A floor collapsed during a party held in a meeting room of a residential building. The building owner should post a sign of what the max occupancy of the meeting room is. The information that should be investigated is maximum live load of the space and the concrete slab test results. The architect should be responsible if the building concrete does not reach its requirement. I would factor in the building owner or architect to be liable.
The collapse happens due to the amount of people that were in the party, the floor slab was overloaded. The situation could have been avoided if there would have been a sign referring people that the room was designed for meetings only. Also, there should be another sign implying the maximum live load allowed in the space. To investigate this case I will propose to find out first what caused the collapse, what were the maximum people allow to occupy the space, the durability of the materials used to build this building, I will look through the specifications and structural plans to see if there’s any update or changes that could affect or exceed the DOB regulations.
October 21, 2018, a residential building near Clemson University in South Carolina experience a floor collapsed during a party they held in the meeting room, 29 out of 30 were injured. No one was killed. When investigating I would first like to see the document from the Department of Building made by the architect and construction document when it is built to compare any inconsistency, if found check through the architects work with a structural engineer to see its durability, if it’s okay then the fault would most fall on the general contractor and superintended for not following the document provided by the architect as well as the architect passing the work. Second, find the occupant load, as well as the dead load of the space, see if the party held is too much for the structure, if it’s too much the fault would go mostly to the owner or the one in charge with the planning the party and letting the student party in an unusual space. Third, any reconstruction/reconfiguration of the structure in a recent month to a year base on the frequent use of the room in a year, if the building is modified in any way, check the new structure to see its durability and the fault would be on those who made the change. In any case, the architect fails to provide the health, safety, and welfare for the public, the leading architect needs his license stop for a certain period base on how much is his fault, the worst would take his license and the architect also need to pay for the damage. The general contractor and superintended would pay the damaged base on their carelessness.
CASE STUDY #2
Professor: Barbara Smith Mishara
All information depends on:
1. The construction method
2. Material and the Structure Design reasonable?
3. The user of the structure
4. Required loads and capacities according to the DOB
5. Lawful redundancy for unexpected situation
In this case study, if I am investigating for the cause collapsed floor. I will first understand and clear the use of this type of the building and the maximum life load and redundancy according to DOB. I believe the responsibility can be complicated. For the contractor, the construction quality may not up to the standard that required by the DOB, cause the structure can not afford the load that is required to. Id the construction is assumed to be okay, then the contractor is not responsible. However, through the information , the owner did change the use of the room, the original structure may not be allowed the activities such like a party. Those activities apply too much life load exceed the maximum. Indeed, if the owner has changed the used of the building from original it should be without the permission from the DOB, then the owner has to take the responsibility.
Submitted by: Zhenhao Huang
If I were investigating the cause of the collapse, the information that I would need would be extensive. I would need to assess where and how factors contributed to the collapse. First and foremost, I would extract building information from the Department of Buildings. Since the incident occurred in a meeting room regardless of the buildings use type, I would assume it is an office suite. Typically, a building is designed according to its building usage and in this case a party should not be held in an office area. In understanding what led to the incident, I would need to know what occurred for the floor to collapse as well as the number of occupants at that time in the meeting room. Occupancy is important in this case because it is likely that the party exceeded it. The live load designed for that specific floor would be important in understanding if it was in fact caused by the occupants. I would also check for the quality of materials used in the floor of the incident. Apart from the building information aspect of the investigation I would also investigate how and why the Clemson University fraternity was able to gain access to that meeting room. This would be important because it could pinpoint a culprit, the students themselves or someone else. Ultimately the legal liability lies in who gained access and permission for this party to occur. The legal liability obviously does not end with them but rather with the design and construction of the building. The architect of this building would be contacted and questioned on the structural aspects of his or her design.
A floor collapsed during a party held in a meeting room of a residential building. The information that should be investigated is maximum live load of the space and the concrete slab test results. I would factor in the building owner or architect to be liable. The building owner should post a sign of what the maximum load of the meeting room is. The architect should be responsible if the building concrete does not reach its requirement.
If I were investigating this situation, the required information from the DOB would the maximum capacity load of the room and floor. The use of the room, concrete test results and the construction documents. The responsibility would be on the owner or the architect. The owner for occupancy limit and wrong use of the room. Meeting room not party room. The architect for structural problems and concrete results do no meet the requirement
The cause of the collapsed floor, can be simply identified form the original required documents provided to the city, listing in details the design construction type, and the maximum allowable loads, the two main important accounts will provide the necessary information needed to determine if all of the drawings and specifications falls in line with city regulations.
This significant approach will also reveal who’s responsible for any failure the project has endured.
If I was investigating the cause of the floor collapse the information i would need is:
- the legal capacity of the room
- has the structure been changed?
- what are the original plans or specification?
- what was the live load of the room where the floor collapsed
I believe the person could be held responsible is the owner for not being aware of what was happening in his building. A party was being held in a room that designed to be a meeting room. however the owner could decided whether change the purpose of that room. There the architect and the structural engineer would be held responsible for not building a safe steady building. basically for not thinking what else the room could be used for.
Arch 4861 Professional Practice
Case study #2 Clemson floor collapse
If I was investing the cause of collapse, the information that I would need is:
- The legal capacity of the room
- Structure research (Did it change after the construction?)
- The initial function/purpose of the room
- Construction documents (DOB)
The main responsibility would be the owner’s because he is in charge of room instructions, such as occupancy limit/ the occupant load. Also, he allowed the change of room function (from meeting to party), which concluded in floor collapse.
In case of a structural failure, the building team (architect; structural engineer) would take the responsibility.