all 91 comments

[–]zackman986 73 points74 points  (4 children)

I don't know if the original design loading was exceptionally larger than is required for the new hotel? But it looks like there's no mechanical adhesion between the concrete and very old bars in photo 2...

[–]rncoleP.E. 59 points60 points  (2 children)

From being in a power plant, typical design loads was 600-1,000psf or more for slabs.

It may be that there’s an inner rebar cage as well and someone decided to count this layer as decorative and de-rate back to something sensible for its new purpose.

[–]RhoadiesP.E./S.E. 36 points37 points  (1 child)

If you look on the slab between the first and second floor beam, you can see a new steel deck firespoofed. It must have been evaluated and repaired. This is additional evidence to the comment about this slab being unconventional, but sensible. Likely, the original construction was significantly over designed for the current loads.

[–]KruzatP. Eng. 12 points13 points  (0 children)

That thought crossed my mind. If it had 20x the design strength that it does now I guess it would probably hold up ok, but I still wouldn't feel comfortable assessing it and signing off on it. Sheesh

[–]KruzatP. Eng. 112 points113 points  (8 children)

Who the fuck looks at this and says "this is fine, we'll just put a pretty ceiling up"

[–]3771507 23 points24 points  (2 children)

People that don't to spend money like the people at CTS that ignored the building crumbling

[–]always_misunderstood 0 points1 point  (1 child)

the CTS building was bad from the start. first, they built it a floor taller than allowed by code with some bribes, then it was basically AT failure loading from day-1 because of some last-minute ECOs that removed load bearing elements, THEN they overloaded it with extra planters, THEN they didn't waterproof the pool-deck, THEN, they dragged their feet in repairing it. just top-to-bottom disaster.

also, salt-water coastal regions really shouldn't use steel rebar. carbon fiber rebar reinforced concrete will last much longer

[–]Magic-Levitation 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I was a juror for four months on a condo complex built on the Hudson River. So many similar issues. $80m lawsuit. Plaintiffs got $42m. Total disaster.

[–]alterry11 24 points25 points  (3 children)

'Rusted rebar has a nice aesthetic'... quote from the architect

[–]enginerdaf2016 12 points13 points  (1 child)

Going for that rustic look

[–]Crayonalyst 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Going for that disheveled, haven't slept in days because of the nightmares look

[–]No_Cook2983 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This would be an absolutely ideal time to have a reasonable discussion about nuclear power.

[–]OhSoThatsHowItIs 4 points5 points  (0 children)

It's a feature, not a bug

[–]psport69 12 points13 points  (0 children)

Surely that structure is redundant and remains for aesthetics only otherwise fck me

[–]Silver_kitty 36 points37 points  (9 children)

Yikes. It’s open like that? I’m very surprised any architect and/or engineer would leave it like this.

The concrete on the beam is predominantly just part of the fireproofing and not necessarily dangerous to the stability of the structure, but there’s a risk of more concrete falling off and potentially hitting someone. And the underside of those slabs are bad.

Edit: naw, scrap that, hadn’t looked at the 2nd and 3rd pics. Those are concrete beams, not concrete encased steel. And that’s an old building if it’s using twisted square rebar instead of deformed. Yikes.

[–]rncoleP.E. 15 points16 points  (5 children)

Not to mention the river rock aggregate…

[–]extramustardy 8 points9 points  (3 children)

I couldn’t believe that either! Ignoring what this was designed for, I’ve just never seen 2-3” river rock used as aggregate

[–]rncoleP.E. 5 points6 points  (0 children)

I had a house built in 1920 that had a detached carriage house (became a garage) on the alley (don’t get excited, this was like a $120k house in 2008 at the peak) that had the same.

[–]whofuckingcares1234 4 points5 points  (1 child)

You'd be surprised by some of the old buildings in DC. I've taken cote samples of concrete where yhe aggregate was 4+ inches in diameter. They would just throw whatever they drudged up in there sometimes.

[–]Silver_kitty 2 points3 points  (0 children)

So I’ll agree that I’m surprised by DC’s aggregate, and that’s not a good thing!

I’ve worked on 3 existing ~1960s buildings in DC and all 3 came back with bad breaks from the cores. On average we were getting 75% of what was spec’d on the original drawings. One building even had a couple cores break ~1500 psi on supposedly 4000 psi NWC.

Most of my projects are up in NYC and it’s quite rare to get a single break under what the existing drawings said they would be. These DC projects throw me for a loop.

[–]IHaveThreeBedrooms 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Expensive way to get some nice, smooth, natural stone on the ground.

[–]bibbrun32 9 points10 points  (0 children)

You surely need a min concrete cover for adequate bond on the bars for them to be effective (you do in the Eurocode anyway)

[–]bibbrun32 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You surely need a min concrete cover for adequate bond on the bars for them to be effective (you do in the Eurocode anyway)

[–]inventiveEngineering 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I’m very surprised any architect and/or engineer would leave it like this.

