Why they dont immediately remove rubble from a building collapse when one occurs.
In: Engineering
Because death-by-Jenga-collapse is basically manslaughter.
You can’t just pile in and shift hundreds of tons of collapsed rubble without it moving underneath you, potentially killing anyone who’s surviving in a small pocket underneath. People can and do live for days in such scenarios, and it’s better to recover them safely than find out that you caused a collapse which killed someone who would have been relatively uninjured.
Also, what you want in those circumstances is SILENCE. Every now and again you must ALL stop work, to listen for cries of survivors so you know where to focus your efforts, even if all you can do is reassure them or get water to them, it’ll extend their life by days, sometimes weeks.
You mean after the immediate search and rescue / making sure it won’t further collapse operations are over?
Same reason they don’t immediately remove a dead body from a potential murder scene and bury it.
Gotta figure out what happened – insurance companies, lawyers etc. send their experts to investigate the rubble. To figure out why the building collapsed, if there is someone to blame, to figure out who has to take responsibility. If they would just remove it and clean up immediately they would basically destroy potential evidence.
I’m no engineer but I believe two reasons: 1) They have to do a search and rescue. Just going in hog wild and removing debris could lead to further collapse, which plays into 2) They have to do it in a certain way to prevent further collapse and risking the lives of first responders.
Latest Answers