1

Reinforced Autoclaved
Aerated Concrete
(RAAC) Panels
Investigation and
Assessment

February 2022
The Institution of Structural Engineers RAAC Inspection and Assessment February 2022
2

1 Introduction

In 2019 SCOSS1 published the safety alert “Failure of This report should be considered as an interim update and
Reinforced Autoclaved Aerated Concrete (RAAC) Planks” more detailed guidance will be issued in the future. It is not
following the sudden collapse of a school flat roof in 2018. intended to be definitive guidance and focuses principally on
The collapse occurred at the weekend and fortunately there the performance of RAAC roof panels, although some of the
were no casualties. findings may be relevant to floor and wall panels. Skill and
expertise will be required to assess the structural integrity
Following the collapse, the IStructE formed a specialist
and condition of RAAC panels and to advise clients on
Study Group of Members with experience of RAAC panels,
management and remediation measures.
either through advising clients on identification, management
and remediation or through academic research on the
material. Participation in the expert group was by invitation.
This report has been prepared by members of the IStructE
RAAC Study Group to improve awareness of RAAC
amongst the wider structural engineering community
and share recent findings to assist those who are asked
by clients to advise on the management and mitigation
of RAAC panels. It is recommended that the reader also
familiarises themself with the 2019 SCOSS alert and the
other key references at the end of this document.

The Institution of Structural Engineers RAAC Inspection and Assessment February 2022
 3

2 Background

Reinforced Autoclaved Aerated Concrete (RAAC) is a In May 2019 the Standing Committee on Structural Safety1
lightweight cementitious material. It is aerated and has no (SCOSS) issued an alert after being notified of the failure of
coarse aggregate, meaning the material properties and roof panels in a school.
structural behaviour differ significantly from ‘traditional’
Members of the IStructE Study Group have recently
reinforced concrete. RAAC has been used in building
specified and implemented survey and monitoring
structures in the UK and Europe since the late1950’s, most
programmes to assess the condition of RAAC panels and
commonly as precast roof panels in flat roof construction
have designed management, remediation, or replacement
but occasionally in pitched roofs, floors and wall panels in
solutions where RAAC panels were considered to pose
both loadbearing and non-loadbearing arrangements.
an unacceptable structural safety risk to occupants. There
In the 1990s structural deficiencies became apparent; and is also representation from members of Loughborough
these are discussed in papers by the Building Research University who are leading on a major research programme
Establishment (BRE) (reference IP10_96 and IP7_02). The into RAAC. The research is in early stages and periodic
panels in question were supplied, designed and installed updates will be published as the research progresses.
pre-1990. Since that time, new European Standards have
been developed and published to prevent under-design
and to ensure long term durability. BS EN 12602 was first
published in 2008 and would cover panels supplied in the
UK since that time.

The Institution of Structural Engineers RAAC Inspection and Assessment February 2022
4

3 Characteristics of RAAC

RAAC panels are distinguishable from traditional reinforced • Permeability

concrete members in a number of ways. The Autoclaved The aerated material is highly permeable. As a result, cover
Aerated Concrete (AAC) material is aerated, hence having to the reinforcement does not protect against environmental
the benefit of being considerably lighter than traditional conditions as with traditional concrete and the cover
concrete. Typically, AAC has a density of 600-800kg/ zone can be expected to be highly carbonated. Prior to
m³ compared to 2400kg/m³ for traditional concrete. This manufacture the reinforcement was covered with a coating
aerated nature and reduced density, influences other key to protect it against corrosion.
material properties including:
• Elasticity and Creep
• Compressive strength
The aerated nature and lack of coarse aggregate means
Typically, in the range of 2-5N/mm² and therefore much that the elasticity and creep characteristics of AAC are
lower than traditional concrete. Flexural, shear, and substantially inferior to traditional concrete which has an
tensile strengths are also similarly reduced compared with impact on long term deflections of the RAAC panels.
traditional concrete.
• Reinforcement anchorage
Because of the aerated nature of the material the AAC will
not form adequate bond strength with the reinforcement. The
reinforcement is also smooth and not ribbed. Tensile forces
are therefore predominantly transferred to the reinforcement
via transverse reinforcement bars being welded to the
longitudinal reinforcement with bars over the bearings of the
panels for end anchorage. The position and effectiveness of
the transverse reinforcement over the bearing is critical to the
shear capacity of the panels at their bearings.

