Should half a dozen people riding an elevation 30 floors up – about 300 feet, expect the same standard of equipment maintenance as half a dozen people flying in a plane at 300 feet?\u00a0 You would think so.\u00a0 If the\u00a0plane falls from the sky people are certain to be killed or seriously injured.\u00a0\u00a0If the elevator free-falls in its shaft the same can be expected for the people on board.<\/p>\n
What about\u00a0a fun-filled Ferris wheel several 10s of feet high at a circus?\u00a0 (There was\u00a0one set up near my home recently)\u00a0 What should the paying public expect?<\/p>\n
What’s this got to do with an engineering expert formulating a reliable initial hypothesis on the cause\u00a0of a building or bridge collapsing, or an elevator failing?\u00a0\u00a0Actually quite a\u00a0lot,\u00a0if the reliability of a hypothesis is increased on knowing\u00a0if maintenance of the structure included independent<\/em><\/span> inspection.<\/p>\n I thought this after a reader told me about,<\/p>\n The Department of National Defence (DND) monitor and inspect the maintenance on military aircraft by private contractors.\u00a0 Transport Canada do this in\u00a0a similar\u00a0way for civilian aircraft.<\/p>\n Who does the independent<\/em> maintenance inspection for elevators?\u00a0 Many are failing according to recent news reports. (Refs 1, 2)\u00a0\u00a0We need to know if\u00a0such a procedure exists\u00a0if we\u00a0are to formulate a reliable initial hypothesis on\u00a0the cause of a failure.\u00a0 We need to remember that maintenance is the Achilles’ heel of the built environment. (Ref. 3)<\/p>\n We can ask this question about\u00a0any type of failure or accident in the built environment.\u00a0 Who does the maintenance\u00a0of structures – including Ferris wheels, used by the public and who\u00a0independently<\/em> ensures it’s done to an acceptable standard?\u00a0 The owner of the structure?\u00a0 He’s got his profit margins like the aircraft maintenance companies, and may also\u00a0think of them as small.<\/p>\n I had these thoughts after Gary Bartlett, P. Eng., Halifax, a retired aircraft maintenance engineer, read\u00a0a previous\u00a0blog on the\u00a0incidence of elevator failure in Canada and the suspect maintenance.\u00a0(Ref. 2)\u00a0 He\u00a0commented on the exhaustive maintenance\u00a0on military aircraft, the tight profit margins, and the\u00a0independent government inspectors who\u00a0would show up\u00a0unannounced to check that maintenance had been done properly.<\/p>\n Gary and I were classmates in engineering at the University of New Brunswick; he did electrical engineering\u00a0and I did civil.\u00a0 He then joined the air force and flew on military aircraft as a\u00a0radio officer\u00a0for years.\u00a0 After that\u00a0my good friend\u00a0joined a military aircraft overhaul company as an electrical and avionics engineer.\u00a0 In time he became vice-president of an engineering design branch.<\/p>\n I subsequently spoke with an aircraft mechanic, Shaun Morin, Edmonton, who confirmed that\u00a0independent inspectors might drop in on him doing his job, unannounced. They would want to know in detail what he was doing – right down to the toque he used to tighten a bolt.<\/p>\n ***<\/p>\n What I’m\u00a0realizing\u00a0as I write this item – thinking on paper –\u00a0is the need for independent<\/em>\u00a0maintenance inspection agencies for different structures used by the public, not just aircraft.\u00a0 Agencies that ensure a maintenance program exists and is being carried out properly.<\/p>\n An engineering expert\u00a0can increase the reliability of his initial hypothesis on the cause of a failure\u00a0just by checking that such an agency exists for the structure involved in his investigation.<\/p>\n References<\/strong><\/p>\n <\/p>\n Should half a dozen people riding an elevation 30 floors up – about 300 feet, expect the same standard of equipment maintenance as half a dozen people flying in a plane at 300 feet?\u00a0 You would think so.\u00a0 If the\u00a0plane … Continue reading \n
\n