Paris Airport Collapse Insurance Recoveries Unclear

June 1, 2004

  • February 20, 2005 at 2:20 am
    Alan M Dransfield says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Atn Dr Michael Hogan.
    It is encouraging to have such an expereinced engineer as your goodself agree with my theories ref the Paris Roof Collapse.

    Firstly, ASR in concrete cancer = Alkali/Silca Reaction and the tests which have been taken on the Lafarge Concrete are the normal cube testings for strength only, which, have passed with flying colours but it is possible to obtain EXCELLENT concrete strength results with substandard CEMENT. When I refer to substandard CEMENT, I refer to the CEMENT and NOT the concrete and when I refer to sub-standard cement ,I refer to ABNORMAL LEVELS of Alalki in the cement manufacturng process. Excessive levels of ALKALI in cement will NOT show on the cube tests and it will NOT adversely affect the early stages of concrte strength. However, excessive levels of cement alkali WILL MANIFEST itself into catastrophic affects of the affected structures.
    Time will tell.

    ASR(concrete cancer) can manifest itself between 12 months and 15 years, hence, it is possible the 2E terminal post mix concrete strength tests were adequate and STILL result in unsafe concrete.However, substandard cement has allowed the ASR to manifest, which is a chemical reaction between the cement and the aggregate and causes the structure to crack and blow.
    Lafarge have supplied 2 million tonns of this sub-standard CEMENT to the South West of the UK, hence, similar catastrophes could well happen here in the UK!?
    I fully understand your comments about the EGO trips of the Architect but the French have never been shy, have they and when have you ever known a Frenchman to be wrong!!?? From the photographs available in the domain, I don’t think the roof concrete is at fault because it has maintained its shape AFTER the FALL, it looks to me, like a coloum(s) failure. Why would they “wrap the coloums in Fiber??!!
    It really does BEGGAR BELIEF they have pulled the Temprature stunt AND debarred the Inspection Panel from the site. Thirty Nine 39F is golfing and sunbathing weather here in the UK and we CERATINLY don’t expect our concrete to fall apart at such tempartures. Such comments makes me wonder where the EXPERTS have done their time??Sceptics amongest us will smell rats?!.
    Concrete technology is not rocket science but unless ALL CHAINS of the link are CAREFULLY processed, monitored,supervised and tested, CONCRETE DURABILITY will not be achieved.
    Concrete Durability is the MINIMUM aim of any reputable engineer, architect,contractor, and client but Concrete Durability CAN be ruled out on terminal 2e from public domain information.
    I am surprised ASR hasn’t been ruled out by core testing and forensic testing. With the information which has been made available in the public domain, I will stick by my BEGGARS BELIEF theory until I see demonstrable evidence the inquiry is being handled professionally.?!
    Maybe they should whiteswash the colums, as they have done with the inquiry??!!

  • February 20, 2005 at 3:33 am
    Dr. Michael Hogan, P. Eng. says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Excellent.

    I have very little knowledge of chemical engineering, but, isn’t there a pH test that limits the Alkali in concrete? I recall this was a problem in the Middle East years ago but have not heard of it elsewhere.

    The de Gaulle Airport Collapse began the day it was completed so that eliminates this long term phenomenon.

    It seems we are in general agreement: the Report by Jean Berthier, President of the Civil Engineering Council of France, is a fraud.

    How can society deal with Institutional Fraud?

  • February 20, 2005 at 4:40 am
    Alan M Dransfield says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Michael.
    Unfortunately,institutional fraud appears to be the norm these days and we live in a disposable world, where we thrown away the fridges,cookers and TV’s every few years and it now appears, we are moving into disposable building and structures?!.
    You are correct, there is a ph test for Cement/Alkali but Lafarge have admitted to falsifying their test results for two years in the UK.
    With respect, I don’t agree with you about the chronology of the 2e completion dates and any previous testing, i.e.
    ALL tests undertaken on the 2e terminal are POST -MIX tests which do NOT identify ASR, hence, it is perfectly feasable to Complete the 2e terminal and for Lafarge to CROW about the Concrete Cube Tests, whilst ASR is manifesting itself in the first 12 months. The design of the VAULT has put “extreme” pressure upon the roof, beams and colums and IF ASR is the root cause, as I suspect, it wouldn’t take long for the root cause to show itself via this “sheer collapse”. The “OBVIOUS” pressure of this “futuristic” design has identified itself QUICKER than the norm. However, I would envisage LOTS more examples of CATATROPHIC failure on this abortion.
    Information released into the public domain would suggest the French inquiry team are either incompetent or are good decorators, e/g spendid whitewash job?!

  • February 22, 2005 at 7:17 am
    Alan M Dransfield says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    The temprature of 39F on the day of the roof collapse has been attributed as “significant cause” for the 2e terminal collapse.
    I have never herad of such “********” in my whole life and that being the case the terminal should be condemned because Paris Tempratures HAVE BEEN KNOWN to go well below freezing point during Oct to Mar EVERY year.
    If the design of this “furturistic” Terminal Building CANNOT withold tempratures of 39F, there is a SERIOUS problems with the French Building Standards and Specification.
    Quite frankly, I question the sanity of the so called experts conducting this inquiry for making such statements. It is CONSITENTLY OBVIOUS the collapse was caused by a design/construction flaw and it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out where the ROOT PROBLEMS lies.
    Todays temps in Paris is 34F and light snow. Does this mean we can expect ANOTHER collapse??!!.Get real pleeeeze.

