Continue to Site

Eng-Tips is the largest engineering community on the Internet

Intelligent Work Forums for Engineering Professionals

Register Log in
  • Congratulations The Obturator on being selected by the Eng-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!

Dallas Cowboys indoor practice facility collapses

Status
Not open for further replies.
The video I saw on the news showed a LOT of swaying well prior to the collapse. If I were to believe that it was a micro-burst one would need to convince me that these bursts are a long term event which would cause the excessive swaying preceding the collapse.

I think that sometimes when the traditional Building Code is applied to non-conventional construction we aren't always ending up with the same factors of safety. I see a lot of gas station canopies and pre-engineered buildings ripped apart when I watch the weather channel. Anecdotal evidence to be sure, but it makes me wonder. Maybe it has more to do with design-build vs. design-bid climate.

Was the Dallas facility design-build?
 
"Maybe it has more to do with design-build vs. design-bid climate."

I don't know about this specific case, but any time I have been involved with any building type like this (any type of pre-engineered structure), the design engineer for the structure is working for the manufacturer of the structure, in a turn-key type operation. This is an inherent conflict, in my opinion, as the desire to make as much money will always be at odds with conservative design. When I look at some structures, particularly preengineered metal buildings, I wonder how they get them to work by code. I have been involved trying to retrofit some, and not been able to justify the original shapes, much less add additional load to them.
 
Good name "Cover-UP".
 
WillisV - I was entertained by all the pubic comments on that article. Some were intelligent, some were....well...
 
I hope Mr. Tabak thinks twice before he ever again allows himself to be listed as EOR on a project he had little to do with. For however much time he has left in the field.

Engineers putting their names (and stamps) on drawings and calculations they had little or nothing to with the formulation of, and did little or no review of, seems to be a bit of trend for Summit. The EOR on the Philadelphia project testified in court that he did not thoroughly review the drawings and calcs but only reviewed them to "see if they matched his general experience with [ ] buildings".

structuresguy- even when the design engineer is employed by the manufacturer, most reputable tension fabric structure manufacturers send all engineering out for independent review, not just the rubber stamping that apparently occurred in Philly. The fact is that the failure rate of engineered tension fabric structures is well in line with, and often times lower than, other forms of pre-fab construction. A fact that will be mostly ignored due to one manufacturers apparent negligence.
 
Consider the time available for the review: Apparently, the entire review covered only a 2 day period, and during that two period, the same engineer was signing off on several unrelated projects at the same time.

Doesn't leave much time for real review of the project that failed.

Failure to install <= failure to monitor what is being installed <= failure to GO to the jobsite and walk around and poke-your-nose, ear, fingers, and eyes into the HOLES where hardware is supposed to go.
 
For what it's worth, I'm officially going to reserve judgement on this until all the facts are investigated and reported. It sounds like corners were cut by a lot of entities. The Engineer might be totally to blame or maybe they used his name without permission.
From my exposure to Texas work, there seems to be a laissez faire attitude from local governing authorities regarding building safety.
But I hate to point a finger at Texas. I was at a seminar yesterday where they talked about a structurally failing hotel in Indiana. No permit, no Geotechnical Report, no EOR, no Architect of Record, no nothing. The local authorities didn't notice nor inspect a six story building going up in their town.
 
I don't see how one could blame the local gov't or building officials. Even if there is NO building authority you still need to design things right. We are challenged with this issue right now on a project in Mexico. My thought is that we need to provide a certain standard of care whether a B.O. is watching or not.

It's up to the professionals (us) to make sure things are built correctly. I hope none of us here design one way if our name and seal is on the drawing and another way if no one is watching.
 
JLNJ-

Kudos. If you are in an industry that you care about and want to see survive and prosper, you take it upon yourself to make sure that the product you deliver to field is well-designed, well-engineered, installed properly and safe- and is something that you can stand behind and be proud of.

This project and others like it, done safely and properly, should have been a launching pad for an exciting, relatively new techonology- lightweight, steel framed, tension fabric structures providing large clear-span spaces that were cost-effective and environmentally friendly. Instead, this tragedy and it's aftermath- which I firmly believe will be found to have been the result of a single companies negligence- will set this technology back in the marketplace by 5 years.
 
You are probably right about the future reluctance to use this type of structure, tentguy. But if it is only 5 years, you are lucky. Anyone remember the Binishell? Or the trend to use thin shell hyperbolic paraboloid gym roofs? A few failures killed those ideas.
 
Hokie66-

I may be being overly optimistic, probably due to the fact (if you haven't figured this out yet) I make a living in this industry.

In my defense, there are factors that may make this event less than fatal. Unlike the technologies you list, tension membrane technology is only "relatively" new. While fewer than a dozen structures are currently in place that match the dimensions of the Cowboys structure, there are literally hundreds of tension fabric structures of significant size throughout North America and thousands world wide. So there is plenty of positive data out there to draw upon.

The air-supported structure industry has managed to survive and thrive despite that fact that they average probably around a dozen failures per year.
 
I don't think the tension membrane industry in general will be harmed very much. There are plenty of tension membrane coverings on robust roof structures all over the world. Where the reluctance will come is in the very light truss systems such as in the two failures which Summit has had. Good luck, hope it doesn't affect you adversely.
 
hokie66, what do you think of this quote in the article you posted:

[blue]Summit manufactured materials for that facility and designed it, university spokesman Jason Cook said.

But Cook said Summit did not handle construction or supply the engineer of record.[/blue]

Summit designed it.

But did not supply the engineer of record.

Doesn't that almost make for an admission of violating basic engineering laws? (i.e. plan stamping)



 
It is really hard to know what to make of the whole situation. It would be an admission of wrongdoing if Summit had said it, but the statement was attributed to a spokesman of Texas A&M, and he may not be versed in the law. There seems to have been what in Australia is called a "She'll be 'right, mate." attitude by the Owner and the City which has contributed to this going so wrong. And now, it seems there may be no proper independent investigation, at least until the lawsuits are filed.
 
What Building Permit?

Dik
 
Never sign-off, stamp, a design that one couldn't comprehend.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Part and Inventory Search

Sponsor

Back
Top Bottom