Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
Jaya supermarket presentation 2011 latest
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×
Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

Jaya supermarket presentation 2011 latest

3,870

Published on


presentation engineering professional practice 2011..case study...

Published in: Education, Business
3 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
3,870
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
2
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
178
Comments
3
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. JAYA SUPERMARKET COLLAPSEGroup 3Kartini Bt MuhamadKartini Bt IbrahimLim Teck Chee
  • 2. Objectives To know the process and procedure involved in demolition of building.To educate people about theimportance of adopting ethicalconducts to prevent disastrousconsequences
  • 3. Introduction Structural demolition is defined as an operation to bring down or destruct the structure. It can be completely or partially dismantling of a structure by planned and controlled methods in order to ensure the safety of work. Buildings, like all structures, are designed to support certain loads without deforming excessively. The loads are the weights of people and objects, the weight of rain and snow and
  • 4. Causes of Collapse The causes of building collapse can be classified under general headings to facilitate analysis. These headings are: Bad Design Faulty Construction Foundation Failure Extraordinary Loads Unexpected Failure Modes Combination of Causes
  • 5. The Evaluation of Demolition Techniques Demolition techniques for structure is greatly affected by the structure form using reinforcement concrete, pre stressed concrete, plain concrete or masonry and the size of the constructed structural. The location of the building, range of the demolition either is whole or partial demolition, grade of safety in work and the time taken to demolish the structure will greatly affect the evaluation if demolition technique. The evaluation of demolition method is a very
  • 6. Experience and knowledge play crucial role in demolition engineering. Those parameters will affect the decision of engineer in determine the suitable method of demolition Many demolition techniques had invented and applied in this world such as using machinery method, hand method, chemical agent, explosion and hydraulic demolition.
  • 7. CASESTUDY
  • 8. Background of Case Study Built in 1974, it was one of the first supermarkets in Petaling Jaya and has survived the many facets of development until now. The shopping centre was involved in a controversy in the early 1990s when it built its present 10-storey car park extension - four storeys higher than what the building plans approved by the then Petaling Jaya Municipal Council (MPPJ). The building has four storeys of retail units, five storeys of office units and four storeys of carparks. The building has been earmarked for redevelopment, where it will be demolished and rebuilt with better-planned features like loading bays, access roads and security.
  • 9.  One of the city’s earliest landmarks, Jaya Supermarket, collapsed while demolition work was going on. A 10-storey office block at the other end of the building was not affected. It was on the process of the reconstruction of a four-storey complex and basement parking along Jalan Semangat. People around there saw that six cranes falling down along with the building. Claimed the lives of seven Indonesian construction workers. Three others were injured.
  • 10. Reasons of the Collapse• Initial investigations showed that the contractor, Pembinaan C.W Yap Sdn Bhd, did not get the greenlight from the Department Of Safety and Health (DOSH) to start demolition, although it did get approval from the Petaling Jaya City Council to carry out the work.• Investigation also state that the contractor not use the proper methods for demolish the building.• Indicated overloading caused by heavy machines may have triggered the collapse.• Eight heavy demolition tractors were in the building when the incident occurred.• Nine mini excavators were to be hoisted on the building’s two roofs — three at the ninth floor and six at the fourth floor roofs.
  • 11. Action Taken• A month after the incident, the state government blacklisted the owner and firms (6) involved in the redevelopment of the Jaya Supermarket.  Jaya Section Fourteen Sdn Bhd (land owner and developer)  DP Architects Sdn Bhd (that submitted the building plan) Meinhardht (M) Sdn Bhd (engineering company) Pembinaan CW Yap Sdn Bhd (contractor)  Jurutera Perunding Sdn Bhd (engineering contractor)  DLS Management (project manager).
  • 12.  Syarikat Pembinaan C.W Yap Sdn Bhd, the main contractor in charge of demolition and reconstruction at the site was charged at the Sessions Court under Section 17(1) of the Occupational Safety and Health Act 1994. Sub-contractor Lian Hup Earth Work and Construction Sdn Bhd was charged under Section 15 (1) of the same Act for failing, as employer, to ensure safety, health and welfare of all employees during work.
  • 13.  The companies face a fine not exceeding RM50,000 or imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years or both upon conviction. Housing and Local Government deputy minister Datuk Seri Lajim Ukin had said that the information in the report was classified under the Official Secrets Act (OSA). He slammed the classification of the report over the incident that involved public interest, adding that this had prevented parties affected by the collapse to claim for losses.
