No products in the cart.
4.3
- Webinar No: WBNR 1139
- PDH Units: 2
Webinar No: WBNR 1139
PDH Units: 2
$139.00
4.3
- Webinar No: WBNR 1139
- PDH Units: 2
Webinar No: WBNR 1139
PDH Units: 2
$139.00
Intended Audience: All Engineers
Credits: 2 PDH Units
When: Wednesday 10/18. 2 - 4 pm ET
We promise you a very special webinar . This is not your ordinary boring ethics webinar. We are very proud to bring this webinar to you. The 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake resulted in the drop of a 50-foot-long segment of the San Francisco Oakland Bay Bridge, an 18,000-foot-long steel bridge. The earthquake caused the collapse of the concrete double-deck viaduct, killing 42 people. California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) undertook a multi-billion dollar retrofit and replacement program, which included the replacement of the Eastern Spans of the Bay Bridge with a single-tower self-anchored suspension bridge. The bridge took 15 years to design and construct, more than twice the original plan. At the cost of $6.5 billion, a 2,500% cost overrun from the initial estimate of $250 million to retrofit the existing span to a 500% cost overrun for the new bridge. The SAS Bay Bridge had more than 16 severe structural problems, including the fracture of the anchor rods of the main tower, which occurred even before the bridge opened to traffic. This course traces the root cause of the problems of SAS Bay Bridge mainly to the “conflict of interest” among the engineer members of various advisory and peer review committees of Caltrans. The engineers charged with independently overseeing and peer-reviewing the seismic safety aspects of the new bridge were themselves receiving contracts to do the design and testing work on the same bridge they were peer-reviewing. Dr. Astaneh will present a summary of his extensive seismic analysis, test results, and retrofit design of the 1936 East Spans of the San Francisco Bay Bridge, which sustained relatively minor damage but was demolished and replaced with the new Self-Anchored Suspension (SAS) Bay Bridge, which opened to traffic in 2013. The seismic response of both bridges to the same ground motions that the bridges might see will be compared. He will show how the “conflict of interests” of some members of the top advisory boards and the peer review committees was at the root of the design and construction problems of the new SAS Bay Bridge. Some critical elements of the new SAS Bay Bridge, such as the tower and the east support’s 3-inch diameter high-strength anchor rods, fractured even before the bridge was opened to traffic. References and Recommended Further Readings:
- Code of Ethics of National Society of Professional Engineers (NSPE) (PDF)
- NSPE Ethics Reference Guide (PDF)
- ASCE Code of Ethics (PDF)
- Ethics, Technology, and Engineering, a book by Ibo van de Poel and Lambèr Royakkers, Wily-Blackwell, 2011. (Amazon page)
- Concepts and Cases-Engineering Ethics, a book by Charles E. Harris et al., published by Cengage2019. (Amazon page)
- Engineering Ethics-Contemporary and Enduring Debates, a book by Deborah G. Johnson, 2020. (Amazon page)
- Concerns on Seismic Safety of the New East Bay Bridge Design, by A. Astaneh-Asl, Submitted to MTC.
- Astaneh Letter to Bay Area Toll Bridge Oversight Committee on SAS Bay Bridge Problems, PDF
- Concrete Credence: More Bay Bridge Woes May Validate Concerns of Span’s #1 Critic by Glen Martin, CALIFORNIA Magazine (PDF)
- A Bridge Too Weak?, Ron Russel, San Francisco Week l
- Bridge Over Troubled Bolts: Cal Experts Question Whether New Bridge is Safe, CALIFORNIA Magazine (PDF)
- Cracked welds raise doubts about Bay Bridge safety, by Charles Piller, Sacramento Bee Newspaper (PDF).
- Do hidden cracks imperil Bay Bridge? By Charles Piller, Sacramento Bee Newspaper (PDF)
- A Bridge Suspended in Controversy WIRED Online Magazine
- Panel that reviewed Bay Bridge foundations has ties to Caltrans, Sacramento Bee Newspaper (PDF).
- Bay Bridge troubles began with design - SFGate.
- California lawmakers prescribe more transparency and independence for megaprojects – East Bay Times
Date: Wednesday. October 18. 2023 . Starts: 2 - 4 pm ET Credits: 2 PDH Units
Learning Objectives
Upon completion of the course, the student should understand:- How the 1936 East Spans Structure of the Bay Bridge performed during the 1989 earthquake and why with a relatively small amount of retrofit ($240M) it would seismically perform better than the new 2013 SAS Bay Bridge.
