Foundation designs
We all do agree that foundations are the bedrock of any construction or building project be it a small house and large complex structures like underground rail lines , tunnels , airports , Harbours and bridges.
A large condominium project was being built in six phases, spread out over several years. For Phases I through III the soils engineer gave the recommendation that the foundation was to be of certain a drilled pier type, and that the piers should be 4 feet deep.
When construction of Phase IV started, he again recommended 6 feet deep piers. Later, during construction of Phases V and VI, the structural engineer went back to 4 feet piers. All the buildings in all six phases were of the same design, based on the same soils report. The soils were similar in all Phases. Was the structural engineer negligent in not carrying forward the soils engineer's Phase IV recommendations?
Management and control of information is part of diligent engineering practice. It was argued that the structural engineer's failure to carry forward the revised soils engineering parameters represented an error inconsistent with the standard of care.
Major engineering failures are often cited in engineering education as archetypes of engineers' negligence.
Professional Engineers have a duty of care to provide their services in a manner consistent with the "standard of care" of their profession which they practice.
Any time it comes to the attention of a professional that there is a mistake in his drawings or calculation, he or she should accept them in good fate and make changes before it reaches the point of he or she being sued.
The story is told of a professional land surveyor who did not set the property corners at the right location on a property.
After a neighbor to the property who had lived there for his entire life had informed him of the mistake to his survey drawings and where he had set the corner markers , he said and I quote “We shall cross the Bridge when we get there” meaning when the time comes we will solve the matter.
He refused to listen to very vital evidence and he was later sued and had to pay for a very heavy sum. If he had listened and corrected the error he would not have found himself in that situation.
The fact that an engineer makes a mistake that causes injury or damage is not sufficient to lead to professional liability on the part of the engineer.
In order for there to be professional liability, it must be proven the services were professionally negligent, that is, they fell beneath the standard of care of the profession. When one hires an engineer, one accepts the risk, and the liability, of that professional making a mistake similar to mistakes other normally competent engineers make, using reasonable diligence and their best judgment.
Some errors are bound to happen but like I said we should not wait as professional engineers and land surveyors before the harm is done.
We should be able to save the situation as soon we told before you are held liable for a stupid mistake which could have been corrected.
In performing professional services for our clients, Engineers (structural engineer) has the duty to have that degree of learning and skill ordinarily possessed by reputable (structural engineers), practicing in the same or similar locality and under similar circumstances.
The question of a structural engineer's performance relative to the standard of care arises when errors are made, or when there is a failure of a constructed facility to achieve its intended safety, durability, serviceability or utility.
Posted by Benjamin Yaw Atsem.
References:
Joshua B. Kardon, SE
“The Structural Engineer's Standard of Care”
http://www.onlineethics.diamax.com/CMS/profpractice/ppessays/standard_of_care.aspx#section3
"Suspended Engineer's Lesson: Never Wait Until It Is Too Late." Engineering News Record, page 12, June 24, 1996.
Sunday, April 27, 2008
Friday, April 11, 2008
"Ethical Issues Concerning the Chernobyl Nuclear Disaster"
“Ethical Issues Concerning Chernobyl Nuclear Disaster”
I am sure most of us heard of the greatest Nuclear Disaster that occurred in Chernobyl of the former Soviet Union (USSR) in 1986. This disaster was the world’s worst nuclear disaster which was located 80 miles north of Kiev, capital of Ukraine (formerly in Soviet Union). The nuclear plant had four Reactors and the safety procedures were disregarded. At exactly 1:23 the chain reaction was unable to control creating explosion and fire blew the reactor’s heavy steel and concrete lid.
This disaster killed more than 30 people at the place of accident and because of its radiation level in the surrounding 20-mile radius, almost 1,35,000 people were evacuated. The effects of this nuclear disaster is still being felt today with children and the elderly having serious medical conditions such as cancer , breathing problems , skin disease just to mention a few. Six people per million suffered from cancer before the accident had happened. But the statistics from 1986 – 1997 showed a rise to 45 accidents per million.
The lack of safety culture resulted in the inability to remedy design weakness despite being known before the accident. There were many construction failings at the Chernobyl nuclear power plant and its inadequate monitoring. According to the data in the possession of the KGB of the USSR design deviations and ventilation of construction are occurring at various places in the construction. The pillars of generator room were erected with a deviation of up to 100mm from the reference axis and the horizontal connections were absent. Also there was a deviation in the wall panels of up to 150mm. In a report, the Deputy Head of the construction directorate said the backfill of the foundation in many places where waterproofing were damaged. So this damage lead to ground water seepage into the station and radioactive contamination of the environment.
The head of Chernobyl did not show any proper attention to the foundation. Even the cement plant operates erratically and also its output is bad. There were obstacles during the pouring of cement, so it gaps and laying in the foundation. There is no third high voltage transmission lane, which caused limitation in the using of second lane. Due to minor safety equipment in 1978, 170 individuals suffered work related
injuries. This caused the loss in the work time also.
A lot of safety procedures were being violated. They used only 6 rods for the test discipline but the minimum number of rods to be used was 30. Actually they were performing an experiment. In any case they were not under the normal regime of operation, and no usual rules applied.
