Engineering Failure Analysis: Case Studies and Mitigation Strategies

This report analyzes various engineering failures, including those caused by fire and structural collapses. It examines the St. Peter's church fire in Riga and the collapse of the Beauvais Cathedral, detailing the causes, consequences, and levels of damage. The report highlights design flaws, material failures, and inadequate foundation designs as key contributors to these failures. It emphasizes the importance of pre-failure mitigation strategies, such as proper fireproofing, geotechnical analysis, and over-designing. The analysis underscores the need for comprehensive planning, material selection, and adherence to engineering principles to prevent future failures and ensure structural safety. The report concludes by advocating for a proactive approach to risk management and the implementation of lessons learned from past incidents.

Name:
Course:
Institution:
Professor:
Date:

Learning from engineering failure
Engineering failures are able to happen at different situations. In many cases, engineering
failures have been able to happen since in past decades. Nevertheless, mitigation measures are
usually required to be taken before the execution of the projects. Measures are usually taken in
advance to ensure that the failures are prevented. Nevertheless, these measures are at times not
able to withstand the failures and therefore not able to prevent such failures. Moreover, the
engineering failures are able to happen on different situations and different ranges (Drysdale,
2011). Ranges on these failures are wide and are able to enhance the different aspects of the
projects. The control of the engineering projects is critical to ensure safety of the structure.
Engineers are able to enhance the safety of the structures by enhancing and considering different
aspects of the projects. Medium and widespread engineering failures are common in many of the
projects. Under these situations, many of the projects are able to experience different failures
under different situations.
Medium level
Under construction, buildings are meant to withstand fire situations and enhance their safety
measures. Since long time, engineers were able to be designed to prevent the engineering failures
under fire situations. Artillery fire was able to happen 10 May 1721 and therefore destroying St.
Peter's church in Riga. The church was able to experience the fire, which enhanced the
engineering failure. Masonry construction is meant to be able to withstand the fire effects at any
instances. The masonry walling and structures are able to enhance the resistance into effects of
fire and excessive heats. The structural capacity of the masonry should have the capacity to
prevent the engineering failure. Wall thickness is one of the major preventive measure, which is

usually in cooperated to enhance the failure. Enough coating is a key measure that should ensure
that the failure of fire is prevented. The inherent risk from this failure is the collapse of the wall.
The wall should be in strong position in order to withstand such exposures and ensure that the
wall does not fail. The fire is able to weaken the bonding materials and therefore causing the wall
failure. Design flaws are key in ensuring that a proper mitigation program is achieved.
The level of damage on this project was at medium level. The damage is able to define different
levels and measures, which can be used to rectify the damage. At this project, reconstruction
measures were taken to rectify the damage on this level (Pētersone, 2010). The damage was able
to lead to complete reconstruction of the wall areas. This is because the bonding structure was
weakened and this led to increase the damages. Masonry structures only withstand heat up to
some levels and this plays a critical extend under which the damage was experienced on this
structure. The fire effect was able to destroy the interior section of the church. The partition
sections and walls were completed and led to the complete replacement of the interior section,
which was termed as a medium damage level on the project (Drysdale, 2011). Fault on electrical
sections are the major key causes of the fire, which was able to lead to the engineering failure.
The low strength of the wall qualifies to be engineering failure because they are able to affect the
strength of the members of structure. Limestone covering was also done during the
reconstruction stage. This was a measure to be able to enhance the prevention of damage to the

fire level. This is a preventive measure, which should be in cooperated earlier and would have
enhanced the construction of the project. This pre-failure mitigation strategy would have worked
to ensure that the damage and failure is prevented. Materials failure can also be highly attributed
to the engineering failure on this project. The inability of the material to withstand such heat and
therefore failing.
Widespread
Engineering failure is able to extend to a level, which the damage is higher and able to extend to
other structures and properties within. Another key failure, which has been able to happen in the
engineering sector, is the collapse of the Beauvais Cathedral church, which happened on 1284.
The building was able while under construction and the fault was laud mostly on the engineers
and masons who were on the site (Karl and Barnett, 2010). The failure was able to happen on the
completed choir, where French masons were working on the Gothic style. In addition, the failure
on this structure was also attributed to the foundation failures and wring spacing of the piers. On
this note, it was noted that the designers had a large part to play on this engineering failure. The
materials failures were attributed to the increased loading on the present piers and therefore led
to the failure of the members (Maury and Robert, 1976). The analysis model for the loading,
which the designers were able to apply, is thought to have played a key role in the resulting to
the failure. The two-dimensional epoxy mode was applied and thought to have generated the
loadings, which were not accurate.

Proper design measures are the key methods, which could have been coupled to ensure that the
failure is minimized. Moreover, additional or over designs are key areas, which are mostly key in
many structures to ensure that the collapse is prevented. Additionally, the foundation was found
to be more weak and unable to carry the masonry at the east and west terminations. This was
able to lead to the collapse of the piers and causing large damage. Geotechnical engineering of
the soil and foundation are key measures, which need to be carried before the commencing of
any major superstructure works. This is a preconstruction measure, which could having played a
key role to ensure that the failure did not occur. The geotechnical details would have given the
key foundation construction measures, which could have enhanced the foundations to carry
additional weight (Cruickshank, 1996). These extreme conditions at this project together coupled
and increased the impact of the plane and therefore increasing the damage and causing the
failure. Internal buttress were experienced on different locations and therefore increasing the
need to more repair and damages, which needed to be amended.

References
CRUICKSHANK, D., ED. (1996). Sir Banister Fletcher's A History of Architecture (20th ed.).
Architectural Press. p. 436.
DRYSDALE, D., (2011). An Introduction to Fire Dynamics New York: Wiley Interscience, pp.
134–140.
KARL, B. P. AND BARNETT, H. M. (September 2010). "Completing Beauvais Cathedral"
(PDF). Architectural Association School of Architecture.
MAURY I. W. AND ROBERT M. (Jul., 1976). "The Collapse of the Vaults of Beauvais
Cathedral in 1284," Speculum 51, no. 3: 462-476. https://doi.org/10.2307/2851708
PĒTERSONE, Z. (April 2010). "Chapter IX. Architecture, landscaping and engineering" (PDF).
netherlandsembassy.lv. p. 8. Retrieved 8.