Your browser is no longer supported

For the best possible experience using our website we recommend you upgrade to a newer version or another browser.

Your browser appears to have cookies disabled. For the best experience of this website, please enable cookies in your browser

We'll assume we have your consent to use cookies, for example so you won't need to log in each time you visit our site.
Learn more

Engineers told to consider safety consequences of cost cutting

ENGINEERS WERE warned this week not to jeopardise structural safety by producing cut price, low quality designs.
Pressure to maximise profits is forcing contractors and consultants to produce simplified, less robust structures, experts told delegates at the 'ICE Structural Safety Across the Lifespan of Buildings' conference in London.British Nuclear Group principle engineer Chris Bolton warned 'Aggressive cost cutting and rejection of quality and inspection constraints, effectively cutting corners, can have severe and unforeseen consequences should part of the structure fail.'Bolton told NCE that consultants must ensure that structures are robust 'If the client says 'I don't want robustness' it is the duty of the engineer to build it in and inform the client he is doing so.' Another expert noted that money saved by clients who cuts cost on projects will be paid for in the end, either through major maintenance issues or at worse catastrophic failure.Experts also said that although engineers are adhering to design codes they are not adequately considering the consequences of structural failure.Gifford chairman, Geoff Clifton, warned 'Too often they [engineers] calculate to a code of practice instead of stepping back and looking at the true consequences of failure.'Clifton illustrated his point by referring to the design of the failed New Orleans dykes which were only able to withstand a 1:100 year event.'People use the same margin of safety for New Orleans as you would when designing a retaining wall at the bottom of someone's garden,' he said.Bolton agreed and added: 'The key is protecting structures against failure with a level of confidence proportional to its importance. The more important it is the more confidence you need.'The Department for Communities and Local Government are currently reviewing the building regulations to try and address the issue of robustness and Clifton is chairing a task group that hopes to publish advice on designing for robustness next year.

Have your say

You must sign in to make a comment

Please remember that the submission of any material is governed by our Terms and Conditions and by submitting material you confirm your agreement to these Terms and Conditions. Please note comments made online may also be published in the print edition of New Civil Engineer. Links may be included in your comments but HTML is not permitted.