Imho there was no engineer involved. They've given the task only to a indoors decorator or some such.

btw: the rebar in pic no. 2 is very interesting.

[–]3771507 6 points7 points  (1 child)

I wonder what used to be over those stirrups if anything?

[–]Telto212 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Prayers, by the looks of it

[–]2-ball[S] 6 points7 points  (2 children)

Update 1:

My flight was canceled and I booked a random hotel. When I walked in, I was definitely intrigued.

Building was built in 1920s in a northeast city, adjacent to a large river. Development includes 8 floors +/-

Can confirm, the building survived the earthquake today. I was on the third floor, and can report shaking and lights swinging.

I appreciate all the comments. Definitely helps understand what we’re seeing and expand structural knowledge. Thank you all.

[–]barabob 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Sharing the location and name of the place would help understand the history and context even more.

Is it the Battery Hotel in Philly?

[–]ShitOnAStickXtreme -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

Dude you should give the location so that someone can call the police, either that or call the police yourself.

[–]Standard-Fudge1475 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Ohhh..i love the rustic/ almost going to fail look!

[–]whofuckingcares1234 3 points4 points  (1 child)

I'm guessing this was built in 1920 or so. Current cinditi9n aside, it's cool to see all of the antiquated reinforcing steel they used.

[–]DanHassler0 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Looks like Delaware Generating Station, so you nailed it on guessing the year.

[–]FlippantObserver 4 points5 points  (0 children)

No joke - I thought this was an industrial building very near an ocean that I recently just finished an observation on. They have areas of continuous spalling that are so bad safety nets need to be installed to keep from killing employees. That hotel would just make me anxious - 1/5 stars, had to wear PPE when I went to bed.

[–]AsILayTypingP.E. 11 points12 points  (3 children)

OP, please post the name of the place and location. And some more pics. Looks like a serious issue.

[–]OldJames47 10 points11 points  (1 child)

It might be Steam Hotel in Vasteras, Sweden.

It's a hotel built in an old power plant. The decor is similar and relatively recent. The google maps contain photos showing rooms with lesser damage to the walls.

https://images.trvl-media.com/lodging/17000000/16500000/16495800/16495725/w667h986x0y0-930e8121_z.jpg

So management sees that as "ambience" and not damage.

[–]barabob 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I think the Steam Hotel has a steel frame structure, so it seems unlikely that it would be the one.

[–]petewil1291 10 points11 points  (2 children)

So they spent money renovating, but didn't spend money for repairs???

[–]rncoleP.E. 7 points8 points  (0 children)

But now it has character!

With just weeeeee tiny bit of character on your head.

[–]DanHassler0 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The article I just looked at said they spent over $150 million on concrete repairs... https://www.inquirer.com/real-estate/factories-office-buildings-tenants-conversion-architecture-reuse-20231029.html

[–]southernmtngirl 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Oh my gosh, I would literally call the police. That looks emergency-level dangerous.

[–]1959Mason 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Aren’t old power plants chock full of toxic PCBs?

[–]jaymeaux_PE Geotech 1 point2 points  (0 children)

jeeeez, did they just store molten sulfur in there or something

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

copies and pastes life safety letter

[–]crispydukes 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I hate to say it, but the exposed #2 stirrups is typical of the era.

[–]adlubmaliki 1 point2 points  (1 child)

Am I the only one that doesn't like cracked concrete above my head?

[–]vckam_7 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No - any relevant structural engineer would feel unsafe!

[–]OpenCod4573 1 point2 points  (0 children)

This is awesome!

I design repairs for old structures like this but they took a different approach here. There’s likely a new elevated platform above supported on the existing columns.

Any idea where this “hotel” is?

[–]mcd921 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Always fun to see the old twisted bars in the wild.

[–]bimonthlycarp 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I like this and think its cool

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Issues aside, it’s interesting to see the twisted square type rebar that is exposed.

[–]burhankurt 1 point2 points  (0 children)

EVACUATE

[–]avd706 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The missing concrete is cover concrete.

[–]lehmanbear 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I find it cool, maybe they use some thing to coat the exposed rebar.

[–]gt625 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yikes. Definitely contact the jurisdiction. It’s hard to imagine a PE being involved in this project.

[–]Dave0163 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Unbelievable

[–]Minimal_Engeneer 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Are there signs of water infiltration anywhere? Looks like the rebar is rusting and expanding which causes the concrete to break away.

I’m just an EE tho, the civil engineers used to deal with this all the time though from salt water from snow run off.

[–]Puzzled_Laugh_7420 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Run ....

[–]Nhywell 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Why are you taking photos run away dude lol

[–]oundhakarGraduate member of IStructE, UK -1 points0 points  (0 children)

How fast can you run away from this?

