Keynote Lecture - IABSE Conference - Weimar 2007

Adding Confidence and Reducing Risk – The Role of

Independent Design Checking in Major Projects

Ian Firth
Flint & Neill, London

Minneapolis

Henan Province,
China

Karachi
 Adam and Eve
China, S Africa, Kenya & France..........? by Lucas Cranach

“Mistakes are a part of being human.

Appreciate your mistakes for what they “Mistakes are the portals of discovery.”
are: precious life lessons that can only be
James Joyce
learned the hard way.”

Al Franken
“The great liability of the engineer compared to men of
other professions is that his works are out in the open We all make mistakes
where all can see them. His acts, step by step, are in
hard substance. He cannot bury his mistakes in the Engineers deal with public safety - the stakes are high
grave like the doctors. He cannot argue them into thin
air or blame the judge like the lawyers. He cannot, like The consequences of failure are unthinkable
the architects, cover his failures with trees and vines.
He cannot, like the politicians, screen his short-comings We have a duty to check and double check our work
by blaming his opponents and hope the people will
forget. The engineer simply cannot deny he did it. If Checking is designed to reduce the number and
his works do not work, he is damned.” significance of the mistakes we make

Herbert Hoover

Mistakes may occur due to ignorance, carelessness When a failure occurs and human error is a factor,
or a number of other factors. either

They may occur in design, construction, •someone didn’t check carefully enough, or
maintenance or demolition.
•someone did not act promptly upon warnings
arising from someone else’s check.
 Codes &
Standards

Changed
Theory

Disaster or
The Great Fire of London, 1666 Investigation
Failure

New rules were introduced empowering the Lord Mayor, Aldermen Changed
and Common Council of London to appoint “one or more discreet Process
and intelligent person or persons in the art of building to be the
surveyors or supervisors to see the said rules and scantlings well
and truly observed” Procurement
and the surveyors and supervisors must “take the oath upon the Holy Quality Assurance
Scriptures for the true and impartial execution of their office.” Checking

Self Design Full Independent

Check Review Design Check

Rigorous Full Independent Design Checking

Selective Separate Full Independent analysis
calculation checks within
checks design team Internal External
independent independent Introduced in the UK after the steel box girder
Internal External check team checker collapses in 1970 following the recommendations
peer review peer review (Category 2) (Category 3) of the Merrison Committee of Inquiry

Building Accredited
control certification
Milford Haven (Cleddau) Bridge Collapse , June 1970 West Gate Bridge Collapse, October 1970

Koblenz Bridge Collapse, November 1971 The Interim Design and Workmanship Rules
First recommendation of the Merrison Committee: The Merrison Committee also recommended:

“The Engineer’s permanent design should be
checked by an independent engineer both for the
design concept and the method of analysis of stress,
and a certificate furnished to this effect and for
compliance with the criteria ....”
“The independent engineer should have experience
and qualifications commensurate with the magnitude
and complexity of the design in question.”
The terms of the Engineer’s appointment must make
him “..responsible for the supervision of the works
...” and must include the requirement for
“..examining Contractors’ proposals and details and
the checking of the adequacy, stability and safety of
the proposed methods of construction and temporary
works.”

UK Classification for Technical Approval

Technical
“No amount of writing of design codes and writing Category Description Approval Independent Checker
Required?
of contracts can in the end be guaranteed to
0 Small, minor constructions. No Within design team.
prevent the results of stupidity, carelessness or
1 Spans < 20m and other Yes Within design team.
incompetence. relatively small
constructions.
But one can do a great deal to discourage these 2 Intermediate scale and Yes Separate team within
complexity of construction. designer’s organisation.
vices and that must be done.”
3 Span >50m and complex Yes External organisation,
structures requiring relatively fully independent of
Sir Alec Merrison, London, 13th February 1973 sophisticated analysis. designers.

Notes: Designation of Category to be agreed between Client & Designer.

Formal Technical Approval implies certification of the design by both
the Designer and the Checker.
 Designer submits proposal to TAA1
Typical Independent Check Scope
TAA1 and Designer agree category of structure
1. Review conceptual design and general design
Category 0 Category 1,2 & 3 principles.
2. Review information such as proposals for and results
AIP2 document Designer submits AIP2 from wind tunnel tests, site investigations, river scour
not required document to TAA1 for approval surveys etc.
3. Set up independent analysis models, deriving
Notes
geometry, properties and loads from design drawings
1 TAA = Technical
Design and check completed and design criteria.
Approval Authority (Not
necessarily the same as the 4. Independent static and dynamic analysis and compare
Design and Check Certificates submitted client.) results.
to TAA1 to certify compliance with AIP2 2 AIP = Approval in

Principal Document which

Design and check certificate defines general principles,
design criteria and other
accepted by TAA1 aspects.

Typical Independent Check Scope (continued)

5. Independent assessment of structure in permanent

condition.
6. Independent analysis of erection procedures to check
temporary conditions of permanent structure.
7. Check drawings for consistency with design.
8. Certification

River Usk Bridge, Newport, Wales

Northbank Footbridge, Stockton on Tees, England Stockton deck wind tunnel testing

Possible extra tasks

9. Review design criteria.

10. Possibly including independent derivation in special
cases.
11. Review materials and workmanship specifications.
12. Check reinforcement bending schedules.
13. Check contractor’s fabrication drawings.
14. Review contractor’s erection procedure & method
statements.

