Hacker News Reader

Comment by ajsnigrutin | Hacker News Reader

This is an interesting theory... one would wonder, how come it collapsed at the place, where it only held one slab, and not somewhere under more weight... but i'm not a civil engineer, so yeah... time (and analysis) will tell.

View on HN

That area, the pool deck, was exposed to the elements. Rainwater was allowed to pool on top and seep into the concrete because it was not constructed correctly. It should have been slanted to allow water to drain off. The slabs and pillars under the actual building may have been in better condition since they were mostly protected from the weather.

In salty environments, exposure to the weather tends to allow rain to wash away salt. Semi- exposed areas tend to fair worse for corrosion due to the absence of scouring by rain.

A bit counter intuitive.

But that’s building by the sea. Salt can be deposited by mist and chloride ions are the nemesis of reinforced concrete.

Also, once the initial shift occurred, could that have caused enough plumbing to break to begin flooding and further cause solid ground to liquify?

This would also be consistent with less steel being included than originally designed, as was rumored during construction of numerous hi-rises during the boom.

Looks almost like punch-through of all floors simultaneously due to shock, almost as if it was a planned demolition where stuctural supports are compromised with precision to assure orderly collapse.

Only this part of the building fell precisely without any carefuly placed dynamite.

But when buildings are stronger, sometimes intentional demolition projects do not complete the job so thoroughly on the first attempt.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com