Possible wood decay studied as factor in bonfire collapse

Possible decay in the center pole may have contributed to the fatal collapse of the 59-foot Texas A&M bonfire stack last fall, a wood pole expert said Friday. <br><br>James Taylor, a former head of the

Monday, February 14th 2000, 12:00 am

By: News On 6

Possible decay in the center pole may have contributed to the fatal collapse of the 59-foot Texas A&M bonfire stack last fall, a wood pole expert said Friday.

James Taylor, a former head of the Rural Electrification Administration timber products group, told WFAA-TV (Channel 8) that photos of the broken center pole reveal that it was lined with numerous small cracks.

Those cracks, known in the utility pole industry as checks, could have made the untreated wood vulnerable to fungal infection and decay. That would have weakened the pole, said Mr. Taylor, who also has researched wood poles for Bell telephone and several federal agencies.

"It's my feeling that this wood outside the center and inside the shell has infection in it and the strength has been lost," the Fairfax, Va., resident told Channel 8. "To a layman there's no sign of decay. Somebody who is not in the business is going to look at the pole and say that looks like a good pole."

Channel 8, which is owned by Dallas-based Belo Corp., parent company of The Dallas Morning News, asked Mr. Taylor to examine more than 200 photographs taken of the bonfire accident by police and Texas A&M officials.

The Nov. 18 collapse killed 12 people and injured 27 in the worst accident in the 90-year-history of the bonfire, an annual event held before the Texas-Texas A&M football game.

In an interview Friday with The News, Mr. Taylor cautioned that a definitive conclusion was impossible without tests of the wood.

He also said he did not think a weakened center pole caused the accident.

"The root cause, I think, is that this was a very loose structure and it started to shift," Mr. Taylor said. "Instead of the pole being able to hold 100 percent of its strength capability, it was only able to hold 50 percent. So that meant there was less of a resistant force to stop the movement of this mass of wood, and it broke the pole.

"If the pole had been in A-1 shape," he added, "it might have slowed it down. It might have held it. I can't say."

A special commission investigating the cause of the collapse is due to report its findings by March 31, though investigators have cautioned that their work may push that deadline back. A&M is paying for the investigation, which has a budget of $1 million.

An A&M spokesman referred questions about the center pole to the special commission.

Leo E. Linbeck Jr., a Houston construction company executive picked by A&M President Ray Bowen to lead the commission, was traveling and could not be reached for comment Friday.

Officials with Lufkin Creosoting Co., which donated the utility poles for the bonfire, also were unavailable for comment Friday.

For each annual bonfire, A&M students cut the wood and do almost all of the construction of the massive, 5,000-log bonfire tower, layered into multiple tiers like a giant Lincoln-log wedding cake.

Workers wire together the logs and anchor them upright to a center pole, made of two untreated pine utility poles spliced together with metal plates.

The center pole - more than 100 feet tall at the start - is sunk 10 feet into the ground and is supposed to be cut at the top so that the bonfire rises no higher than a university-imposed limit of 55 feet. A&M officials' measurements of the pole after the 1999 accident, however, indicate that the unfinished stack had already reached 59 feet.

After the collapse, investigators found that the center pole had snapped in three places.

The strength of the center pole ought to be a key area of investigation, said A&M officials, faculty and outside experts during a meeting five days after the accident.

According to a transcript of the meeting, Ray James, an associate research engineer at A&M, noted that the center pole did not break when the stack leaned dangerously in 1994. That bonfire, which resembled a person doubled over with a stomachache, had to be knocked down and rebuilt, but no one was injured or killed.

"If like in 1994, the center pole had not fractured, it might have delayed the collapse," Dr. James said, according to the transcript. "It might have prevented it completely. So I don't think we need to completely rule out a careful investigation of the properties of that particular pole. It could be a significant contributor to the loss of life."

Peter Keating, an A&M associate professor of civil engineering who helped with rescue efforts, agreed.

"I think had it been stronger, things would have been different," Dr. Keating said of the center pole.

But colleague Gary Fry, an associate professor of civil engineering, pointed out that it would be hard to point to the center pole as the culprit because it is impossible to know exactly what kind of stress it was under.

"We'll know a minimum, because you can find out how strong the wood is and find out what it would take to break it," Dr. Fry said, according to the transcript. "But you wouldn't know the load distribution of the stress along the length of the pole."

At the same meeting, David Trejo, an assistant professor of civil engineering, noted that the bonfire was designed not to put any side-to-side stress on the center pole.

"It was never intended to be the stabilizing element in that stack," Dr. Trejo said, according to the transcript.

Mr. Taylor told Channel 8 that the way the center pole snapped without splintering suggests the presence of decay in the wood.

The untreated utility poles, which remain outside for weeks as the bonfire is being built, could have dried unevenly and split open into cracks, providing a route for fungus and decay to set in, Mr. Taylor said.

"You've got untreated wood in the center. That's the food for the fungus to grow on," Mr. Taylor told Channel 8. "And when you get a nice warm summer day, that's ideal and the fungus, shall we say, takes root and grows."