Yangon Technological University

Department of Civil Engineering

CIVIL ENGINEERING INVESTIGATION

Presented By: Ma Cho Wai Phyo Kyaw

Ph.D.CSE-1
Contents
Document Collection and Review
Theoretical Analyses
Laboratory Tests
Failure Hypotheses, Data Analyses, Formation of Conclusions
Determination of Procedural Responsibilities
Reports
Document Collection and Review
An ongoing process throughout the investigation

At the outset of the assignment, the investigator attempts to obtain

pertinent documents regarding the overall design and construction
of the facility
Continued.
The types of documents:
Project-specific documents: history of design, construction,
modification, operation and prior investigation of the facility in
question
Research documents: characteristics and performance of key systems
or elements
For Large Complex Projects
On large complex projects, the investigator must plan:
Review carefully and consider only those documents relevant to the
topics
Database management computer programs are useful to track
documents to sort or retrieve information by subject, author, date or
source and to perform statistical analyses and other data manipulations
 Project Specific Documents
Project-specific documents are reviewed to assist in determining:
The operating condition of the facility at the time of failure (strength,
serviceability or process)
The operating effects acting on the facility at the time of failure (loads or
environmental conditions)
The allocation of responsibilities of various parties for the cause of failure
Continued.
In case involving litigation, the investigator’s access to these
documents is arranged through the client’s attorney

The investigating engineer may request for a civil engineering

investigation in Table 8.7

Sources of documents in Table 8.8

Continued.
Weather records of wind speed and direction, precipitation,
temperature, and relative humidity are useful in establishing
environmental conditions at the facility prior to and at the time of
the failure

Frequently in collapse investigations, the team may not be granted

access to the site for sometime after the collapse, perhaps after the
debris has been removed
Continued.
In such cases, information from others on the condition or
configuration of the facility immediately after the collapse becomes vital

The best source is photographs (from newspapers, television news

reporters, police departments, fire departments, civil defense rescue
teams, and local building inspectors)

Aerial photographs (purchased from U.S Geological Survey (USGS) and

other sources)
Table 8.7. Project Specific Documents
Contract Drawings (including Mechanical (HVAC)
all revision issues thereof) Electrical
Structural( including progress Plumbing
prints) Lighting
Architectural (including progress
prints)
Table 8.7. Continued.
Contract Specifications Contracts
Technical sections of interest Owner/Architect
General Conditions Architect/Structural Engineer
Supplementary General
Conditions
Special Conditions
Table 8.7. Continued.
Contract Revisions Change Orders
Addenda Any correspondence authorizing
change to the structure from the
Bulletins
contract requirements
Field Directives
Table 8.7.Continued.
Shop Drawings and other Reinforcing Bar
submissions Product Data
Structural Steel (Detail Drawings
As-built Drawings
and Erection Drawings)
Bar Joists and Prefabricated
Trusses
Metal Decking
 Table 8.7. Continued.
Field and Shop Reports( including Clerk of the works
Construction Photos) Structural Engineer
Structural Steel Inspection Architect
Laboratory (including Weld and
Bolt Inspection)
Concrete Inspection
Laboratory(Reinforcing Steel,
Formwork, Concrete)
Concrete Mix Designs
Table 8.7. Continued.
Construction Supervisor’s Daily Log

Local Building Inspector

Owner’s or Developer’s Field Inspectors

Table 8.7. Continued.
Materials Strength Reports or
Certification
Concrete Compressive Strength
Masonry Prism Strength
Steel Mill Certificates
Welding Procedures (e.g. Type
of Electrodes, required Preheat)
Fastener Certification
Results of Special Load Tests
Table 8.7. Continued.
Project Correspondence Transmittal/Records
Owner/Consultant In-house Memoranda
Intra consultant Records of Meeting Notes
Owner/Contractor Records of Telephone
Consultant/Contractor Conversations
Table 8.7. Continued.
Consultant Reports
Feasibility Studies
Progress Reports
Soils Consultant
Reports( including Boring Logs)
Calculations
Primary Structural Engineer
Reviewing Structural Engineer
Specific Subcontractor’s
Engineers( where required by
contract)
Table 8.7. Continued.
Maintenance and Modification Records