- How might the 2013 New SAS Bay Bridge perform during future earthquakes?
- What are the 16 serious engineering problems of the new SAS BAY Bridge?
- What does Canon 3 of the Code of Ethics: “Engineers shall issue public statements only in an objective and truthful manner,” mean?
- What does Canon 4 of the Code of Ethics: “Engineers shall act for each employer or client as faithful agents or trustees” mean?
- What are the “legal” and “ethical” responsibilities of engineers in “Avoiding Conflict of Interest.”
- How not “Avoiding Conflict of Interest” was at the root of many problems and failures of the new SAS Bay Bridge.
- What “conflict of interest existed in the members of the Caltrans Seismic Advisory Board and Caltrans Seismic Safety Peer Review Panel concerning planning, design, testing, and construction of the SAS Bay Bridge?
- What lessons can we learn from the case of the SAS Bay Bridge to “Avoid Conflict of Interests.”
Professor Abolhassan Astaneh-Asl nailed it. He cut to the essence of many of the problems with this out of control project. My grand children will be paying for this mess. The engineers mentioned in the presentation were more a victim of California politics than their own ethical lapses. An entire semester or two could be spent on exploring the SFOBB project and it’s associated issues. Professor Astaneh-Asl was able to boil it down to two action filled hours for our benefit. This webinar should be a requirement for continuing education for all of us engineers. I obviously highly recommend this webinar.
Thought the speaker was bias but the information was really interesting.
Excellent topic and presentation. Professor Astaneh-asl did a clear and concise summary of the seismic analytical evaluation of the east span as well as the inherent conflicts of interest in the advisory boards charged with protecting the public interest. He also clearly showed how CALTRANS biased the retrofit decision by creating a technical solution known to be expensive enough to “justify” a new viaduct. I am professionally embarrassed that it took investigative journalists to expose the flagrant conflicts. The collective silence of the local professional engineering community spoke their consent to this violation of professional ethics and is, in itself, disgraceful.
Very informative presentations
Good overview of suspension bridges and ethically what not to do in any project. It is hard to believe that the Bay Bridge got that far “off target” during both design and construction. It went from an engineering project to a political project ripping off people. It should not surprise me that in the end, nothing really changed since politics were involved and the “fox is watching the hen coop”. It shocked me even more because it sounded like technical/engineering problems were never fixed. The problems are going to come back in the future and haunt the bridge itself, resulting in even more money for repairs and maintenance. Overall comment on the presentation was live webinar sound quality-the professor dropped his voice and mumbled sometimes making it hard to understand what he was saying. A few of the course pages were slightly different than his, but that was not a serious problem.
I have over the years been to many coursed this was one of the best I have sat through
Very interesting course that addressed actual ethical problems. Much more engaging than previous ethics seminars I have been involved with.
Thanks
Great class and an interesting and more fun approach to learn about real life conflicts of interest and ethics violations. Highly recommend.
Excellent Webinar but what took place on this bridge project is scary & very unfortunate.
This is the second recent webinar I’ve taken from this professor and it was very good. I would strongly recommend this course to anybody looking for an interesting and for the most part inexpensive way to earn ethics PDH credits. There may be cheaper options out there if you’re just going through the motions and doing the very least amount of work possible. However, if you want to learn about actual events that were shaped negatively by unethical engineering behavior AND do it an interesting, entertaining, and educational way then THIS IS THE WAY TO DO IT. I will be watching for and then enrolling in any future webinars offered from this professor.
but distressing story of corruption within the engineering community, told by one with first-hand knowledge of the events. I would have liked more information on if and how the state licensing board addressed the issue.
A case study of engineering ethics based on the personal experience of the instructor on a major California bridge project. The instructor personally observed the ethical issues during his work on the project and therefore brings his close-up and detailed perspective. He is able to relate the story of the project with details that illuminate the ethical concerns and keep the course interesting.
Sobering story of a critical bridge. Dr. Astaneh is very knowledgeable on this project. It was a little slow getting going. would like liked more time for Q&A but glad I was able to join in.
Excellent course about how politics, greed, and unethical practices can bilk taxpayers and lead to public endangerment.
It is a shame for such a critical infrastructure of transportation for the Bay Area, not to mention the investment of our country’s resources, that more care was not taken in the selection of the design type! Kind of boggles the mind!