Photo of RAAC samples showing variability of the material Photo showing bubble formation on reinforcement

The Institution of Structural Engineers RAAC Inspection and Assessment February 2022
 5

4 Summary of Recent
Investigations and Research

In recent years contributors to this paper have been Research work being led by Loughborough University is at
commissioned by several clients, mostly from the public an early stage. The following research has been conducted
sector, to investigate the performance of RAAC panels in to date:
buildings that are currently in use. The investigations
• Literature review.
have included:
• Preliminary finite element modelling of the structural
• Visual inspections – crack and defect recording. performance of roof panels.
• Surveys – vertical deflection measurement and • Investigation into the corrosion performance of wall panels.
condition assessment.
• Preliminary lab-based material characterisation.
• Non-destructive testing – cover meter and radar
• Preliminary site based structural testing.
techniques to determine reinforcement location on
reinforcement positioning. This paper is mainly focused on the use of RAAC in
• Intrusive surveys – verification of reinforcement roof panels which has been the focus of most of the
position at panel bearings, exposure of reinforcement investigations undertaken recently. Future works will also
to identify corrosion, electrochemical testing for include wall panels. Floor panels will also be considered as
reinforcement corrosion. well as providing further definitive guidance on the issues
affecting roof panels. This guidance is expected to become
It is noted that that some testing methods used on available during 2022.
traditional concrete to check for reinforcement condition
(carbonation testing and chloride ion concentration) are not
appropriate to RAAC construction. Resistivity and half-cell
testing require careful interpretation and the use of different
assessment criteria. Further research is underway on
testing methods.

The Institution of Structural Engineers RAAC Inspection and Assessment February 2022
6

5 Summary of Latest Experience

The collapse reported in the SCOSS Alert in 2019 showed some visual evidence of a shear failure close to the support.
This failure mode was different to those discussed by the earlier BRE papers and the failure suggests that there may be a
risk of sudden structural failure of RAAC panels.
The findings from the BRE papers and the latest experience of the Study Group suggest that the key defects in RAAC
panels include:

Performance Defects Manufacturing Defects Construction Defects

• High in-service deflections • Misplaced transverse reinforcement • C utting of panels post manufacture
• Cracking and spalling in the • Insufficient anchorage of • Short bearing lengths
soffit of panels longitudinal steel • Missing reinforcement e.g. linking
• Corrosion of reinforcement • Voidage around reinforcement dowel anchorage
• Deterioration in condition • Incorrect cover to tension steel • Structurally damaging
• Panel distress caused builders work
by overloading
• Panels acting independently with
limited load sharing

In general, it has been observed that there is a high degree cut prior to installation to suit the position of the panel.
of variability between panels even where they were part of Penetrations through the panels at the time of installation
the same contract and installed immediately adjacent to one were often provided with straps off adjacent panels or
another. When determining the condition of RAAC panels independent structural trimmers but the panels were often
within a building, caution should be taken with assessing the cut to the reduced length.
results from discrete sampling and allowance made for the
• Short bearing lengths
potential variability of the properties being considered.
The design guides and Codes of Practice permitted bearing
While many of the above defects have previously been lengths as short as 45 mm on steel supports. Short bearing
discussed in published guidance, recent work by the lengths increase the vulnerability to misplaced reinforcement
specialist Study Group has identified some additional at the time of manufacture or incorrect positioning of the
considerations for some of the above: components during installation.
• Misplaced reinforcement / Insufficient anchorage • Structurally damaging builder’s work
of longitudinal steel
Many instances have been found where building
The reliance of the tension reinforcement on welded refurbishment has resulted in builders-work holes within
transverse bars means that the workmanship by the panels. No instances of structural failure have been seen
manufacturer of the reinforcement cages and their placing by the contributors, but the strength had been reduced
in the moulds is critical to the structural performance of the by alarming amounts and raised concerns regarding the
installed panel. The placing of the cages has been found integrity of damaged panels.
to be variable across a batch of panels. There is also some
evidence of the longitudinal reinforcement terminating short • Corrosion of reinforcement
of the bearing which gives rise to concern regarding the Due to the aerated nature of RAAC and low tensile and
shear capacity of panels. The numbers of transverse bars compressive strengths, corrosion of reinforcement does not
has also been found to vary from panel to panel within the always lead to spalling of the concrete cover so corrosion
same building. can often be concealed. Corrosion at the end anchorage
is of particular concern. Corrosion could reduce secondary
• Cutting of components post manufacture
bond stresses, damage the welds to the transverse
The cutting of components could give rise to locations reinforcement and reduce load capacity of components.
where transverse anchorage bars are not in place over the The moisture needed for corrosion to occur could either be
bearing length of the panel. Cut components can occur due to leakage from failed waterproofing, services failure or
when panels were made to a length and subsequently interstitial condensation.