The scope will vary depending on the investigator’s assignment

Table 8.8. Sources of Project Documents
Architects and Engineers involved in original design, modification,
or repair of facility

Past and Present Owners

Past and Present Tenants

General Contractor and/or Construction Manager for original

construction, modification , or repair of facility
Subcontractors involved in original construction, modification,
repair of facility

Developer of Facility

Construction Mortgagee of facility

Materials or systems suppliers for original construction, modification, or
repair of facility

Previous or other current Investigators

Building Department

Testing Agency involved in original construction, modification, or repair of

facility
Research Documents
The investigator researches documents that are not specific to the
project
to obtain information on analysis techniques or

the characteristics and performance of key systems or elements of the

facility
Contined.
These documents may aid:
In determining the mode and technical cause of the failure

In developing opinions regarding procedural responsibilities for the

failure
Continued.
By indicating what information was available to those involved in
the design and construction of the facility or what research and
testing went into the development of a construction system or
material

Common sources of such technical information are the world wide

web, technical journals, and research reports etc.
Theoretical Analyses
To determine the causes of failure and to establish the degree of
conformance of the structural and geotechnical design to applicable
standards

In design review, the investigator should not waste effort on checks
of components or regions of the construction that have nothing to
do with the failure.
Nor should the investigator become distracted by exhaustive
documentation of simple code violations that have no causal
relationship with the failure

Structural Analyses may attempt to determine stress, strain,

strength, deflection, dynamic response (transient or harmonic),
fatigue, fracture, or stability
Geotechnical Analyses deal with strength, soil pressures, long-term
and short-term settlements, and slope stability

Sophisticated Soil-structure interaction analyses are now

commonly performed.

To determine the causes of failure, analyses that include geometric

and material nonlinear behavior frequently are necessary
Computer codes for finite-element and finite-difference analysis
such as (NASTRAN, SAP, STRUDL, ANSYS, ADINA and BOSOR)

Secondary stresses from the effects of temperature, humidity,

creep, shrinkage, foundation settlement, stresses induced during
construction, and joint eccentricity are frequently ignored in
structural design and often play a part in structural failures.
When the overall distribution of forces within the structure has

been established and the problem is reduced to determining the

resistance of a particular member, connection, or geotechnical

element, three options are available:

Hand Solutions

Finite-element or finite-difference analyses

Physical mockup Testing

With simple hand solutions, scrutinize every parameter in the
resistance relationship to see if the value you are using represents
accurately the true as built condition of the structure at the time of
failure

For example, Suppose the initiating cause of collapse of a concrete

flat-plate structure was found to be punching shear.
 
The investigator had become convinced that the following
American Concrete Institute (ACI) Code Relationship accurately
quantified that resistance:
 
First, review the literature for the research

Show that the factor of 4 more realistically should be taken the be 4.4

Next, determine the real the time of failure

The real d?

Finally, examine the actual failure surface to get a better estimate of

Avoid blind overreliance on complex computer methods

Each finite-element analysis should be checked for satisfaction of

overall equilibrium and should be scrutinized for qualitative response

Simple and approximate checks by hand solution to complex

computer models should be made
Probabilistic reliability analyses that account for the variation in the
parameters the engineer has estimated for strength and resistance are
becoming more common in failure investigations

Where possible, establish structural resistances of key components or

assemblies by both analytical and experimental methods

Correlation of the results of the two is persuasive proof of your findings

Laboratory Tests
Based on the author’s experience, the planning and conduct of
laboratory tests is fraught for error and invalid results.

