@PEinc
John…will do. Things are very fluid and there’s a lot of crap floating around. Will try to review for legitimacy before posting…
I see from the news this morning that the remainder is the structure was demolished Sunday night. Just a pile of rubble now.
Just saw this on the net today too…
Long time developing apparently…
I am seeing a lot of structural engineer wanna-bees giving their “opinions” on the net who are really ■■■■■■■ me off.
Sorry for the emotional post - the site redacted me… That’s good!
And as I said before, the attitude of the powers to be in Florida is at the root of a very large problem here… Follow the money…
For DeSantos to say that the condo had “problems from the start”, the “establishment”, local government in particular, has known of this for many years.
@MSQUARED48 …I think that his job might have left him rather than what was reported!
Yep…DeSantis is at the root of quite a few issues in Florida. The legislature has to address this recertification issue. 40 years is too long, particularly along the coast. I think 20 years is more reasonable, maybe even every 10 years after 20.
@ Ron:
I saw another report today that some other buildings in the area are being evacuated. Is that the case now? If so, do you know which ones?
I wonder if the powers to be are now seeing the money trail with all the fingers pointing to their jobs, with possible criminal charges, let alone the litigation?
This subject is going crazy on the other site…
Thanks for any updates.
@MSQUARED48 …Mike…yep, at least one large condo about 5 miles to the north of Champlain was ordered to be evacuated. It was based on an engineering report showing similar issues. The attorneys for the Condo Association engaged another engineer to do an inspection who said all was OK…the municipality rejected the second one and ordered the evacuation. Correct move.
We have gotten several requests for inspections by condos along the coast since the Champlain collapse. They all seem to think that all it requires is a “home inspection” approach. I have explained to them that in order to do an adequate inspection it will require a lot of stuff and it won’t be cheap. For an adequate inspection, it will require multiple engineers and technicians, some nondestructive testing and some sampling/laboratory testing. Could easily run upwards of 20-30K.
1 Like
And a new one … Roof of Miami-Dade building partially collapses, all apartments evacuated
Looks like it may have been a small portion of the fascade from what I can see.
The August issue of “Informed Infrastructure” magazine has a technical article with thoughts by one structural engineer on what may have happened:
“What Went Wrong At Surfside Collapse” - Article
The article is based on a 15 minute video interview with the engineer:
“What Went Wrong At Surfside Collapse” - Video
2 Likes
I thoroughly enjoyed the video, and I’m not a SE. Several parts, hopefully the important ones, I listened to twice.
@ Ron:
What do you think of these comments?
@MSQUARED48
Mike…I agree. This is where I would look first. Chlorides are killers along the coast. Have done a lot of chloride gradient testing to determine depth of ingress of chlorides in concrete, particularly on balconies on the exposed side. Levels can get quite high and beyond the acceptable levels for rebar corrosion.
What does the term “overcrowded concrete reinforcement” really mean to us non-SE types?
There is a youtube video of an SE that is doing a forensic analysis of the collapse. He even pulled up the 1979 design standards, original 1979 drawings, the 1980 revision, and walks through each of them one-by-one. It was really well done.
Of course, I can’t find the link and that video doesn’t show up in my youtube history for some reason. (I wonder if he got sensored.)
@Latexman
Overcrowded reinforcement means there is not enough space between individual pieces of rebar to allow concrete to flow in between and bond to the whole bar. A rule of thumb is for there to be at least 3 times the size of the nominal coarse aggregate size for bar or form clearance.
This does not apply to tied lap splices in the rebar though.
Thanks @Ron. Let’s see if I understand, so one should expect #4 rebar (0.5" nOD) to have 2" C-C distance or greater to give the 1.5" (3X the 0.5" nOD rebar) clearance in a cross-section remote from a tied lap splice?
@Latexman
It is 3 x the nominal coarse aggregate size, not 3x the rebar size. As an example, if you wanted 1.5” of concrete cover over the rebar, the max. coarse aggregate size you would want in the concrete mix is 1/2”.
This is one of many reasons it is important for structural engineers to know something about concrete material technology.
2 Likes