] [Thread] [Date] [Author]

["Jordan Truesdell, PE" <seaint1(--nospam--at)truesdellengineering.com>]

Actually, that was my thought as well.  I remember reports that the 
epoxy anchors came out clean (well, dusty) with the epoxy intact around 
the anchor. Also, the loading wasn't static due to the traveling 
pressure waves in the tunnel.  To be honest, I rely on the manufacturers 
data for installed anchors. If there are no specific limitations for 
installation geometry or load cycling in the literature or ES report, I 
generally presume that the  anchor is good for the rated load. While we 
can all think of "better" (usually more expensive) ways to create a 
detail, part of engineering is to produce the most economical solution. 
If not, we could just go specify based on conservative rules of thumb, 
like the prescriptive codes use.

Granted I have not read the report (and probably won't get to, to be 
honest), but I'm not quite ready to cast stones.

Jordan



David Fisher wrote:
> This was certainly a terrible tragedy.
>
> But, as I understand it, epoxy anchors typically have a safety factor of at
> least 4:1.
>
> If it were really "epoxy creep" then why didn't more panels fail?
>
> I guess my point is that maybe the installation was faulty; perhaps the hole
> was not cleaned out or the epoxy incorrectly applied, etc.
>
>
> I think we can all look back at details we've done over the years and wonder
> "what was I thinking?"
>
> I think it could be classified as "seemed like a good idea at the time"
>
> Obviously, some sort of redundancy should have been built into the design;
> but say the panels were supported by four rods; at 4:1, the panel should
> have only needed ONE rod to support its dead weight...at least the panel
> would have come loose and repairs been able to be made to stabilize it prior
> to failure.
>
> It appears that there might be more to this story...
>
>
> Still, an awful waste of human life.
>
>
>
>
> David L. Fisher SE PE
> Senior Director
>
> Cape Cod Grand Cayman Holdings Ltd. - Cayman
> Fisher+Partners Structural Engineers Ltd. - Cayman
> 372 West Ontario Chicago 60610
> 75 Fort Street Georgetown Grand Cayman BWI
> 319 A Street Boston 02210
>
>
> 312.573.1701
> 312.573.1726 facsimile
> 312.622.0409 mobile
>
> www.ccgch.com
> www.fpse.com
>
>
>   
>   

******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
*   Read list FAQ at: http://www.seaint.org/list_FAQ.asp
* 
*   This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers 
*   Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To 
*   subscribe (no fee) or UnSubscribe, please go to:
*
*   http://www.seaint.org/sealist1.asp
*
*   Questions to seaint-ad(--nospam--at)seaint.org. Remember, any email you 
*   send to the list is public domain and may be re-posted 
*   without your permission. Make sure you visit our web 
*   site at: http://www.seaint.org 
******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********