To avoid this:

Understand the intent and purpose of the test you are conducting
and its significance to your investigation before implementing it
Continued.
Whenever possible, witness the test yourself. If not possible, see that
the test is conducted by a qualified professional who can testify as to
the procedures used and the accuracy of results obtained
Understand the relevant parameters that may cause results to vary
from the in situ condition. Consider parametric studies or sensitivity
analyses to understand the effect of variables
Continued.
Choose the number of tested samples to be consistent with your
objectives for level of confidence and types of determination desired

Check calibration of all components

Use redundant checks by alternate means of test methods

 Table 8.9. Structural Laboratory Tests
Component or Mockup Load Concrete Materials
Tests Cylinder Compressive Strength
Wood Trusses Modulus of Elasticity
Wall, Floor and Roof Panels Thermal Expansion
Shear Resistance of Framed Walls Bond Strength
Window/Wall Assemblies Tensile Strength
Data Reporting Flexural Strength
Beam Flexural Strength
Diagonal Shear Strength Cement Content
Fatigue Strength Alkali Reactivity
Fracture Characteristics

Petrographic Analysis
Air Content
Chemical Analysis of Cement
Table 8.9. Continued.
Abrasion Resistance Hardness

Absorption Compressive Testing

Density Ductility
Metal Materials Acoustic Emission

Tensile Tests
Charpy Impact
Metallography Prism Strength
Chemical Tests Flexural Strength
Corrosion Bond Strength

Elongation Shrinkage
Fatigue
Masonry Materials
Compressive Strength of Units
Mortar Strength Freeze-thaw Resistance
Shear Strength Petrography
Thermal Expansion Mortar Air Content
Tensile Strength Chemical Resistance
Water Absorption Wood Materials
Efflorescence Compressive Strength
Flexural Strength Weld Testing
Shear Strength Model Tests
Tensile Strength, Modulus of Rupture Structural Load Tests
Creep Boundary Layer Wind Tunnel Tests
Shrinkage Water and Air Penetration
Moisture Content Window/Wall Air Leakage
Durability of Adhesives Window/Wall Water Leakage
Weld Inspection Scanning Electron Microscopic Examination
Subsurface Tests and nondestructive
Component or Mockup Load Tests
Tests may be performed on actual samples removed from the
debris, from laboratory-built mockups, or from both
Concrete Materials
Tests include: Tensile strength
Mechanical properties of Flexural strength
compression strength
Shear strength
Modulus of elasticity
Fatigue strength
Thermal expansion
Fracture properties
Abrasion resistance
Bond, creep and expansion/
shrinkage characteristics
Continued.
Material tests include:
Chemical analyses

Petrographic analyses

Air content
Resistance to Environmental Attack
To check resistance to chemical, pollutant, and abrasion attack
Metal Materials
Mechanical properties include:
Ductility
Yield Strength
Elongation
Tensile Strength
Fatigue properties
Shear Strength
Fracture toughness
Creep
Hardness
Modulus of elasticity
Continued.
Metallography is used to confirm mechanical characteristics and
environmental performance

Resistance to Corrosion is determined by a number of methods

such as chemical tests
Masonry Materials
Masonry prisms, individual units or mortar and grout materials are
tested for mechanical properties of compressive, tensile, flexural,
bond and shear strength, modulus of elasticity, volume changes
caused by temperature, shrinkage, and humidity

Various petrographic and chemical analyses are performed to

ascertain composition
Other test include:
water absorption,

freeze-thaw resistance,

efflorescence and resistance to other environmental effects

Wood Materials
Wood is an orthotropic material and its mechanical properties are
sensitive to duration of load

Mechanical properties tested include:

Compression and Shear

Tensile and Flexural Strength

Modulus of Elasticity

Creep and Shrinkage

Continued.
Microscopic and chemical analyses are performed for structure,
composition and resistance to decay.