  • February 23, 2005 at 3:38 am
    Alan M Dransfield says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Just HOW GULLIBLE do the French Authorities think the general public are?
    Quote: An array of structural problems progressively weakened the vaulted roof of a futuristic terminal at Charles de Gaulle airport and led to the collapse that killed four people, a government-appointed commission said Tuesday.

    Extremely cold weather the morning of the accident could have triggered the collapse, according to the commission, which has spent nine months investigating the May 23 accident.

    Jean Berthier, the head of commission, refused to discuss a “conceptual error” in the design, but said the covering of the vaulted roof grew “progressively fragile” and that “materials weakened” over time.

    Unquote.
    Please Monsieur Berthier, you can fool some of the people some of the time but you CANNOT fool ALL the people ALL the time. Firstly, 39F is NOT extremmely cold and the temprature on the day of the colapse had NOTHING to do with the incident. You also state the concrete grew progressively weaker. If so, the WHOLE building should be condemned IMMEDIATEY because, if, as you say, the concrete got weaker in time, this means further failures can be expected??!!.
    Photographs of the incident available in the public domain would suggest CONCRETE CANCER (ASR) and I suggest you look NO FURTHER than the concrete quality AND the cement quality.In ALL probability you WILL find excessive levels of ALKALI in the cement which has caused a chemical reaction which results in serious concrete cracking ( as seen on the project photos) rendering the structure unsafe.
    What IS alarming on 2e incident, is the RAPID RATE of the ASR manifestation period which normaly takes two to 10 years to identify itself but in this case has manifested itself in one year only. If my theory is correct,further roof and structure collapse(s) ARE envisaged.

  • February 24, 2005 at 3:39 am
    Alan M Dransfield says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    The inquiry has ruled out any material related defects as “CAUSE” for the roof collapse last year. I do not accept their decision on this and point out photographic evidence of “Material Related Distress” (MRD).
    I believe the collapse was caused by JOINT MRD and sub-standard design.
    Please see photographs #21 on page 11 of the official report an this photograph clearly shows the concrete crack patterns of concrete cancer (ASR) whilst the photograph on page 10,photo#20 clearly shows the stress related concrete cracks.

    In light of the design faults,i.e.”Euler Buckling” the additional strain has caused the collpapse of the structure, which has also been subjected to ASR a LETHAL combination in the concrete industry.
    Conclusion. Collapse caused by sub-standard design AND sub-standard materials,i.e. Cement used in Concrete.

  • February 25, 2005 at 11:00 am
    Alan M Dransfield says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Quote from Jean Berthier, the head of the independent commission that drew up the report for the Transport Ministry, said freezing temperatures were a significant factor in the accident, although quality of materials was not in question.

    “The shell was cracked before it collapsed,” Berthier said.

    “The interior concrete shell is air-conditioned, so its temperature varies very little, but the stirrups which support it from the outside have significant temperature swings,” he added.

    “The morning of the collapse, it was 4.1 degrees Celsius, the coldest temperature of the month.”

    Unquote,
    Someone should supply the inquiry team with a Celsius/Farrenheit Conversion Chart because 39F/4c is NOWHERE near freezing thus, IMPOSSIBLE to have had “SIGNIFICANT” bearing on the 2e terminal collape.
    Hence, the temprature can be ruled OUT, which leaves design,construction and material defect possibilities???!! Jean Berthier has ruled out material defects, which leave construction and design.
    I believe it is BOTH design and material related distress (MRD).
    Time will tell.

  • February 26, 2005 at 3:12 am
    Alan M Dransfield says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Overnight tempratures at CDG Airport were 24F/-4C with a windchill factor of 17F-8C.
    Sorry to push this temprature point but the Inquiry Team is on record that the “EXTREME COLD WEATHER” was a significant factors for Terminal 2E collape in May 04 and it was 39F on the day of the collpapse.
    I will leave the readers of this forum to draw their own conclussions!?

  • February 25, 2005 at 6:26 am
    Alan M Dransfield says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    The Inquiry have stated the “EXTREME COLD” weather on the day of the collapse contributed to the structure failures. The temprature on the eventful day was 39F, which, in my view CANNOT be defined as “EXTREMELY COLD”. Moreover, the avg temp in Paris for Jan and Feb this year has been 10 degrees LOWER than the 39F.
    What will happen to the 2E terminal should the current cold spell drop to 10 below and a meter of snow falls on the roof!???
    Grateful for an expert opinion?!

  • February 26, 2005 at 4:16 am
    Alan M Dransfield says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    From information in the public domain,I have to raise serious questions regarding the competence of Jean Berthier, the Engineer in charge of the terminaL 2e roof collapse. He is “INCONSISTENT” to say the least.
    Allow me to give examples:
    He has stated 39F freezing conditions had significant cause of the structure failure. Firstly, 39F is NOT freezing and SHOULD not have ANY significance.
    He has already ruled out any material failures but has said the covering of the vaulted roof grew “progressively fragile” and that “materials weakened” over time.
    WHAT NONSENSE is this , “materials weakened over time”. For goodness sake, the terminal had been in service for only one year, hence, what will the building be like in 10 years time or even next week???.
    Mr Berthier statement ref materials is a contradiction in terms.
    I cannot understand why Mr Bethier has NOT be able to identify the ROOT CAUSE of the Sheer Collapse. For goodness sake,it is not rocket science and if he is unable to pinpoint the problem, may I suggest myself and Dr Michael Hogan take a look at the project, as I am confident we could pin point the problem within 48 hrs. Any takers?



Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*