COLLAPSE OF KOLKATA FLYOVER-A CASE STUDY

INTRODUCTION
On 31st March 2016, a segment of flyover in Kolkata which was under construction
collapsed suddenly causing casualty of 26 people in a short period, and injuring more than 80
people severely. The first reaction of the construction company was that it was an “Act of
God”, as such a collapse had never happened in their 27 years of experience of constructing
bridges. This collapse, in addition to the periodic reporting of collapses occurring all over
India, has eroded the confidence of the common man in engineers and construction
companies responsible for their construction, and certainly blotted their professional
reputation.It found the design of the flyover to be faulty, and also pointed out inconsistency
in construction material, faulty approval of design, lack of quality check and improper project
execution on part of the Kolkata Metropolitan Development Authority.

BRIEF DETAILS OF THE FLYOVER

The long-delayed 2.5-km Vivekanda flyover under the Jawaharlal Nehru National Urban
Renewal Mission was expected to tackle congestion in Burrabazar area - the location of one
of the largest wholesale markets in Asia - up to the Howrah station, the gateway to the city.
This flyover consists of two carriageways made of composite construction, i.e., reinforced
concrete deck slab over steel plate girders which are supported on steel piers at intervals
along the length of the flyover. The project’s foundation was laid in 2008 and work on the
Rs.164-crore project began on February 24, 2009. It was scheduled to be completed in 2012
but land acquisition issues delayed its completion. The implementing agency also ran into
financial trouble.
FAILURE ANALYSIS
In the absence of detail drawings about actual dimensions of the flyover, sizes of structural
members and their connection details, to analyse the cause of collapse,the main cause of
failure is the peculiar joint detail adopted at the cantilevered beam at pier 40(C). The design
strength of the cantilever girders was provided only by the top plate of the box section and 4
nos. small sized beams below it. The posting by Er. Tridibesh Indu on 8th April 2016, at
SEFI website states as below: “Kindly note that the Pier 40(C) which had collapsed on 31st
March 2016 was supporting two simply supported spans. On one side of the pier, deck slab
on both the carriageways were already cast. On the other side, concreting for The cantilever
girders did not collapse when the concrete had been laid on one side of the girders only.
When the new concrete was laid on the other side which was supported by Cantilever Girder
No. 1, this girder collapsed first due to flexure and shear failure, and collapse of Cantilever
Girder No. 2 took place following it because of a common beam supporting them. This
means that the joint at the cantilever girder was not designed even for full dead load condition
of having concrete deck slab on either side Another major point of weakness was the
inadequate number of bolts in the splices, where 16 mm diameter bolts were used in many
important locations. It has to be noted that other spans of the flyover did not fail. It is because
in other spans, there are two piers supporting the hollow beams, in which case it will be in
simply supported condition, and hence there will not be any problem. Since, in this section
(40(C)), only one column is provided, the cantilevered beam resulted in a failure, as
explained above. In addition, it is apparent that the cantilever girders were not at all designed
to carry any super-imposed (vehicular) loads that would be there on the flyover when it will
be put into service. Had the cantilevered beam survived somehow this dead load condition, it
would have failed in service, resulting in more serious collapse.
PROOF CHECKING AND CERTIFICATION
In countries like USA and Europe, the designs of important buildings and bridges will be
proof checked by some competent authorities, who will independently check the analysis,
design and detailing of the structures. Such a procedure eliminates the percentage of failures,
and any mistake made by the original designer, is found and corrected at the design stage
itself. Moreover, the contractor who builds the structure is also well qualified and certified,
and hence even if there is a constructability problem, which is missed even by the proof
checker will be identified by him/her and will be rectified before construction. With the
proliferation of engineering colleges in our country coupled with the non-availability of
dedicated and qualified teachers, the quality of education is poor. Moreover, inexperienced
engineers think that if a computer analysis is done and if the computer results are followed
verbatim, the structure will be safe. Unfortunately, it is not a correct assumption, as proved
again in this case. Fresh engineers are not able to draw even simple bending moment or shear
force diagrams or deflected shapes of simple structures [Subramanian, 2011]. A good
engineer is one who is in a position to check the results using a simplified, ‘back on the
envelope’ calculations. It is high time engineers coming out of colleges are certified as it is
done in countries like USA, through rigorous testing. In addition, their certification should be
extended after the initial period by interviews and additional continuing education courses. It
is because, there is an exponential growth of research and development that is going on in
several establishments, all over the world, and hence it is impossible for the practicing
engineer to know these developments and adopt them correctly in their day-to-day practice.
Professional organisations like the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) are debating
to consider masters degree in Engineering as the minimum qualification for doing practice.

CONCLUSIONS
The close-up photographs of the collapsed cantilever girders clearly show some
unconventional connection details of the cantilever girders to the vertical Pier 40(C)
supporting them. The continuity of the cantilever girders which are made of box section, were
provided only through the top flange of the girders and 4 nos. small sized beams placed
below it. Otherwise, there are no connections between the pier and the girders at the vertical
faces by way of seating or web cleats at the face of the pier to support the girders and to resist
vertical shear from the girders. These are certainly a bizarre way of doing the connection
details which make us wonder whether there was really any involvement of a qualified
structural engineer on this job. If a third-party proof-checking had been made on the design
and drawings of this supporting structure, prior to construction, it would have saved the
collapse and 26 lives. In view of this collapse, the whole length of the flyover that has been
built already is to be thoroughly checked for structural safety and stability before it is put into
service. It is also important to introduce compulsory certifications and continuing education,
in order that such failures are minimized in future.
LESSON LEARNT
Bridges and flyovers are critical links in any transportation network. Failure of any crucial
bridge/ flyover not only results in precious loss of lives, injury and huge property loss, but
also affects the economy of the region. Each failure should be analysed and the causes should
be reported widely, so that other engineers who are involved in similar projects will not
repeat the same mistake and can learn from the mistake of others.

REFERENCES
1.http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/allare-at-fault-says-iit-report-on-kolkata-
flyovercollapse/article8975296.ece

2.http://www.theweek.in/news/india/whatcaused-kolkata-flyover-collapse-experts-speak.
Htm

3.http://www.sefindia.org/forum/viewtopic. php?t=17673

4.Subramanian, N., “Are Our Structural Engineers Geared up for the Challenges of the
Profession?”, The Indian Concrete Journal, Vol. 85, No.1, Jan.2011, pp.20-26.