  • 14. Demolition Regulation Demolition is dealt with under the Building Act 1984. Any person who intends to carry out the demolition of a building must inform the local authority. No one can start demolition work unless the local authority has been notified. It requires six weeks prior notice to be given to the Local Authority Building Control before demolition begins.
  • 15.  The Local Authority Building Control may decide to issue a notice within six weeks on receipt of the notification to specify conditions that need to be met which may include precautions to protect adjoining properties and the public. Demolition work must also comply with the Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 1994 and a health and safety plan produced by the principal contractor.
  • 16. Summary of Cases Study Did not get • Still continue to the demolition process approval from DOSH. Not follow the demolition • Building collapsed. regulation No compensation • The victim cannot claim their losses because no approval from DOSH.for all the victims
  • 17. No • Not consider the weight of responsibilityon the safety in the crane that will effect workplace the stability of the building The fine • They will do the sameimposed is notcommensurate thing again .
  • 18. Pictures
  • 19. METHODOLOGY USE TO ANALYSE THE CASE STUDY
  • 20. Utilitarianism• Definition: actions that serve to maximize human well-being.  Balance the need of society with the need of individual and what will provide the most benefit to the most people.• Good: They will built a new supermarket that give benefit to society (after demolition) complete all the necessary things in daily live.• Bad: Environmental Issues(not follow the demolition regulation-collapsed)
  • 21. Safety and Risk Safety is a value of judgment ,but preciseSAFET because in many cases we can readily Y distinguish a safe design from an unsafe One. Risk is a key element in engineering design RISK ,it is impossible to design anything to be completely risk free. Engineer have a responsibility to ensure that their work is conduct in the most environmentally safe manner possible.EXPLAINATI there was no mention of explosives being used in the method statement. ON The contractors structure were did not dismiss the possibility of the building crumbling if the wrong anchors .
  • 22. Virtue Ethics • define as moral distinction and goodness. Definition • The engineers not monitor during demolition process. • They not consider the weight of the machineIrresponsible • They not thinking about the environmental situation
  • 23. No • The victims cannot claim their losses.sympathy • Continue the demolition even though didImpatient not have approval from DOSH. • Do not care about their worker’s right andUnconcern the people around the collapsed building.
  • 24. Rights Ethics• Definition: right ethics holds that people have fundamental right that other people have a duty to respect.• From Case Study: The right to have a comfortable supermarket. The right to pay attention to our customers or workers .  cannot let our customers or workers suffer because of our project.
  • 25. Duty Ethics• Definition: people have duties , an important one is which is to protect the right of others• From this case study:  Pay the compensation to the victims.  be honest, careful, and trustworthy.  willingness to admit mistake.
  • 26. IEEE Codes Of Ethics DEFINITION: To accept responsibility in making decisions consistent with the safety, health and welfare of the public and to disclose promptly factors that might endanger the public or the environment. RELATE TO CASE STUDY: The construction company should consider the safety of their workers and public around their project building .However, they didn’t consider the consequences if their project failure and just think to finish their work.
  • 27. Discussion• The government should take other pro-active steps to avoid future disasters.• They seem to be charged only under OSHA if they are found guilty.• The max fine is just RM50k or imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years or both upon convinction.That really is nothing for these companies.• Proper risk assessment is the most fundamental issue of commitment to safety.
  • 28. We can take a cue from neighboring Singapore. Singapore Building Control Act 1989 introduced several new measures to regulate the construction industry. In regulating the design and supervision of a construction building, a developer must appoint an Accredited Checker, Their duties are to evaluate, analyze and review the structural design in the plans of any building works and perform such original calculations. The Accredited Checker must be independent in that he must have no professional or financial interest in the building works.
  • 29. Conclusion• In summary, we are able to see and appreciate that construction liability is a complex issue.• Finding a cause of a collapse of a building is never easy. For most of the time it will be a guessing game or a process of elimination.• With so many uncertainties and issues at hand, it is best for the Government to take pro- active steps to better regulate the construction industry.• The developments in Singapore would be a good starting point for us to compare and emulate.

×