Crane Accident 250 ton

Mudzy · 27-09-2008, 01:41 PM

This is what happens when engineers dont do their jobs and lives are put at risk. No one was hurt.
Crane in yard still new

No warning that slab was going to give under crane.

Crane sat like this for an hour.

Then it fell through to the next floor.

**gregaust** · 27-09-2008, 01:53 PM

Damn, that's nasty,very lucky no injuries .

**Falcon Coupe** · 27-09-2008, 02:01 PM

That slab looks quite thin for the purpose, someone is in some strife.

AzuR · 27-09-2008, 02:04 PM

That whole area should of never been given the ok to take the kinda wieght that crane would put on it, it's under 60mm thick by the looks of it! someones guna get in the shite!

Sam · 27-09-2008, 02:13 PM

So what happens to the truck from here, is it repairable??

XR8putts · 27-09-2008, 02:20 PM

That last picture is interesting, looks as though there is bare steel tray-decking. It would be safe to assume that be it an internal or external floor, that level would not have been been designed to take that kind of weight. The construction company and the crane opperators are both to blame, I can just imagine the architect's reaction durring his next site inspection..

wulos · 27-09-2008, 02:22 PM

damn!!! that looks ugly!!!
I've had reason to use that very crane on a number of occasions. Looks like I wont be using that particular one again though - she be scrap metal now..

351capri · 27-09-2008, 02:44 PM

the crane operator obviously had no regard for the millions that the crane would have cost, the safety of other workers on site, or for that matter his own safety. workcover should have a field day. id hate to be paying the fine on top of the cost of the crane. no insurer in their right mind would cover such an obvious act of stupidity.

Mudzy · 27-09-2008, 03:29 PM

Just to clear things a little the crane driver and all people signed off on a certificate that the engineer prepaired that said the slab was good to take the weight of the crane plus the load of the concrete panels that they were lifting into place.
ALL THE BLAME FALLS BACK TO THE ENGINEER

Mudzy · 27-09-2008, 03:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 351capri

the crane operator obviously had no regard for the millions that the crane would have cost, the safety of other workers on site, or for that matter his own safety. workcover should have a field day. id hate to be paying the fine on top of the cost of the crane. no insurer in their right mind would cover such an obvious act of stupidity.

The crane driver has over 20 years in driving cranes he is one of best in our company

V3RSAC3 · 27-09-2008, 03:38 PM

It's not the crane operators fault, its the person who designed it!!

Luckly though this happened BEFORE the building was completed and Occupied

Fairlane · 27-09-2008, 03:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mudzy

Just to clear things a little the crane driver and all people signed off on a certificate that the engineer prepaired that said the slab was good to take the weight of the crane plus the load of the concrete panels that they were lifting into place.
ALL THE BLAME FALLS BACK TO THE ENGINEER

Well I can see on certain engineer someone getting a new job. Probably career after that stuff up. Workcover will no doubt also have a fit.

**DJM83** · 27-09-2008, 03:43 PM

Looks like alot of coin there thats for sure. Someone is looking for a new job as we speak id say.

XR8putts · 27-09-2008, 03:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mudzy

Just to clear things a little the crane driver and all people signed off on a certificate that the engineer prepaired that said the slab was good to take the weight of the crane plus the load of the concrete panels that they were lifting into place.
ALL THE BLAME FALLS BACK TO THE ENGINEER

Well if the engineer made such a certificate then that's that then.

B-1B · 27-09-2008, 03:49 PM

In the last pic there are orange support beams that look like they are a temporary added reinforcement measure for helping support the thin slab above them,under the crane, while works were continuing.

Spanrz · 27-09-2008, 04:48 PM

All I can say, WorkCover is going to love that Engineer.
WorkCover will also look at contributing factors like :

Did the crane driver have any indications of "uneasyness" to go on that slab?
Sometimes WorkCover will blame the crane driver, simply due to the fact that if he had any doubt about the job, he can pull it, and he didn't.
No doubting the driver, it's just WorkCover will always ask the inevitable question, "Did at any stage, you think it was not safe for a crane of that weight to go on to that slab".

