.

The area of the sidewalk below could be roped off and signs posted cautioning people of the danger of falling ice.

Resolution

The claim was resolved by alternate dispute resolution (ADR).

Litigation

The case did not go to trial.

Post mortem

The extent of the man’s injuries was evidence in giving some indication of the size of the piece of the ice that struck him.  I now want to know the extent of a victim’s injuries in all accidents I investigate.

Also, the sound the man heard, suggestive of ice hitting the roof of the addition, corroborated the location of the accident and the area of the roof from which the piece of ice fell.  It was easy to explain the formation of ice at this area of the roof.

Examining the roof with binoculars was the only way to assess maintenance of the roof drainage system.  Less than adequate maintenance was a factor in my analysis.  I wasn’t privy to its importance in resolving the case.

International engineering magazine publishes information on forensic engineering in eastern Canada – and also information useful to Counsel on the causes of failure

International report on forensic engineering practice in eastern Canada

“Built Expressions”, is an engineering magazine published monthly with a readership of about 10,000 engineers and architects in Asia, the U.K, and the U.S.  The magazine published three of my blog postings last year (Ref. 15, pg. 74 to 80):

  • What is forensic engineering?
  • Steps in the forensic engineering investigative process
  • Writing forensice engineering reports

My articles reflected what I have experienced practicing forensic engineering in eastern Canada.  Requests to publish these articles in the magazine suggests to me that we have a standard of practice in forensic engineering in eastern Canada of interest to the world.

(These postings and their publication dates are contained in the References below.  The References list 12 postings forming a series I published last year for counsel.  The series was on the role of a professional engineer assisting Counsel at the different stages of the civil litigation process)

These three articles were included in the December 2012 issue of Built Expressions that featured several articles on ‘Forensic Civil Engineering’.

(Please contact me if you would like to review an electronic version of the magazine, or contact the publisher (Ref. 15). The file containing the magazine is quite large at 14.8 MB and not included in this posting for that reason)

Learning from others about the cause of failures in the built environment

But we can learn from the others as well.  There were nine articles in the Cover Feature including my three articles.  The articles described various aspects of forensic civil engineering as experienced by the authors.  Most of the articles would be of interest to forensic engineers.  One or two would be of interest to Counsel.

One article in the magazine, ‘The expert witness and professional ethics’, (Ref. 15, Rao, B.S.C., pg. 38), reports on the categorizing and classifying of the causes of structural failure as determined by researchers in the U.S. and Europe.  This research reviewed the causes of hundreds of failures.  Based on the research the primary causes of failure were categorized as follows:

  • Human failure
  • Design failure
  • Material failure
  • Extreme or unforseen conditions or environments
  • Combinations of the above

When professional engineers were at fault (human failure) the causes of failure could be classified as follows:

  • 36%…Insufficient knowledge on the part of the engineer
  • 16%…Under estimation of influence
  • 14%…Ignorance, carelessness, negligence
  • 13%…Forgetfulness, error
  •   9%…Relying on others without sufficient control
  •   7%…Objectively unknown situation
  •   1%…Imprecise definition of responsibilites
  •   1%…Choice of bad quality
  •   3%…Other

When the percentage distribution of the failures were summarized the research found that almost half were due to errors in the planning and design of a structure and a third occurred during construction:

  • 43%…Planning and design
  • 36%…Construction
  • 16%…Use and maintenance
  •   7%…Others and multiple factors

I reviewed research a few years ago that found many, possibly most, foundation failures were due to inadequate geotechnical investigation of the foundation soils.

This type of information based on what appears to be quite exhaustive research is valuable to a forensic engineer in forming an initial hypothesis of failure at the beginning of an investigation.

Counsel can also learn from engineering research

The information is also valuable to Counsel in assessing whether or not to take a case or gaining an appreciation of where a forensic investigation may be leading based on initial oral reports by the professional engineer investigating the cause of the failure.

References

  1. What is forensic engineering?, published, November 20, 2012
  2. Writing forensic engineering reports, published, November 6, 2012
  3. Steps in the civil litigation process, published, August 28, 2012
  4. Steps in the forensic engineering investigative process, published October 26, 2012
  5. The role of a professional engineer in counsel’s decision to take a case, published June 26, 2012
  6. The role of a professional engineer assisting counsel prepare a Notice of Claim, published July 26, 2012
  7. The role of a professional engineer assisting counsel prepare a Statement of Claim, published September 11, 2012
  8. The role of a professional engineer assisting counsel prepare a Statement of Defence, published September 26, 2012
  9. The role of a professional engineer assisting counsel prepare an Affidavit of Documents, published October 4, 2012
  10. The role of a professional engineer assisting counsel during Discovery, published October 16, 2012
  11. The role of a professional engineer assisting counsel during Alternate Dispute Resolutionn (ADR), published November 16, 2012
  12. The role of a professional engineer assisting counsel prepare for a Settlement Conference, published November 29, 2012
  13. The role of a professional engineer assisting counsel prepare for a Trial Date Assignment Conference, published December 12, 2012
  14. The role of a professional engineer assisting counsel prepare for Trial, published, December 19, 2012
  15. Built Expressions, Vol. 1, Issue 12, December 2012, Argus Media PVT Ltd., Bangalore, E: info@builtexpressions.com, info@argusmediaindia.com

The role of a professional engineer assisting counsel prepare for Trial

This item is the last in a series on the role of a professional engineer in the different stages of civil litigation.  Other items in the series are listed below in the References.

