Flyover collapses at Upper Changi, PIE

[kdash]

Hmmm...

 

The new contractor might have to demolish the existing supporting pillars if they are structurally unsafe.

Still can meet 2020 deadline?

i'm sure the deadline can be adjusted depending on the works required.

[DACH]

i'm sure the deadline can be adjusted depending on the works required.

Just hope they don't compromise quality for cost and timeline again

[kdash]

Just hope they don't compromise quality for cost and timeline again

i'm sure this time they will overcompensate, just like Nicoll Highway case...

[Carbon82]

This answers your question. Its not so simple as just walking away. Whoever bids to complete the project is likely to bid at a premium because much time is needed to first document then pick apart what has been done/needs doing/etc. before completing the job. This cost will likely be charged in part if not in full against OKP. Even liquidated damages are likely to be levied.

 

I did see that, but these are the problems I am seeing: Mutual termination + Recover appropriate cost.

 

Let me explain a little. Mutual termination is reached through discussions on the T&Cs governing the contract, and typically compromises have to be made. So when KBW replied that LTA will "recover the appropriate cost", instead of "in accordance to the contract terms", it tells something.

 

And as @kdash have mentioned, LD may not be levied if due date is no hit. This is another loophole I would say. Depending on how the contract(s) was/were structured, LTA may face challenges in even recovering the "appropriate cost", especially if timeline are not further breakdown to reflect actual work progress, for example.

 

My point here is that a contract is established for a purpose, and the main objective is to protect the interest of both the issuer (LTA) and contactor (OKP). In normal case, it would have spell out the penalties and LD for failure to fulfill any of the contractual requirement, including but not limited to timeline, quality and safety expectation. And since the contract is terminated due to a serious accident (which constitute to breach of safety requirement), why mutual termination come into play, and cost not recovered according to contract?  

[Ravinged]

Whatever it is, I just hope they get over with this project quickly. Everytime I head to the airport the jam is just horrible, considering traffic is crossing each other to exit or enter the expressway .... much like between Woodlands Ave 2 and Ave 12 location.

[Carbon82]

ownself check ownself?

Accredited Checker's fault...

 

PIE viaduct collapse: Accredited checker admits not performing checks for support structures

 

 

SINGAPORE: The accredited checker for a viaduct project in Upper Changi admitted on Monday (Jun 24) that he had failed to check the designs or perform calculations for the corbels, or support structures.

 

The incomplete Pan-Island Expressway (PIE) viaduct collapsed in the early hours of Jul 14, 2017, with 11 workers on top of it, injuring 10 of them and claiming the life of 31-year-old Chinese national Chen Yinchuan.

 

Singaporean Leong Sow Hon, 61, pleaded guilty to one charge of failing to check the detailed structural plans and design calculations of the viaduct building works in accordance with regulations.

 

He admitted to not evaluating, analysing or reviewing the structural design in the plans and failing to perform original calculations for all permanent corbels. These are key structural elements supporting the ends of the flyovers that made up the 1.8km-long viaduct.

 

Another charge of falsely certifying that he had carried out the required checks was taken into consideration.

 

The 1.8km-long viaduct consists of eight flyovers, with permanent corbels located at expansion joints, the prosecution said.

 

Permanent corbels are short reinforced concrete projections via which vehicular loads on a flyover are transferred to columns, and are key structural elements essential for the support and overall structural stability of the viaduct.

 

The court heard that Leong was an engineer and the managing director of Calibre Consulting, who was appointed as an accredited checker by the Land Transport Authority (LTA) for the viaduct works.

 

His role, which was created after the 1986 collapse of Hotel New World, was to act as the final checking mechanism to check the structural design apart from the designer, said Deputy Public Prosecutor Yang Ziliang.

 

The court heard that Leong initially claimed that he had indeed performed the original calculations for the corbels and found them to be adequate. However, he was unable to produce evidence of such calculations.

 

He admitted that this was false only after engineer Shivananni Yalagunda Siddalingaiah verified from records and documentation that there were no such calculations.

 

Shivannani in September 2017 admitted that no calculations were performed for all corbels, permanent and temporary, during the submissions stage of building works.

 

CORBELS WERE INADEQUATE, COLLAPSE "INEVITABLE"

 

After the incident, calculations found the permanent corbels to be inadequate.