Unfortunately I've dealt with an accident like this (machine falling off a float). We got the blame simply because we didn't offer any personell to stay back to load the machine, because the truckie was late. Mind you this was at 8:30pm.
Truckie in a rush (not our fault), Truckie parked his float in our yard on a very bad angle (not our fault), Truckie rushed machine up his ramps and slid off at the pivot point. He survived, but with a major broken shoulder (again not our fault). If it went off the other side, he would have been squashed.
But WorkCover seen it as "you should have had someone help him", go figure.

The Yeti · 27-09-2008, 04:52 PM

Where was this at?

I would be supprised if the engineer singed off on this particular part of the pavement as some one else pointed out this is just flooring in this point

had the crane been further over it could have been different, was the crane positioned to get the most out its allowable reach? I'm tipping it was moved over to gain more capacity

Rodp · 27-09-2008, 04:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by V3RSAC3

Luckly though this happened BEFORE the building was completed and Occupied

Curious. Why would the crane be there after the building was completed and occupied?

Powdered Toast Man · 27-09-2008, 05:38 PM

I would say the engineer didn't take into account the point load of the cranes extendable support foot (whatever they're called) and maybe based the calculations on an even spread of the load.

Being an engineer myself I was going to defend him until I read the post about the prepaired document. It will fall back on him and he will more than likely kiss his job goodbye along with all of the dirt the investigations will bring. Wouldn't want to be him.

The Yeti · 27-09-2008, 05:44 PM

again were making assumptions based on nothing I would be very supprised if the document in question didnt mention certain points as "no go" it would be a very stupid mistake not to check the machiens ground loadings and calculated that with the pavment for his report, I think you will find were not being told th ecomplete story here

XR8putts · 27-09-2008, 05:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Powdered Toast Man

Being an engineer myself I was going to defend him until I read the post about the prepaired document.

As a soon to be architect myself I was defending him too, but the document put an end to that. Seems rather bizare the engineer would create such a document, it flies in the face of everything we've been taught and have come to expect of engineers - these things happen though I guess.

Powdered Toast Man · 27-09-2008, 05:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Yeti

again were making assumptions based on nothing I would be very supprised if the document in question didnt mention certain points as "no go" it would be a very stupid mistake not to check the machiens ground loadings and calculated that with the pavment for his report, I think you will find were not being told th ecomplete story here

You're right Yeti. Without the document and the complete story we can't really determine anything apart from the crane fell through the building.

XR6-VCT-2000 · 27-09-2008, 05:52 PM

What a mess !, I can only imagine the look on everyones faces when that was happening.

blueoval · 27-09-2008, 06:13 PM

As a building designer, I believe that bondek slab is NOT designed for that kind of live load of the crane let alone extra moving weight over the crane arm.

The foreman should have known this.

V3RSAC3 · 27-09-2008, 06:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rodp

Curious. Why would the crane be there after the building was completed and occupied?

Not saying it neciseraly had to be a crane! .. could have been an upper carpark?!

also, a crane would be on the upper level after a building is complete to build a second level or extension?!

xgtford · 27-09-2008, 06:18 PM

that would have been a sight to see hmm, great conversation point "whats the worst day you've had at work?"

blueoval · 27-09-2008, 06:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by V3RSAC3

.....also, a crane would be on the upper level after a building is complete to build a second level or extension?!

They would have used a fixed type crane if this was the case rather than a moveable one I reckon.

Who knows how long the slab had to cure?

I thoroughly doubt the engineer would have known a crane of this size would be used on a newly formed slab.

Someone obviously made a decision to place a crane in that location.

DoreSlamR · 27-09-2008, 06:24 PM

I'm wondering if the crane operator should have put the counterweights on the back?
The way it's fallen is obviously in the direction of the boom, what if the floor didn't give out but the crane tipped, which would put a lot more stress on the one specific area and we see the result.

As others have said, there's not enough info from a few pics, so it's easy to just assume what may have happened.

xgtford · 27-09-2008, 06:26 PM

does make for an interesting topic though don't you think

Airmon · 27-09-2008, 06:28 PM

Engineers fault assuming the slab was laid correctly?
Not trying to pass blame, but if the engineer was fed the wrong info and the slab wasn't as thick as it was supposed to be.