Dimensional stability under cyclic changes in moisture content is an

important property
Subsurface Tests and Nondestructive
Weld Testing
Various nondestructive methods are available to detect conditions below the surface of a
material, such as flaws or embedments
Magnetic “R-meters,” X-ray, ground-penetrating radar, and pulse-echo methods are used to
detect reinforcing bars or other steel embedments in concrete and masonry
Radiographic, ultra-sonic, and eddy current methods are used to detect subsurface flaws in
metals
Model Tests
Structural model load tests similar to component testing described
earlier are conducted using well-documented principles of similitude

Boundary layer wind tunnel testing of models is now commonly

and readily employed to study wind pressures and suctions on
building frames and cladding, flow directions, effects of wind on
pedestrians and aeroelasticity
Water and Air Penetration, Heat Loss
To check the capability of building cladding to provide a suitable enclosure from natural
elements
These tests range from simple hose or flood testing to elaborate setups with spray racks and
vacuum/pressure chambers
Methods are specified by: American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM), Architectural
Aluminium Manufacturers’ Association (AAMA)
Infrared thermography has been refined for general use in detecting heat loss, used correctly it
can be an effective tool for varied applications ( e.g. detection of air leakage in walls, presence of
moisture in roofs, and location of reinforcement in concrete slabs)
Scanning Electron Microscope
Examination
SEM analyses are now commonly employed for material
composition studies
Geotechnical Laboratory Tests
Tests of soil and rock samples have become standardized through
the ASTM and other systems.