The series is intended to help lawyers and their clients understand how they can use professional engineers in the resolution of disputes with technical issues.

The detailed tasks at this stage are listed below in blue.

Professional engineer’s role in preparing for Trial

When lawsuits occasionally reach this stage, the role of the professional engineer at Trial is similar to that during Discovery.  However, while Discovery testimony can focus on intricate detail, Trial testimony generally addresses key issues and themes.

The procedure at Trial consists of a number of question-and-answer sessions on the evidence and witness testimony, similar to those during Discovery, followed by closing arguments or summatioins.

The judge may ask questions at any time during the Trial.

At the end of the Trial in civil litigation, a judge studies the evidence and testimony, makes findings and arrives at a decision.  Decisions typically are issued later by the judge rather than from the bench and are given in writing.

The professional engineer’s role might consist of the following tasks:

(The tasks are rendered in bold and regular text to facilitate ease of reading)

  1. Review all technical documentation, electronic data, physical evidence, tangible exhibits, and possible demonstrative evidence on the case
  2. Review transcripts of the testimony at Discovery of lay and expert witnesses and assess relevance of new technical data
  3. Confer with counsel about their clear understanding of the evidence from the forensic engineering investigation, any new evidence arising from Discovery, the technical facts supported by the evidence, and the technical issues on which the claim, defence, counter claims, and cross claims are based
  4. Prepare supplementary reports and statements as required by counsel on new technical evidence arising from Discovery
  5. Assist counsel in narrowing the technical issues to be determined at trial
  6. Suggest technical lines of questioning to counsel to examine perceived mistakes in technical data and evidence, or flawed reasoning by opposing lay and expert witnesses.  Be objective in these suggestions
  7. Prepare exhibits, displays and demonstrative evidence for trial
  8. Review agreed document book to be familiar with the technical material
  9. Identify need to retain experts to help with any new technical matters arising from Discovery
  10. Review summaries of the discoveries and the documents
  11. Review technical witness statements and factual decisions
  12. Check that the technical issues, facts, and evidence have been completely and fully identified and properly summarized
  13. Review how technical witness statements and demonstrative aids are included in the trial brief
  14. Review detailed factual chronology and the references to the technical engineering evidence
  15. Check repair costs that may be offered or expected to receive if question of settlement may be reviewed at this stage
  16. Review the forensic engineering investigation file and prepare to testify at trial if required by counsel
  17. Engage in a mock examination with counsel, including direct and cross-examination in preparation for testifying at trial
  18. Assist in mock examination of technical witnesses in preparation for direct and cross-examination at trial
  19. Attend examination at trial of opposing expert and lay witnesses and audit their testimony (see Interesting Note below) 
  20. Alert counsel to possible new lines of questioning arising from the professional engineer’s monitoring at trial of the testimony of other witnesses, particularly technical experts.  Be objective in doing this
  21. Testify at trial as an expert witness on the engineering investigation carried out

(Interesting Note: I met with an RCMP officer recently in connection with a matter.  He mentioned in passing that during his cross-examination in his last three cases, the cross-examining counsel for the defence had a professional engineer monitoring his testimony – the RCMP officer’s, and advising counsel of possible additional lines of questioning)

References

  1. Steps in the civil litigation process, published August 28, 2012
  2. Steps in the forensic engineering investigative process, published October 26, 2012
  3. The role of a professional engineer in counsel’s decision to take a case, published June 26, 2012
  4. The role of a professional engineer assisting counsel prepare a Notice of Claim, published July 26, 2012
  5. The role of a professional engineer assisting counsel prepare a Statement of Claim, published September 11, 2012
  6. The role of a professional engineer assisting counsel prepare a Statement of Defence, published September 26, 2012
  7. The role of a professional engineer assisting counsel prepare an Affidavit of Documents, published October 4, 2012
  8. The role of a professional engineer assisting counsel during Discovery, published October 16, 2012
  9. The role of a professional engineer assisting counsel during Alternate Dispute Resolutionn (ADR), published November 16, 2012
  10. The role of a professional engineer assisting counsel prepare for a Settlement Conference, published November 29, 2012
  11. The role of a professional engineer assisting counsel prepare for a Trial Date Assignment Conference, published December 12, 2012

 

What is forensic engineering?