They were well-experienced engineers who believed thy new exactly what was going on
What we all know as Groupthink was totally missing. There was no proper communication between the team in charge and personal responsible for the operation of nuclear reactor.
There were Sequences of events that caused the accident to occur .
The need for routine maintenance of the reactor four; it was shut down on 25th April 1986. They wanted to take advantage of this reactor to make a test. To make the test the reactor must have a temperature of 1000 MW before shut down, but because of operational error the power fell down to 30 MW due to positive void co-efficient. Finally they stabilized at 1:00 on the 26th of April at 200 MW.
An increase in coolant flow and a drop in stream pressure occurred which made the reactor to become very unstable. This caused less cooling to reactor; it also added an
additional problem. Then the sudden increase in temperature made fuel to rupture and lead to an explosion. After the accident the radioactive material was widely spread.
With in 10 K.M of the area ecosystems lethal doses were reached particularly for coniferous trees and small mammals.
Concerning the ethically issues, the duty of every engineer involved in experimenting with nuclear power reactor is to assure safe operation. Engineers in Chernobyl however believed that they had enough experience and knowledge about the reactor so that they can perform their experiment in a safe way. Unfortunately enough their judgment was wrong. They totally lost control over reactor and caused this great nuclear disaster. They neglected their duty to place public safety and the well being of people within the area as highest priority. Also the safety systems and routines of the reactor were deficient which means that the management of the site has neglected their duty to provide
Safety for public. Even when it comes to information the management of the site have neglected their duty to accurately and timely inform the people.
Also the basic duty of the company is to provide safe equipment.
Also the people with no training were in leading roles, clearly stating the fact that the company was negligent towards its duty. There were so many corrupt practices going on at the plant that even the company lacked its duty in proper maintenance of the plant. Initially the company was in the intension that their staff has sufficient knowledge to prevent large-scale disasters. But unfortunately the staff was unable to detect the defect, which caused the leak. The workers were unable to perform their duty because they have no proper knowledge of operation of technical equipment. The company lacked its duty not by putting up emergency measures to make life a little better for people.
People had the rights to be properly informed about the hazards of nuclear power. They had rights to be accurately informed about the accident that was going on without any
notice in media. Also the management had right to give proper technical knowledge to workers.
The experiment was designed to gain more knowledge about the behavior of the reactor under extreme conditions if it was rightly performed successfully. This could have lead to the benefit for the society. However the fact that they failed in such a catastrophic way means that in spite of their possible good intention, from utilitarian point of view, taking unreasonable risks was not motivated.
The staff was not acting in an egoistic way. They never benefited under any circumstances by the actions they performed leading to disaster. It ended up in a very big
disaster. So they never showed up to be egoistic.
In 1989 a settlement of 470 million US. Dollars was agreed upon and they only paid $350 per victim. Ethical issues arise because of the lack of safety standards and maintenance in Bhopal plant. There were no emergency procedures to deal with large-scale disasters. There was more risk because of the establishment of slum colonies near the
plant. Long before disaster the routine pollution released by the plant led to the
accumulation of several thousand tonnes of toxic waste with led to the abandoned of the area near the areas of factory. The soil and ground water in and around the plant remain
contaminated.
References
Balaji Abhinav Nellore, Artur Jaroszewski.
“Ethical Issues Concerning Risks in Science and Technology - Case Studies”
Mälardalen University Mälardalen University 16-3-97, 2nd Lane, Ramalingapuram, Marynarska 37, 76-150 Darlowo,
Nellore-524003, Andhra Pradesh, India Zachodniopomorskie, Poland.
0091-8615518529, 0091-8612327445 0048-943142171, 0048- 505352852
bne03001@student.mdh.se aji03001@student.mdh.se
<http://www.idt.mdh.se/kurser/cd5590/07_11/Examples-Papers_LectureNotes/RisksScienceTechnology.pdf>
Harris Charles E., Jr., Pritchard Michael S., Rabins Michael J.
“Engineering Ethics-Concepts & Cases”
Thomson.2005: Case 3-Aftermath of Chernobyl
I am sure most of us heard of the greatest Nuclear Disaster that occurred in Chernobyl of the former Soviet Union (USSR) in 1986. This disaster was the world’s worst nuclear disaster which was located 80 miles north of Kiev, capital of Ukraine (formerly in Soviet Union). The nuclear plant had four Reactors and the safety procedures were disregarded. At exactly 1:23 the chain reaction was unable to control creating explosion and fire blew the reactor’s heavy steel and concrete lid.
This disaster killed more than 30 people at the place of accident and because of its radiation level in the surrounding 20-mile radius, almost 1,35,000 people were evacuated. The effects of this nuclear disaster is still being felt today with children and the elderly having serious medical conditions such as cancer , breathing problems , skin disease just to mention a few. Six people per million suffered from cancer before the accident had happened. But the statistics from 1986 – 1997 showed a rise to 45 accidents per million.
