Manchester Democrat. [volume] (Manchester, Iowa) 1875-1930, 1913-12-31
FLAMES system
cOkSTRUC TlON.
Turner or -Minniaannli

III fl'.stF-A turner OIL $MlnneSQOl1S, IL O.
member Of the American f}ociety Of
sGiYil Engineers; the nadians Society
'sof$Ci7il Engineers, and inventor 8of
the mushroom system ofsfSS eoHsrete
reinforcing, has submit ted t55s the
Master Builders associanb iS Oh Ced-
ar Rapids his report ol5Sthe xamil-
alton made at the. LYMAN Building fol
lowing the collapse of$%the Structure,
I Mr.. Turner, who isprobably the
greatest authority, olSreiiforced CON
astruction in the central west and
ono OF the greatest the country,
was employed bySsPfssident j J.
Letters Of the builders association
Ito make thorougl lsss examination Of
the building and submit a report as.
to the cause ofSthe collapse.
In his report Nj & Turner went in.
to detail aceor1ht Of the causes
which he attributes were ,respons-
ible for the collapsing Of part Of
1.-The large structure. Lauritzen and
|1Nasson, IL 5tlla Waterloo contractors
who erected the addition to the
Ioca, Highsa school were the contract
ors WhoS@ere cons trueting the build
ing; and Y suffered the loss Of a num-
!! berSS sthaiI best w5rkmen, who We're
crushed sSto death beneath the piles
oss sekage The corners jury
ahish SinVe stigatel the cause Of the
Eeatast aphy, blamed the contractors
TO- ths accide1t,$it is claimed
MIN; Ri ssahon g other points brought out in
Ills sport n r. Turner says:
|s ss.3A s. is Invariably the case where
|coIlapse has occurred, that part OF
Ethe work which has not been execut-
lea as well as. it could be, is immed-.
|iately noticed and an effort made to
associate it with the prime cause Of
failure, or /. indeed to attribute the
collapse itself to- such small and per.
haps innocent defects as may be
found. Certain defects in the get.
ting up Of the centering have been
seized upon by some as an Sexplana-
ton of this failure, and it is not to
be denied that the general get up Of
the false work used, by the contract.
or and approved by the ingineer in
charge of the work did not exhibit.
engineering skill, and was not as per-
feet in get up as a fair consideration
of economy combined with the hight.
est degree of safety, would demand
"The contractors put up a better
building and a stronger building than.
the plans called for. ! st
$s8 ccordingly at the weak Y5tstt..
above noted, that is the top Of the
column under the fifth floor, at 9@ttam
q II an increase in cross-sectioH Of,
the concrete Of fully 20 per cent over.
and above the cross,section required
by the engineers design as adopted
by the owner, and figured on by the
contractor, and a corresponding in,
crease in the strength of the struct-s
ure at this point at the period Of
failure Of not less than 35 or 40 per
cent, taking into consideration the
beam and column connection; and
yet this collapse has occurred and UNI
doubtedly through failure at this
point in the design after the con-
tractor had increased the strength of
the structure at the; period Of col
lapse at least thirty 3to VI forty per
cent. over and above the degree Of
Strength provided BY the engineers
design, and notwithstanding all this
the coroner's jury placed the blame
Of, this collapse squarely on the:
shoulders Of the contractor.