Bridges, buildings, structures, institutions, subsystems and societies collapse when logic is so weak, things begin to groan, creak, pop, crackle, buckle and snap due to life and existence being under way too much pressure and tension causing bounce back khekh back so the greater can remain intact.1. Florida International University (FIU)
2. Sweetwater City and their engineers or whoever approved the process where you leave a bridge hanging on two relatively narrow end-of-span supports.
3. Munilla Construction Management, Bridge Builder
4. FIGG Bridge Group, Bridge Engineers Designers and the Inspection Company.
5. Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT)
6. Media
7. The Public
8. National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB), investigators Clearly the first five groups have joint and several responsibility. Already, FDOT is turning to the plausible deniability handbook. Secondly the public has a responsibility to look out for itself, and not just go along with the first five. The Media is always culpable in contributing to the problem because the public still relies on the media as the main source of information, and for some reason the Public still expects the media to do critical analysis and critical thinking for them. If the media and first five groups had a more open process, they would at least listen to all safety concerns from any source.
Are you telling me that those who lifted the bridge into place were not wondering why they removed their hydraulic supports before the weight they were holding up was transferred to another source just as stable?
Are you telling me none of the construction crew or engineers or inspectors wondered, well, when we built this thing over on the side of the road we put dozens and dozens of supports under the structure, which were only removed just before those hydraulic lift trucks picked up the bridge, so then, explain to me again, how this bridge is going to stay up in the air, if it needed numerous supports on the side of the road, shouldn't it need more supports when this bridge is over the road, and then, if we are going to stress test this bridge, why not do it on the side of the road by removing the supports and then checking the structure every day for any changes to make sure all those connections in the substructure and trusses, can withstand Construction 101 downward force.
We now know, it took less than 3 days for the concrete to begin cracking once those hydraulic trucks were removed. 1. The construction process was flawed regarding the attaching of that one big section. Even when you build a wall, you brace it in multiple places until the rest of the walls can be erected, and then all of them attached to each other, thus helping hold each other up.
2. The culture of the workers was flawed because somebody should have screamed long ago.
3. Regardless of what type of bridge it was, it was not properly supported. It appears that Pratt truss hybrid method was vulnerable if one part failed. There was no redundancy support, which is crazy. If that tower had been designed and constructed first, for the purpose of providing complete backup support, then no disaster. If somebody, had simply said, hold up wait a minute, then no disaster.
3. By the way, why design a bridge with a high tower and cables in a Miami Hurricane Prone area?
4. The main support column was not even built and was not even supposed to provide main support.
5. What does it mean that “the bridge was designed to support its own weight?” Show me a design of any bridge of that length and materials only supported at two ends that can support its own weight, including during the construction process. So I guess that main tower was just for aesthetics. So now the question becomes, if the bridge was designed to support its own weight, was it also constructed to hold its own weight? Was it constructed according to plan, without any modifications up to that point? We know the answer but want to hear what the responsible groups say and what the NTSB says.
6. The bridge saves time, money, traffic, allows for safe passage and is an architectural showpiece. Clearly the bridge failed in all of these areas, thus having the complete opposite effect. We keep getting shown that all these things we consider important, are not the most important things in life.
7. Clearly also, the first five groups were ego tripping on being innovative and everything in number 6 above.
8. A ton of thought process and communication breakdowns had to occur within and between each of the five groups above over the course of months and years. It is likely somebody in those groups was more concerned but either didn't speak up or was ignored. It is also likely someone in the public and media also had concerns. How could other construction companies and engineers and others familiar with that type of work, not wonder what was going on? Under what circumstances has the FDOT allowed traffic under a bridge in construction before it was permanently supported?
Analysis Of A Paid Lying Expert
In a March 18th article, Engineer Verrastro uses faulty logic because he still, after the fact, essentially says, the cracks were not a concern because those with primary responsibility were not concerned.[I say, okay, so since allowing traffic under the bridge was not a concern, then that must have also been no big deal either.] Engineer Verrastro continues his testimony-for-hire delusions. He is clearly meant to counteract specific testimony from another Engineer who finds multiple areas of fault. Verrastro says, “there may have been enough support in place at the time. He said these projects are constructed with "very specific sequencing" and phases.” [I say, if there had been enough supports, the bridge would not have collapsed or would not have collapsed in multiple places or would not have collapsed in a total giveout fashion. But what do I know?] Verrastro goes on to say, “"This was designed to support itself — that was the beauty of the design, I'm sure," he said. "You didn't need temporary supports. It saves money. It's safer, because if you put temporary supports, you have to block the road and the traffic would be a mess and it would be in the way. So I'm sure that was all thought through." [Again I say, if the bridge had temporary supports, plus was able to hold its own weight, then there is no way for it to collapse in that stage of completion and simply due to a stress test.
I also ask: If one of the possible outcomes of a stress test is complete structural failure, then what the hell?] Multiple issues dealing with pride, ego, saving face, not looking bad, not having to admit a miscalculation, not to having to stop traffic and anger the public when not stopping traffic was made such a big deal of, and many other logic errors were made that cascaded onto the Public anyway. All because FIU, the designer and the builder were more concerned about using this bridge project as a PR Marketing opportunity to get more business, grant money, students and self-esteem. Clearly a significant problem was execution – execution of thought and execution of behavior.
At multiple steps over many months, especially in the pre-construction phase. Execution failure is evident when FIU, FDOT and FIGG had a meeting on the morning of the collapse and did not include the construction company. It was not the fault of one person or one group. Groupthink of the suboptimal kind ruled thought processes. Groupthink in each group above and Groupthink as they sorta worked together and relied on each other and Groupthink of the larger culture of the society that caused the Public to just go along. Groupthink that causes us to look at things in terms of jobs, money and glory. This is another harbinger for more horrors if we don't adjust our logic in a hurry.
ABC Construction – Accelerated Bridge Collapse
If those engineers were not concerned about the cracks, they are beyond incompetent - they have been thoroughly institutionalized, like us, to forget the basics of Natural Law 101 and Construction 101. Concrete is weak under tension forces that tries to pull it apart. UniversityCity Bridge was at least partially a truss bridge. A truss bridge of that design automatically puts the bottom portion of the substructure under tension. It also usually puts several trusses under tension. The substructure and the trusses were bonded with concrete which was bonded to the rebar and steel. The structure was giving away due to insufficient support which caused the steel to give way just enough and caused several areas in the concrete to begin pulling away. This then also pulled the rebar and connection points enough to significantly weaken one concentrated area via the domino effect of how low can you go energy flow. Before the stress test, the bridge was already under extreme tension. The bridge gave a hint via the cracks. Then came more loosening and tightening of at least one truss. The bridge cried out in a loud voice, "why hast thou not supported me," then it gave up the ghost. The bridge was too heavy for the design. Note: In one sense, it is better for the bridge to have collapsed when it did rather than during the heart of lunchtime, rush hour or when school buses were on the road. All disasters are warnings to us because all of them are due to emergences that always prove to be detectable in advance. The Creator took this bridge down before it killed more people. If the bridge has survived the construction process, it still would have been a danger when the first hurricane blew threw, with that tower and long set of cables acting like sails in the wind. Oddly the bridge was also bragged to be able to withstand a Category 5 hurricane, so I guess the strategy was, “let's just make it heavy,' and in doing so they forgot they needed to support the heaviness. I read many articles and watched many videos on this and rely significantly on the article titled, “Bridge Victim's Grieving Uncle Lashes Out at 'Incompetence'” by Jennifer Kay, Allen G. Breed and several others, Associated Press as shown in U.S. News & World Report.