You’ve probably seen the word “forensic” in the newspapers often enough.  The term is applied to many scientific disciplines today and to specialties outside the engineering and scientific professions.  The following item explains what is involved in “forensic” engineering.

Origin of the word “forensic”

The word “forensic” comes from the Latin forum and as an adjective means pertaining to or used in legal proceedings.  The forensic engineer helps with the technical issues in disputes – and their resolution – arising from engineering failures.  He does this by presenting and explaining complex technical principles, technical evidence, technical facts supported by the evidence, and opinions to help the parties resolve the dispute.  More than 90% of disputes are resolved by the parties in this manner without going to trial.

Forensic engineers use engineering methods to investigate failures

In my forensic engineering practice in eastern Canada, and reviewing some literature, I’ve come to think of forensic work as the use of the engineering approach, and various engineering methods and knowledge, to investigate the cause of failures in the built and natural environments – including environmentally related failures.  A failure may mean total collapse, partial collapse or inadequate performance and serviceability problems.

The same engineering approach – the methods may change, can be used to investigate the cause of slip, trip and fall accidents, and motor vehicle and aviation accidents causing property damage, personal injury, or death.

Methods the same in forensic engineering and design engineering

The engineering approach and the methods used during forensic investigation are essentially the same as those used during design of a structure.  And in applying those methods to forensic work there would be no greater or lesser attention paid to thoroughness and accuracy.

The difference between forensic engineering and design engineering

If there is a difference, forensic work looks at what was done in the past to provide for the loads on an existing structure and whether or not it was adequate.  Design work looks at what must be done in the future to adequately provide for the loads on a proposed structure.  “Load” in engineering can be anything to do with a structure that should have been provided for or must be provided for.

Forensic engineering

“Forensic engineering” is the term now accepted to connote the full spectum of services which an engineering expert can provide.  A number of engineering disciplines might be used in the investigation of a failure.  For example, civil engineering, foundation, geotechnical, environmental, structural, chemical, mechanical, and electrical, among others.  The forensic engineer directing the investigation – usually from the discipline thought at the beginning to be most relevant to the problem, would retain other specialists as required by different facets of the problem.  I’ve done that often enough during my forensic engineering investigations.

Most forensic engineers have higher, specialist degrees in engineering and decades of experience.  They are usually retained by counsel for the plaintiff or defendant in a dispute, by claim’s managers with insurance firms, and occasionally by the court.

Anything can fail, break and fall down

Anything in the built environment can fail – buildings and their different components, including environmental components like fuel oil tanks, and civil engineering structures like bridges, roads, dams, towers, wharves, and earthworks.

Also, anything in the natural environment can fail – natural slopes, river banks, coast lines, flooding protection, subsidence protection, and erosion and sediment control.

The infra structure servicing these building and civil engineering structures can fail – infra structure like water distribution and sewage collection systems, pipe lines, power distribution systems, and tunnels.

Typical forensic engineering investigations

Forensic engineering experts might investigate why:

  • a building settled,
  • a building caught on fire and burned,
  • a bridge collapsed,
  • a dam washed out,
  • oil spilled contaminating the ground,
  • ice fell injuring a pedestrian,
  • a worker fell off a ladder and died,
  • a fatal traffic accident occurred after hitting a pile of salt on the road,
  • foundation underpinning does not appear adequate,
  • land or a basement flooded,
  • a land slide occurred,
  • etc.

The majority of failures that are investigated by forensic engineers are quite ordinary, at least in the engineering world, and are not ongoing, news-grabbing events.

Assisting the court

If the dispute can’t be resolved and it goes to trial the forensic engineer as an expert presents and explains the evidence, facts, and opinions to help the judge or jury understand the technical issues so that the verdict will be proper within the law.

In a dispute resulting in civil litigation, it is the role of the forensic engineering expert to objectively provide evidence, regardless of whether it favours the plaintiff or the defendant.

References

  1. Association of Soil and Foundation Engineers (ASFE), Expert: A guide to forensic engineering and service as an expert witness, 1985
  2. Cooper, Chris, Forensic Science, DK Publishing, New York, 2008
  3. Suprenant, Ph.D., P.E., Bruce A., Ed., Forensic Engineering, Vol. 1, Number 1, Pergamon Press, 1987
  4. American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), Guidelines for Failure Investigation, 1989
  5. Lewis, Gary L., Ed., American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), Guidelines for Forensic Engineering Practice, 2003

(Posted by Eric E. Jorden, M.Sc., P.Eng. Consulting Professional Engineer, Forensic Engineer, Geotechnology Ltd., Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada November 20, 2012 ejorden@eastlink.ca)