What Really Brought Down the Cage System? A Case Study in Objective Forensic Engineering
When 300,000 hens perished in a sudden structural collapse at a large-scale egg production facility, the initial explanation was almost too strange to believe: a rogue chicken had allegedly triggered a grain spill, setting off a chain reaction that led to catastrophic failure.
But as any seasoned litigator or claims professional knows, first theories don’t always hold up under scrutiny.
That’s where Engineering Design & Testing Corp. (EDT) came in.
The Collapse
The failure occurred in one of several massive poultry houses at the facility, each containing 12 layers of cages, automated feeding systems, and thousands of birds. Just weeks after the top six layers of cages in one section were loaded with hens, the entire structure gave way.
Early speculation focused on a proximity switch—allegedly tripped by a single bird—that may have caused a large grain spill from the feed system. With thousands of pounds of additional grain pushing against the cages, some posited that the resulting weight led to progressive structural failure.
That theory didn’t sit right with EDT’s engineers.
The Investigation
EDT was retained to determine the true cause of the collapse. The scope of the investigation included:
- Load testing surviving cage components
- Analysis of proximity switch behavior and feed cart logic
- Structural evaluation of cage support legs
- Assessment of concurrent activities—like a university-led bird redistribution program—that may have influenced load distribution
The engineers followed the evidence. What they found told a different story.
The Real Cause
EDT’s testing revealed that several cage support legs showed signs of pre-existing deformation. Some had been improperly installed. Load tests confirmed that these components lacked the structural margin needed to support the expected weight of the birds—let alone any additional load from spilled grain.
In fact, EDT concluded that the feed system spill occurred after the structural failure began—not before.
The so-called Rogue Chicken Theory didn’t hold up.
Key Lessons for Legal and Insurance Clients
This wasn’t a simple equipment failure. It was a structural design and installation issue—masked by a convenient but inaccurate narrative.
Forensic engineering played a critical role in uncovering the truth. Here’s what this case underscores:
- Rule 702 matters. This was an unwitnessed event. EDT’s findings were rigorously evaluated under the standards for expert testimony—reliability, relevance, and scientific grounding.
- Causation can’t be assumed. Even well-intentioned theories backed by internal records or witness accounts can collapse under data-driven testing.
- Early involvement is strategic. In complex failures involving potential design defects, multiple liable parties, or contested narratives, getting an engineering expert on-site early makes a difference.
Why EDT
EDT brings courtroom-tested engineering expertise and a commitment to objectivity—no matter which side of the table you're on. Our engineers are equipped to handle high-stakes litigation, complex claims, and multidiscipline investigations that demand more than speculation.
The Rogue Chicken case might sound unusual—but for our team, it was a textbook example of what happens when theory meets evidence.
About the Author
Kyle T. Minden, P.E. is a consulting engineer with our Kansas City, MO office. Mr. Minden provides consulting services in the areas of design and performance of machinery and machine components, pressure vessels, fracture analysis, metallurgy, fire protection sprinkler systems, materials, and component testing, and infrared thermography. You may contact Kyle for your forensic engineering needs at kminden@edtkc.com or (913) 449-4953.