Lusail Signature Bridges, Qatar

 Erskine Bridge, Scotland
Erskine Bridge, Scotland (Agreement on special assessment criteria for buckled plate panels needed)
 Possible extra tasks (continued)

15. Independent analysis of erection procedure to check

temporary works requirements, pre-cambers & all
temporary conditions.
16. Additional specialist studies to confirm designer’s
proposals in the case of complex structures. (eg
separate wind tunnel tests – Messina)
17. Economic design review.
18. Security review.
19. Cost checks.
20. Supervision of construction

Bay Bridge, California

London Millennium Dome Ting Kau Bridge Wind Tunnel Tests

 The Independence of the Checker

1. Technical Independence
2. Commercial Independence

Messina Bridge - independent wind tunnel tests required

Technical independence

• Analysis
• Modelling
• Software
• Approach and methodology
• Expert opinion
• Certification
Independence from the designer Commercial independence

Client Employer Employer

Client

Design & Build Design & Build

Designer Checker
Contractor Contractor
Designer Checker

Checker Designer Checker Designer

DBFO type arrangements DBFO type arrangements

Employer’s Employer’s
Employer Employer
Agent Concessionaire Agent / Checker Concessionaire

Design & Build Design & Build

Contractor Contractor

Designer Checker Designer

 DBFO type arrangements

Employer’s
Employer
Agent / Checker

Banks and
Concessionaire
Insurers

Lenders’
Design & Build
Checking
Contractor Client
Engineer

Designer Checker

Designer
Tsing Ma Bridge, Hong Kong

Check contractor’s aerial spinning Check certain fabricated elements

proposals

Tsing Ma Bridge – examples of extended checker’s brief Kap Shui Mun, Ting Kau and Tsing Ma Bridges, Hong Kong
 Employer

D&B
Checker
Contractor

Designer

Ting Kau Bridge, Terminal 5,

Hong Kong Heathrow Airport

Concept

Review
De
Design Basis sig
n
Programme Implications Pr
Analysis oc
es
s
Development

Scheme Design

Optimisation

Detail Design
Independent
Check Construction
Typical Traditional Design & Check Programme Typical Design & Build Programme

Design Design

Submit Design Package Construction

Check and Certification Submit Design Package

Construction Check and Certification

Better Design & Build Programme

Design

Construction Legal implications

Submit Geometry etc

Independent analysis

Compare results

Submit Design Package

Check and Certification
 • Designer and Checker are both theoretically liable.
• Claims may be made against both parties.
• The share of liability is decided between the parties or
by the courts. (Typically in the ratio 60:40 or 70:30)
• However:
• Cases of collapse or other types of failure are rare
when qualified independent checkers are appointed.
• There are very few recorded cases of claims against
both parties.
• But, in the UK, the law allows the Checker to be 100%
liable if the Designer is not able to pay!
• Also, the Client cannot contract out of his legal liability
under current Health and Safety legislation.
• Engineer’s duty of care differs in different countries.
• In Germany for example a consulting engineer may carry a
duty to ensure “fitness for purpose” whereas in the UK it
only extends to acting with “due care and diligence”.
• So, make sure you check your liability!

Ferry Terminal Ramps, • Collapse 1994

Ramsgate, Kent • Design, fabrication and
construction had been checked
• Designers, checkers,
constructors, and owners all
• Checker’s role should not reduce the Designer’s liability,
charged under the UK Health
even when the Checker is providing expertise the Designer
and Safety at Work Act
may not have.
• Fines payable (excluding costs):
• Designer/builder: £1.0 M
• Checker: £0.5 M
• Client found to be most liable

CIRIA recommendation: “...the designation of an engineer to

appraise the design, operation and maintenance of the whole system.”
 Why appoint an Independent Checker?

• Reduced risk of errors (mistakes)

Value for money
• Added confidence that the design basis is correct
• Reassurance that the design complies with the required
criteria and is likely to perform as expected
• Application of specific expertise
• Shared liability (additional professional indemnity insurance)
• Widen the knowledge base (shared experience = education)
• Peace of mind

4.5 4.5
4.0 4.0
3.5 3.5

Check Fee Percentage

Check Fee Percentage

3.0 3.0
2.5 2.5
2.0 2.0
1.5 1.5
1.0 1.0
0.5 0.5
0.0 0.0
0 10 20 30 40 50 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400
Construction Cost (£ million) Construction Cost (£ million)
If Checker’s scope includes Economic Design Review:

• Check for over-design as well as under-design

Conclusion
• Identify possible savings
• Changes must be agreed to and proposed by Designer
• Avoid confusing design responsibilities
• Only possible if the programme permits it
• More work, so the Checker’s fee is higher, but ...
• ... the Checker’s fee can be saved many times over!

• Structures are still failing.

• Are we becoming complacent and in danger of relaxing
our guard?
“Experience is the name everyone gives
• Do the harsh lessons of the previous generation need to
to their mistakes.” be learnt again?

Oscar Wilde • Systematic, competent, thorough checking is as vital

now as it has ever been.
• Many countries still have no established culture of
independent design checking.
• The cost of an independent design check is insignificant
compared to the value and added confidence it provides.
• Read the Merrison Committee of Inquiry report.
• Establish a full independent checking system.
• Ensure the technical and commercial independence of
Thank you
the checker.
• For large projects (say >£100M) extend the Checker’s
scope to include an Economic Design Review.
• Allow enough time in the programme for a thorough
independent analysis and evaluation of the design.
• Designer and Checker interact in a spirit of mutual
respect and co-operation, learning from each other and
advancing the state of engineering technology.