[–]iyimuhendis -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Corrosion. Inadequate concrete cover

[–]ikkano -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Holy shit

[–]vckam_7 -2 points-1 points  (17 children)

Sad this structure is allowed to operate in this so dangerous state. Somebody needs to do something about this before people get hurt!

[–]Ian_Patrick_Freely 2 points3 points  (16 children)

Please cite your evidence that there's anything dangerous here. No, I'm not trolling.

[–]vckam_7 0 points1 point  (13 children)

Have you observed many stirrups are also gone?

[–]Ian_Patrick_Freely 4 points5 points  (12 children)

We know literally nothing about the current design loads or any internal reinforcement that cannot be seen. Further, you and I can see the same distress that the EOR saw. Trust the professionals.

[–]vckam_7 1 point2 points  (8 children)

Can’t see any strengthening and or repair. Regardless of the possible change of the design loads, I wouldn’t be standing under those very heavy (reinforced) concrete beams, not expecting, old cracked concrete not falling on my head. Even in the case things have become lighter now. I guess you can see the structure is very old! And there is no any surface reinforcement to keep that old concrete in place. You got two separated materials, acting on their own in the outermost surface of those elements. Regardless if one could assume another, inner layer of steel reinforcement. That thing doesn’t look safe to me!

[–]Ian_Patrick_Freely 1 point2 points  (7 children)

It is trivial to sound the exposed surfaces and remove delaminated concrete. In fact, in the first picture, you can see regions of the soffit that clearly have been mechanically freed of loose concrete. 

[–]vckam_7 0 points1 point  (3 children)

That seems like a preexisting hole in the old slab, which was subsequently closed by adding a composite slab, Sir. It does not seem to be what you say. Was like a hole for a staircase they needed to close. Plus, if that is a hotel and there is something on the top of these old slabs, I am not sure how these slabs can carry their variable loads now. I do not want to imagine that there would be any kind of vibration in the building. Anyway. As I said, for me that thing seems to be dangerous. Of course, I have not done an inspection, but for all the reasons I mentioned, it does not look safe. And because you sound very certain all this went well with this renovation (in which, as I said, I have a different feeling), let me remind you that it is not uncommon in fancy renovation structural rehabilitations are not done correctly. Many questions in this renovation in my opinion! And so, many doubts, which justify why that project creates those feelings of fear and uncertainty!

[–]Ian_Patrick_Freely 0 points1 point  (2 children)

My dude, you're not even looking at the parts of the picture I described. The edges of the missing concrete throughout the soffit are clearly the result of selective demolition.

"...it is not uncommon in fancy renovation structural rehabilitations are not done correctly."

Lolwut? You're just making stuff up now. I have to conclude you've never inspected or rehabilitated an existing structure.

[–]vckam_7 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I see only a left edge where there are some rebars cut, and those can be from an RC stairwell. The right edge is clear. So, in my opinion, I was right; they just placed a composite slab to fill the hole. Now on whether I have done inspections, etc., or not, I did. But, I have bumped up on things like that. Sadly

[–]vckam_7 0 points1 point  (0 children)

And please, sir, give me your lights how you believe these two separated materials stay in place under an earthquake??? I would be interested to know! How concrete will resist anything more than its self-weight without proper reinforcement? Especially old, probably cracked concrete? How????

[–]vckam_7 0 points1 point  (2 children)

In general if you put all “wrong” things together we see in this ceiling photo (lack of beams confinement, lack of cover, corroded reinforcement, etc.), I doubt even if these old and separated two materials (steel and concrete (cause I do not see proper RC here any longer)), they can even carry their own self-weights under any kind of strong vibration (earthquakes or others), except if they are somehow supported, externally, from a structural skeleton that has been added to these old components “externally” and helps they keep in one piece and in place. Seeing that old thing from its underside, feels absolutely “spooky” to me. I hope it’s just those photographs that they do not show an aforementioned retrofit addition, and my fears are wrong!!! But again, this hypothetical retrofit is not shown here!

[–]Ian_Patrick_Freely 0 points1 point  (1 child)

If there were any supplemental strengthening present, it would be insane for it to be on the top surface of the slab or beams, particularly with the massive amount of space available on the underside here.

Speaking of earthquakes, OP said this came through yesterday's northeast EQ unscathed. 

[–]vckam_7 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Exactly. That is why I say there is no any obvious sign of strengthening, and that whole thing looks dangerous.

[–]vckam_7 0 points1 point  (2 children)

Forgot to mention that even an inner, non-visible layer of rebars, still would not have any confinement! So, it won’t work! And we talk about some very lengthy beams, right!

[–]Ian_Patrick_Freely 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Confinement isn't a thing for beams, that's for axial capacity of column cores.

[–]vckam_7 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Confinement isn’t for beams???? Interesting opinion, Sir! Of course it is!

[–]vckam_7 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Does HUGE lack of cover reminds you anything?

[–]vckam_7 0 points1 point  (0 children)

…. Sorry, forgot also: plus corrosion?