I don't think thats it....
I always thought it was that the load path of the hanger rods was offset
at the channel by the fabricator to facilitate erection...
Analogy: - Five guys are hanging on a rope
- The bottom four each grap hold of the guy's leg directly above
and let go of the rope
- Now, the top guy has to hold up his plus four other guy's below him
Quite a difference.
As far as a reference, try "Why Buildings Fall Down" by Matthys Levy at
Pretty interesting reading.
David L. Fisher, SE,PE
Fisher+Horos Structural Engineers
372 West Ontario
Chicago, Illinois 60610
From: Dave Adams [mailto:davea(--nospam--at)laneengineers.com]
Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 4:40 PM
Subject: RE: EOR (Hyatt)
I've got a brief blurb on this failure in a book entitled "Design &
Construction Failures" by Dov Kaminetzky, who explains that neither the
originally-designed connection detail of the hanger rods to the channels nor
the as-built detail could safely support imposed loads. Both details placed
these hanger rods at the edge of channel flanges without any stiffeners or
I'd be interested in reading more about this failure. Does anyone have a
reference to recommend?
Dave K. Adams, S.E.
Lane Engineers, Inc.
PH: (559) 688-5263
From: Todd Hill [mailto:thill(--nospam--at)tkarch.com]
Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 12:43 PM
Subject: RE: EOR
The Kansas City Hyatt walkway failure, in the early 1980's, is one of most
prolific of the many examples where the Engineers were responsible for
failures that occurred from a design changes made without their knowledge.
Actually the design change was with their knowledge, they choose not to
check it (even after an architect brought it to their attention). I didn't
read anything in the court case on omission of on-site inspections, but I
only have a brief copy of the court case (final version is 442 pages long).