M&R blames material failure for Grayston collapse

AfriSam refuted speculation that one of the company's readymix vehicles had collided with the scaffolding structure for pedestrians built next to Grayston Drive in Sandton before its collapse on to the M1 motorway. Picture: Supplied

AfriSam refuted speculation that one of the company's readymix vehicles had collided with the scaffolding structure for pedestrians built next to Grayston Drive in Sandton before its collapse on to the M1 motorway. Picture: Supplied

Published Jul 8, 2016

Share

Johannesburg - An expert witness for Murray & Roberts claims the Grayston bridge collapse was due to failure of the materials.

For the second day running, the head of the University of Pretoria's Materials Science and Metallurgical Engineering Department, Roelf Mostert, gave evidence in the Department of Labour inquiry into the Grayston bridge collapse last year that killed two people and injured 19 others.

On Friday, Mostert, who is an expert witness for Murray & Roberts, reiterated his earlier testimony that “material failure” contributed to the collapse of the temporary bridge structure across the M1 near the Grayston Drive off-ramp on 14 October 2015.

On Thursday, Mostert had told the inquiry, sitting in Pretoria, that there was no noticeable movement on the structure until it collapsed and that it was his view that “material failure” contributed to the collapse.

However, on Friday, when Willem le Roux from the Johannesburg Development Agency quizzed Mostert about what the Murray & Roberts probe found as the reason for the collapse of the bridge, the professor declined to elaborate.

“I can't comment on the actual cause of the collapse, only that material failure,” Mosert said.

Read also: G rayston Drive inquiry: second sitting rescheduled

Murray & Roberts erected the support structure, including scaffolding and super beams. It has previously told the inquiry that it sub-contracted Formscaff to design the structure.

The sub-contractor has denied doing so.

Mostert told the inquiry that he tested 20 samples of couplers, similar to the ones used on the structure, and was of the opinion they were not strong enough.

William le Grange from Formscaff, however, said that the couplers used on the bridge that collapsed were of good quality. “The couplers are good quality, but not tightened enough,” he insisted.

Le Grange cast doubt on Mostert's evidence because the couplers he tested were not the actual ones used on the bridge. The inquiry will resume on Monday.

AFRICAN NEWS AGENCY

Related Topics: