COLLAPSE OF TEXAS TOWER NO. 4 183 



Mr. Kendall. Mr. Crockett, go back for a moment to the installa- 

 tion of the X-bracing last August, I believe it was. Do you now 

 have any opinion as to the effect or result of the installation of that 

 X-bracing ? 



Mr. Crockett. It is kind of like Monday morning quarterbacking. 



My opinion has not changed since the outset. I felt that the re- 

 pairs should have been made from the bottom up, rather than put- 

 ting the X-bracing in. I feel that the development of that X-bracing 

 put a great big hinge in the caissons above the minus-75- to the minus- 

 25-f oot levels. But this is only an assumption. 



Mr. Kendall. Will you elaborate a little on what you mean by a 

 great big hinge ? 



Mr. Crockett. We know there was total loosening of at least an 

 inch in the minus-25-foot panel by actual observation. After the 

 X-ray bracing had been installed and further stabilized the upper 

 panels or sections and reduced slightly the motion, encountering sea 

 conditions that the original design had purposely deleted, the X-ray 

 bracing because of it, had to put an action throughout this minus- 

 25-f oot panel on that tower. 



Mr. Kendall. Do you think the installation of the X-bracing had 

 anything to do with the ultimate collapse of the tower ? 



I mean by that, do you think that it was calculated to prevent the 

 collapse or to cause the collapse ? 



Islr. Crockett. I have no doubt that it was calculated to prevent 

 the collapse. 



Mr. Kendall. I do not mean what the design engineers calculated, 

 but do you have an opinion as to what the actual effect would be? 



Mr. Crockett. Not as such, no. 



Mr. Kendall. I believe that is all, Mr. Chairman, 



Senator Stennis. Now, on that very point that counsel makes, Mr. 

 Crockett, one of the gentlemen who were here the other day was ques- 

 tioned about that. As I understood his testimony, he said that the X- 

 bracing — that is, the bracing that is represented in red on that model — 

 which was not originally planned to be there and which is above the 

 water, that witness said, as I understand, that due to the obstruction 

 of the waves that were hitting it, it put more force on the tower. Is 

 that not correct ? 



Mr. Crockett. I am inclined to agree with that, sir. 



Senator Stennis. And therefore created more stress and more 

 strain on the tower. 



And on the other hand, the X-brace itself taken alone did add cer- 

 tain strength to the tower. 



Now, did one offset the other, or is it more probable, in your opinion 

 as a professional man, that the X-bracing made it more likely that 

 the tower would fall under those conditions ? 



Mr. Crockett. I do not feel it is, as such. I feel the continual 

 fracturing of the lower brackets and bracing was the ultimate cause, 

 and very severe sea conditions. 



Senator Stennis. So if I miderstand you correctly, then, the X- 

 bracing shown in red did not contribute much one way or the other ? 

 The added stress or added strength resulting from the X-bracing 

 was not the determining factor, but the original defective condition 