 

Investigations found that eight of the 10 piers with permanent corbels were inadequately designed, with five piers unable to support the intended weight during the construction stage.

 

"Therefore, the five permanent corbels would have collapsed during the casting of the slab at the construction stage," said the prosecutor.

 

He added that although the remaining three piers might support the weight during the construction stage, the corbels would show significant structural cracks with a full traffic load, followed by "sudden brittle failure leading to collapse".

 

Because of the incident, the estimated completion date of the viaduct construction has been pushed back by at least two years from the first quarter of next year to the first half of 2022.

 

Leong is the first person involved in the case to plead guilty. The rest - including the qualified person who designed the building works and the builder Or Kim Peow Contractors - are set to claim trial.

 

The prosecution asked for at least nine months' jail, saying there was "complete inadequacy" in checking the corbels.

 

They added that "the collapse of the viaduct would have been inevitable", and many people would have been harmed either during the construction stage or after the viaduct was open to traffic.

 

Leong's defence lawyer Lim Lian Kee asked instead for a S$25,000 fine, saying that the viaduct accident had been caused by the failure of temporary corbels, not the permanent corbels.

 

Checking the temporary corbels was not part of his duties, said the lawyer. The prosecutor conceded that Leong "played no part" in the checks of the temporary corbels.

 

The lawyer said the design and checking process was carried out by the qualified person, Robert Arianto Tjandra, and his client, who was the secondary person.

 

If Arianto had been doing his job, there was "very low likelihood" that potential harm would have occurred, said the defence.

 

District Judge Hamidah Ibrahim adjourned sentencing to Jul 5.

[ER-3682]

Laziness no cure ...wash Backside Clean Clean go Changi Chalet for a short Holidays.

[Playtime]

.. so where is Robert Arianto Tjandra,

[Othello]

This is the greatest fear/failure for any process. The checker never check. To think this role was SPECIFICALLY created after the Nicoll Highway incident.So now should we have a secondary checker to check the checker?? Hahaha

 

Really speaks volume of our safety culture here sia. Or should I say WAYANG culture.

Edited June 24, 2019 by Othello

[No_worries]

Well from the look of it , the checker and designer will have to look forward to doing time in Changi chalet .

[Sosaria]

.. so where is Robert Arianto Tjandra,

Well, can't imagine if the temporary corbels were done properly, then the weaknesses of the permanent corbels wouldn't be discovered until much later - would it be a worse outcome?

[Kb27]

Lazy.

Your responsibility.

Don't check.

Building collapse.

You're in deep shit for the rest of your life.

[Sturtles]

Well, can't imagine if the temporary corbels were done properly, then the weaknesses of the permanent corbels wouldn't be discovered until much later - would it be a worse outcome?

 

All his previous inspections and certifications are now suspect... other building works may be affected

[Karoon]

All his previous inspections and certifications are now suspect... other building works may be affected

 

start digging

[Victor68]

From what I know, electrical, plumbing/sanitary, gas all required authorities to check/test before approval given. Why structural and fire safety no leh?

 

When you have 2 private individuals checking each other works, then the penalty for failure to carry out such check should be jail and immediate cancellation of their licence. This is about life not just material losses. 

 

Yes, now not only his previous works should be checked, those he has certified and those checkers for his projects must be included.  

[Daniu82]

Luckily it didn't collapsed after construction was completed with cars travelling on it. If not, dunno how many more ppl will die.

[Dafansu]

Lazy.

Your responsibility.

Don't check.

Building collapse.

You're in deep shit for the rest of your life.

 

his profile should be very highly paid, just collect money relax one corner and enjoy life    

[Soya]

This is the greatest fear/failure for any process. The checker never check. To think this role was SPECIFICALLY created after the Nicoll Highway incident.So now should we have a secondary checker to check the checker?? Hahaha

 

Really speaks volume of our safety culture here sia. Or should I say WAYANG culture.

The problem is these 'authorities' juz collect fee but the developer is the one that has to employ the checker.

 

And if anything goes wrong, the authorities role is to go after the checker. The rightful process is that the checking should be done by the authorities themselves, not outsourced to the lowest bidder by the developer. Same with fire compliance checking

 

Damn screwed up system that needs to be changed