Reminds me of the mayor in Jaws.
Or Putin.
Any more than for a resident who is out of their place? At least the vacationers were already planning on paying for a hotel, & quite possibly buying some souvenir clothing; changing to another hotel shouldn’t materially change their budget. I wouldn’t be surprised if some resident was out for a run, walking their dog, or at the gym & doesn’t even have access to their wallet because it’s upstairs in their unit which they can’t get to.
I read an interview of some mother who had just helped her daughter move into one of the evacuated buildings. She doesn’t know anyone else in the city other than her also-displaced roommate.
If a tourist ends their stay & goes home, who would pay to ship their luggage back to them? It wasn't their fault they didn't take their stuff as they weren't allowed to retrieve it; however, it's not the hotel's fault either. Is there an industry standard for this unusual situation? If the Red Cross was called in are they able to handle this kind of demand for such a large quantity of disaster assistance
Not exactly. I studied this accident extensively as an engineering student and even presented it to my physics class that I taught. I first heard about it years ago in a classic book entitled To Engineer Is Human: The Role of Failure in Successful Design.
Anyway, the builder in the Hyatt Regency walkway collapse was at fault, but so was the engineer because their design was not constructable. They called for a nut on a threaded section of rod in the middle of an otherwise smooth (unthreaded) rod, which is not possible. Worse, they approved the fabricator’s proposed change over the phone without looking at any shop drawings or performing any calculations.
The way these things are supposed to work is that the builder provides shop drawings and submittals showing exactly how they intend to construct something which the engineer (or architect) then approves. While this has always been good engineering practice, the specific requirement to have structural engineers review and approve shop drawings prepared by fabricators was adopted by the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) as a direct result of this accident.
Assuming the building is safe to work in and not in danger of imminent collapse, you might try jacking up the floor next to the buckled column and replacing it (i.e. the column). Then reinforcing and/or replacing all of the other columns.
Yeah I over-simplified. I knew in general that the design would be stupid hard to build, so the builder’s pushback wasn’t totally wacky or just them trying to cheap Charlie. But not that it was flat impossible or that the engineering firm verbal-OK’ed the changes wo analysis.
Thanks for setting everyone, including me, straight.
I don’t see a fix for this. If one column buckled, it seems to be that the others are suspect as well. Similar lengths, similar loads, probably same section properties, same Euler’s buckling load.
That’s exactly what’s happening. Or at least, my assumption is that temporary support beams are the first step to new permanent support columns. From CNN:
As of 8:30 a.m. Wednesday morning, temporary shoring and beams have been installed on floors 18 through 23 of the under-construction Midtown Manhattan building that was evacuated Tuesday after structural columns buckled.
Additional shoring beams will be added throughout the day, New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani said, adding that there has been no additional movement of the structure since Tuesday morning.
Floors 17 and 24 are in progress, and shoring will be added all the way down to the ninth floor of the 37-floor building, the mayor said.
Was it just a verbal ok over the phone? I actually just watched a documentary on YouTube about that accident (Petter Hörnfeldt aka Mentour Pilot has a new channel where he analyzes non-aviation accidents). From that it sounds like the fabricator did send the shop drawings with the revised design back to the structural engineering firm for approval, but they pretty much just rubber stamped them without properly analyzing them.
So I made a decision and it was… wrong. It was a bad call, Ripley. It was a bad call.
Where’s Stockton Rush when you need him to give some advice about real leadership under pressure?
I’ll let, ahh, you install the first one few. I’ll then come in & install the later ones after you.
I wonder what kind of extra/hazard pay the first guy(s) in there got.
In my area, a newly-built office building was closed in 2020 after a sag was observed in the basement parking. They built a structure over it to hold it up while they repaired. But this was an 8-floor building in the middle of a field in a suburb, not a tower with setbacks in midtown Manhattan.
So what’s the problem here, that steel beam isn’t structural in that sideways V shape???
Actually, I got that detail from the linked Wikipedia article, not the book I mentioned. The Wikipedia article states that the engineer approved the changes over the phone without viewing any sketches. However, the article’s cited source simply states that the project engineer failed to do any calculations despite the design (both the original and the proposed revision) being repeatedly questioned by the fabricator and the builder.
I love Mentour Pilot’s videos about aviation accidents. I didn’t know he had one on this. I’ll have to check it out.
Looks like that ceiling beam / joist (and the entire building above it) needs to be jacked up about a foot. Meanwhile everything else around the buckled upright is supporting unplanned unanalyzed randomly varying loads.
They are going to offer a discount to height-challenged tenants on that floor.
Low overhead! We pass the savings along to you.
Can you get inside John Malkovich’s mind from that floor?
I don’t get it. I’ve had really good luck with JB Weld on all sorts of projects.