The Quebec Bridge

Collapse

EEE404: Ethics and Professional Engineering

Summer 2018 Sec: 01
Group No: 09
Rashadul Islam (2015-2-80-012)
Nishika Zaman Tasmin (2015-2-80-032) 
Joynul Arefin (2015-2-80-059)
  Pritom Bhattacharjee (2015-2-80-068)

1
 Outline of Contents

• Introduction
• Case Background
 Key Individual Selection
 Original vs Moderated Design
 The Ultimate Fate of Bridge
• Identifying Associates with Ethical Violation
• Related Code of Ethics
• Responsibility to Public Safety
• Recognizing the Rights and Responsibilities
• Justifying Impact of Engineering Decisions
• Conclusion
• References

2
 INTRODUCTION
• Quebec bridge is a road, rail and pedestrian bridge across the lower
Saint Lawrence river at Quebec, Canada.

• Around 1850, Quebec wanted a bridge over St. Lawrence River to

become competitive in trade.

• In 1887, the Quebec bridge company was formed.

• On 29 August 1907, the bridge collapsed killing 75 men.

3
 Key Individual Selection

• Phoenix bridge company offered to prepare

plans for the bridge free of charge.

• In return, the tender will be given to the

Phoenix Bridge Company.

• Theodore Cooper was selected as a

consulting engineer.

• Tenders were called and the plan of the

Theodore Cooper, the most
Phoenix Bridge Company was selected by respected bridge builders
Cooper.

4
Original vs Moderated design
stress
Originally
1800 ft assumped
18%
7%+
Bridge length weight 150 ft.
1600 ft. 62 M lb above river

• Erroneous assumption
• Made by Szlapka, chief
designing engineer
• Accepted by Cooper

Cooper’s allowable stresses

doesn’t match any standards

5
 The Ultimate Fate of the Bridge

Meeting between Cooper &

McLure

“No more Loads”

-- Cooper

The Collapsed Quebec Bridge Message ignored in absence of

Phoenixville Chief Engr.

But the Chief Engr. called for

urgent meeting after finding
message

6
 Associated Engineers with Violation of
Code of Ethics

Action Association
Approving incompetent Theodore Cooper
designing
Incompetent design Szlapka
Failure to fidelity to public Cooper and Szlapka
Didn’t report to appropriate The subordinated Engrs.
professional bodies
Resumed work violating Edward Hoare
McLure’s suggestion

7
 Related Code of Ethics
Section II- 1b
Engineers shall approve only those engineering documents that are in
conformity with applicable standards
Cooper accepted Szlapka’s below standard design The subordinates know,
without any testing or research but did not complain

Section III- 1e
Engineers shall not promote their own interest at the expense of the dignity
and integrity of the profession
Cooper increased the Lengthening of the span would also
length of span without make Cooper the Chief Engineer for the
running proper test longest cantilever bridge in the world

Section III- 2
Engineers shall at all times strive to serve the public interest.

Szlapka, the designing engineer Cooper’s allowable stress

modified the design without any is more than the standard
test and Cooper accepted it
8
 Related Code of Ethics (Cont…)
Section II- 4
Engineers shall act for each employer or client as faithful agents or trustees
Edward Hoare resumed work
Section III- 2b violating McLure’s suggestion
Engineers shall not complete, sign, or seal plans and/or specifications that
are not in conformity with applicable engineering standards. If the client or
employer insists on such unprofessional conduct, they shall notify the
proper authorities and withdraw from further service of the project.
Cooper should not have approved Szlapka’s
design as it did not conform with the
standards
Section II- 1f
Engineers having knowledge of any alleged violation of this Code shall
report thereon to appropriate professional bodies and, when relevant, also
to public authorities, and cooperate with the proper authorities in
furnishing such information or assistance as may be required.
None of the engineers showed any All were concerned about
interest at the deflection of chords meeting the deadline
(31st December, 1908) 9
 Responsibility to Public Safety

The faulty design by

Szlapka and Cooper Continuation of work
on account of loosing
Negligence of proper men
investigation and
testing by Project Edward disregarded
Superiors the death threat of
workmen
Discarding needs
to test bridge by
Cooper

Lack of public
interest
10
 Engineering Decisions
Rights and Impact of the
Responsibilities Decisions
More emphasis on
safety of design and Bridge could not sustain
calculation the faulty design
Cooper should not
have depended on Physical absence could not
McLure and others for rectify mistakes
report
Should have
considered the strike It was workmen who
more seriously suffered ill-fate

Cooper should
have allowed other Peer consultant could
consultant to detect excess stress
review his decisions Should not have
manipulated the Manipulation hastened the
foremen to disaster
Should have
performed the continue the work
necessary test for
modifying the design 11
 Conclusion

• Public safety should be first priority .

• Maintain Professional behavior The report discussed
• Allow adequate peer review when necessary above contains with
valuable
• Co-operate and respect work associates information, not
• Welcome professional criticisms only historical &
• Appropriate allowances for necessary testing technical but also in
respect of ethical,
contractual & project
execution issues that
All in all, having a high standard of had an influence on
professional conduct, being true to oneself in the failure of the
terms of one’s capabilities and following the Quebec Bridge
Code of Ethics.

12
 References

1. Québec Bridge collapses with huge loss of life. Century Ireland.

https://www.rte.ie/centuryireland/index.php/articles/quebec-bridge-
collapses-with-huge-loss-of-life

2. Whalen, J.(2000). “A Bridge With Two Tragedies.” Canada: Canada Corner

https://legionmagazine.com/en/2000/11/a-bridge-with-two-tragedies/

3. Griggs, F. (2015). “Historic Structures”, The Quebec Bridge, Part 1.

http://www.structuremag.org/?p=9300

4. John Tarkov, "A Disaster in the Making,"  American Heritage of Invention &

Technology  1 (Spring 1986): 10-17. http://www.asce.org/project/quebec-
bridge /

13