The lack of safety culture resulted in the inability to remedy design weakness despite being known before the accident. There were many construction failings at the Chernobyl nuclear power plant and its inadequate monitoring. According to the data in the possession of the KGB of the USSR design deviations and ventilation of construction are occurring at various places in the construction. The pillars of generator room were erected with a deviation of up to 100mm from the reference axis and the horizontal connections were absent. Also there was a deviation in the wall panels of up to 150mm. In a report, the Deputy Head of the construction directorate said the backfill of the foundation in many places where waterproofing were damaged. So this damage lead to ground water seepage into the station and radioactive contamination of the environment.
The head of Chernobyl did not show any proper attention to the foundation. Even the cement plant operates erratically and also its output is bad. There were obstacles during the pouring of cement, so it gaps and laying in the foundation. There is no third high voltage transmission lane, which caused limitation in the using of second lane. Due to minor safety equipment in 1978, 170 individuals suffered work related
injuries. This caused the loss in the work time also.
A lot of safety procedures were being violated. They used only 6 rods for the test discipline but the minimum number of rods to be used was 30. Actually they were performing an experiment. In any case they were not under the normal regime of operation, and no usual rules applied.
They were well-experienced engineers who believed thy new exactly what was going on
What we all know as Groupthink was totally missing. There was no proper communication between the team in charge and personal responsible for the operation of nuclear reactor.
There were Sequences of events that caused the accident to occur .
The need for routine maintenance of the reactor four; it was shut down on 25th April 1986. They wanted to take advantage of this reactor to make a test. To make the test the reactor must have a temperature of 1000 MW before shut down, but because of operational error the power fell down to 30 MW due to positive void co-efficient. Finally they stabilized at 1:00 on the 26th of April at 200 MW.
An increase in coolant flow and a drop in stream pressure occurred which made the reactor to become very unstable. This caused less cooling to reactor; it also added an
additional problem. Then the sudden increase in temperature made fuel to rupture and lead to an explosion. After the accident the radioactive material was widely spread.
With in 10 K.M of the area ecosystems lethal doses were reached particularly for coniferous trees and small mammals.
Concerning the ethically issues, the duty of every engineer involved in experimenting with nuclear power reactor is to assure safe operation. Engineers in Chernobyl however believed that they had enough experience and knowledge about the reactor so that they can perform their experiment in a safe way. Unfortunately enough their judgment was wrong. They totally lost control over reactor and caused this great nuclear disaster. They neglected their duty to place public safety and the well being of people within the area as highest priority. Also the safety systems and routines of the reactor were deficient which means that the management of the site has neglected their duty to provide
Safety for public. Even when it comes to information the management of the site have neglected their duty to accurately and timely inform the people.
Also the basic duty of the company is to provide safe equipment.
Also the people with no training were in leading roles, clearly stating the fact that the company was negligent towards its duty. There were so many corrupt practices going on at the plant that even the company lacked its duty in proper maintenance of the plant. Initially the company was in the intension that their staff has sufficient knowledge to prevent large-scale disasters. But unfortunately the staff was unable to detect the defect, which caused the leak. The workers were unable to perform their duty because they have no proper knowledge of operation of technical equipment. The company lacked its duty not by putting up emergency measures to make life a little better for people.
People had the rights to be properly informed about the hazards of nuclear power. They had rights to be accurately informed about the accident that was going on without any
notice in media. Also the management had right to give proper technical knowledge to workers.
The experiment was designed to gain more knowledge about the behavior of the reactor under extreme conditions if it was rightly performed successfully. This could have lead to the benefit for the society. However the fact that they failed in such a catastrophic way means that in spite of their possible good intention, from utilitarian point of view, taking unreasonable risks was not motivated.
The staff was not acting in an egoistic way. They never benefited under any circumstances by the actions they performed leading to disaster. It ended up in a very big
disaster. So they never showed up to be egoistic.
In 1989 a settlement of 470 million US. Dollars was agreed upon and they only paid $350 per victim. Ethical issues arise because of the lack of safety standards and maintenance in Bhopal plant. There were no emergency procedures to deal with large-scale disasters. There was more risk because of the establishment of slum colonies near the
plant. Long before disaster the routine pollution released by the plant led to the
accumulation of several thousand tonnes of toxic waste with led to the abandoned of the area near the areas of factory. The soil and ground water in and around the plant remain
contaminated.
References
Balaji Abhinav Nellore, Artur Jaroszewski.
“Ethical Issues Concerning Risks in Science and Technology - Case Studies”
Mälardalen University Mälardalen University 16-3-97, 2nd Lane, Ramalingapuram, Marynarska 37, 76-150 Darlowo,
Nellore-524003, Andhra Pradesh, India Zachodniopomorskie, Poland.
0091-8615518529, 0091-8612327445 0048-943142171, 0048- 505352852
bne03001@student.mdh.se aji03001@student.mdh.se
<http://www.idt.mdh.se/kurser/cd5590/07_11/Examples-Papers_LectureNotes/RisksScienceTechnology.pdf>
Harris Charles E., Jr., Pritchard Michael S., Rabins Michael J.
“Engineering Ethics-Concepts & Cases”
Thomson.2005: Case 3-Aftermath of Chernobyl
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)