The most commonly employed methods in Table 8.10

Table 8.10. Common Laboratory Tests in
Geotechnical Investigations
Soil Classification
Soil samples are classified under the Unified Soil Classification
System (USCS) on the basis of their appearance, texture, and
plasticity
Strength Tests
These vary with the type of soil and property desired and include
direct shear, triaxial compression, and unconfined compression tests
Water-related Tests
These include consolidation tests to measure long-term volume
change under load of water-bearing soil samples, determination of
moisture content, permeability and capillarity
Groundwater Tests
These tests are used to determine hardness, PH, sulfate or salt
content, corrosion potential, or other chemical characteristics of
groundwater
Others
Miscellaneous tests on soil samples include determination of
specific gravity, grain size, compaction and Atterberg limits
Failure Hypotheses, Data Analyses,
Formation of Conclusions
Failure hypotheses are developed early in the assignment and guide the investigation
However, the investigator must constantly be on guard not to take unconfirmed facts for
granted, jump to conclusions, nor close necessary avenues of investigation prematurely
As the investigation proceeds, some failure hypotheses may be eliminated, new hypotheses may
be developed
To establish the causes of a failure, the investigator must do two things
Determining the mode and sequence of failure
Establish that for the initiating location of failure and for each successive step in the sequence of
failure, the demands on the facility (e.g. loads, environmental factors, or input) exceeded its
ultimate capacity (e.g. strength, stiffness, or durability)
For some investigations, the first step may be trivial(e.g. The concrete beam cracked diagonally
three feet from its southern end) or (The settlement at Column D-2 exceeded one inch)
In cases of progressive collapse, determination of the initiating point, mode, or trigger can be
difficult
Often, failure is initiated locally, but collapse occurs under general instability
Redundant structures are remarkable for their ability to overcome initial gross overstresses by
shedding load through other paths
When gross failure occurs, the investigator must show that the resistance of every potential load
path or failure mode has been exceeded by the load effects
Civil engineering works fail for one or more of the following reasons
Inadequate Design
Improper Construction
Inadequate Materials or Systems
Improper Maintenance or Operation
Failure of Building Codes or accepted engineering practice to recognize properly a certain
demand or limit of capacity
Imposition of extreme or abnormal demands that the facility was not intended to resist
Experience shows that the last two infrequently cause failures
Notable exceptions are the failure of most building codes to recognize the effect of drifting snow
until the early 1970s (Figure) and deficiencies in state-of-the-art practice in parking garage
design to provide a durable facility
More often than not, failures are caused by a number of interrelated factors
With respect to strength issues, the true ultimate capacity must be exceeded for a failure to
occur.
It is not enough to demonstrated that the safe working load factored by the code factor of safety
was exceeded.
Structures often have substantial capacity beyond their code-defined ultimate capacities, and as
mentioned above, alternate load paths and forms of resistance, not recognized in conventional
structural design are often available
For complex investigations requiring several team members, this may involve discussions at
several steps of the investigative plan
An initial site investigation, failure hypotheses are set forth, data are collected, data are
analyzed, failure hypotheses are revised, there is more site investigation and so forth
Experience is invaluable in developing failure hypotheses as facilities of a certain design or
construction tend to fail in repeated modex
In developing and refining hypotheses, do not narrow the focus of the investigation too soon
Do not limit the investigation to likely or apparently obvious causes of failures
The early activities of each initial site investigation should be directed at establishing failure
hypotheses
Keep all avenues open until they can be eliminated by positive proof
At each stage encourage active debate of each of the issues among the team members
Occasionally, it may not be possible to pinpoint a single mode and cause of failure
Even the best investigators, for lack of information or other causes are stumped sometimes
In such cases it is entirely legitimate, and indeed it is incumbent on the ethical investigator, to
present opinions in terms of a number of most likely modes and causes of failures, along with an
opinion of their relative likelihoods
Determination of Procedural
Responsibilities
When an investigative case is involved with litigation, the forensic engineer is usually called on
to provide opinions on the responsibilities of various parties (defendants) for the failure.
Such opinions of course are based on the investigator’s judgement and expertise as a
professional engineer, the engineer should not and cannot draw legal conclusions
These judgements can be extremely difficult to make, requiring the utmost integrity, objectivity,
and impartiality
In the author’s experience, disagreements between experts in dispute resolutions are more
frequently over opinions of responsibility than the technical causes of failure
The engineer is normally required to provide opinions based on a professional “standard of
care” than that of his or her own firm
Definitions of standard of care vary with legal jurisdiction, but generally revolve around the
concept of “ the actions of a reasonable and prudent professional acting under like or similar
circumstances, practicing at the same approximate time and geographic location”
The nuances of varying definitions can be important, however, check with your client’s attorney
for each case
Conformance of original design and construction to applicable codes, regulations and other
written standards must be determined on the basis of those standards that applied to the
particular project at the time of original construction
The investigator should carefully research which standards are applicable before offering such
opinions
Simple lack of compliance to codes or standards does not necessarily prove damages
The expert must show a causal connection between the lack of compliance and the actual
damage
There are multiple procedural causes of failure; no single firm or individual may be responsible
for the damage
In such cases, determination of relative responsibilities is difficult
When responsibility may be mixed, the investigator should check with the attorney to see what
questions of allocation of responsibility need to be addressed.
Is it sufficient to identify a single action of negligence that is “substantially responsible” for the
failure, if such a cause exists?
Or, are all contributory causes relevant, no matter how minor the contribution?
A useful analysis tool in such cases of mixed responsibility is to consider “what-if’’ scenarios,
wherein it is hypothesized that a certain component of negligence did not exist:
What if the design was perfect, but all construction defects existed?”
“What would the result have been?”
“Suppose the construction was perfect and only the identified design deficiencies existed?”
Reports
The report is the culmination of all previous efforts.
It is the final product the client sees and if the case is part of a lawsuit, it is the basis of the
expert’s testimony
The requirements for good report writing for structural investigations are fundamental writing
skills of grammar, syntax, style, punctuation and organization
Table 8.11. General Report Outline
Letter of transmittal

Abstract

Contents

Introduction Responsible design and

Objective construction agencies
Scope Construction documents
Background
Table 8.11. Continued.
Description of Structure

Field Investigation

Laboratory Tests

Results of Calculations
Continued.
Discussion of Field Investigation, Laboratory Tests, and Results of
Calculations

Conclusions

Recommendations