The Institution of Structural Engineers RAAC Inspection and Assessment February 2022
 7

Because of the aerated nature of the AAC material there are • Continuity reinforcement
instances where intrusive surveys have shown corrosion of Instances have been seen where continuity bars have been
reinforcement has been advanced without any indication placed possibly to provide a degree of continuity between
on the soffit of the panels. This differs significantly from the butt ended panels. However, this reinforcement is missing
performance of traditional concrete where expansion of the in some buildings or locations and the effects on panel
products of corrosion typically leads to surface cracking strengths is uncertain.
or spalling. Blown RAAC cover through reinforcement
corrosion has also been observed in many occasions.
• Cracking in the soffit of panels
Due to the high deflection of panels, transverse cracking
is common and longitudinal cracking has also been seen
in many panels. Where transverse cracks are close to the
bearing, say within the end 300mm, this could indicate high
shear stresses or bond failure and should be taken as a
potential warning sign of a failing panel.
• Overloading
Due to the high deflections, there can be occurrences of
ponding water or the build-up of vegetation resulting in
loading higher than design allowances. The addition of roof
level services can also add loading for which the building
was not originally designed.
High loading associated with regular maintenance of roof top
plant and repeated loading under roof walkway routes can
accelerate deterioration and the development of cracking.
• High in-service deflections
While the impact of high deflections on flexural cracking
was discussed at length in the BRE papers, a further Damage caused by drilled holes for services penetrations.
consideration is the impact of rotation of the panel on
bearing stresses. The high deflections may give rise to a
possibility of concentrated loads occurring at the support of
panels which may increase the risks of bearing and shear
failure – this effect will be subject to detailed consideration in
the research programme.
• Voidage around reinforcement
The method of manufacture meant that bubbles could have
coalesced and formed larger voids around reinforcement.
Some evidence has been found but the frequency of such
effects is uncertain.
• Water Ingress
Water ingress raises the risk of reinforcement corrosion
which could affect structural integrity even after the cause
of the water leak has been corrected. There is also some
concern regarding the deterioration of AAC material strength
where moisture content is raised and again the affect may
persist when moisture contents return to normal.
Damage caused by roof vent installation

The Institution of Structural Engineers RAAC Inspection and Assessment February 2022
8

6 Guidance on assessment
methodology

In carrying out their work, the Study Group has learnt a 6.3 Condition Assessment
number of lessons regarding how RAAC can be effectively
assessed and remediated. It should be noted that some common testing methods
used on traditional concrete are either not deemed suitable
6.1 Survey & Testing Techniques for RAAC panels or should be considered in detail before
being recommended. These include:
In order to objectively assess the condition of RAAC panels
a detailed survey is required to be undertaken. It is likely • Carbonation testing – the aerated nature and low
that repeat surveys will be required to monitor ongoing permeability of the AAC material means carbonation can
deterioration and so a repeatable approach is necessary be expected in the cover zones. Corrosion protection for
for both the survey and the data recording system used the reinforcement is provided by coating the bars rather
to enable interrogation of the data and year by year than cover.
comparison. Photographic records of examples of cracking • Core sampling – the softness of RAAC means that it can
types will enable a repeatable survey by multiple operatives. generally be identified by surface testing without the need
The surveys should inspect each panel and include: of removal of a core. The fragility of RAAC panels has
• Measurements of deflections meant that in some instances the drilling process has
caused damage to a panel.
• Records of crack patterns and or delamination
• Covermeters & Penetrating Radar. Neither technique
• Recording of any evidence of water leaks
is effective when trying to detect through foil backed
•  ammer tap testing for any signs of debonding
H insulation. Covermeter surveys can identify the main
concrete, particularly near the supports. reinforcement configuration but is not effective at locating
• Record of any signs of panels cut the transverse reinforcement at the end bearings. Radar
after manufacture. techniques have been used in some surveys, where foil
• Record of any alterations or penetrations through the backed insulation is not present although the data needs
panels after construction. extensive off site processing. Experience has shown
that radar can generally position this critical transverse
The work has shown that re-surveying is necessary to reinforcement to a tolerance of about 15mm. Due to the
determine if deterioration is progressive and re-surveying on tolerance, in many instances with small end bearing, radar
an annual basis may be sensible. scanning does not prove that reinforcement bars are
Due to the age of the buildings the presence of asbestos over the supports. The results also need some intrusive
in any surface coatings should be considered prior to surveys to calibrate the findings and roof coverings may
commencing investigations. need to be removed to facilitate the survey. Experience
is that although useful in some circumstances the costs
6.2 End Bearing Assessment associated with the use of radar needs to be assessed
against installing enhanced bearing strengthening or
The condition of the end bearing needs to be carefully
failsafe measures in the absence of sufficient confidence
assessed. The design codes at the time permitted end
in the location of the transverse reinforcement.
bearing lengths as short as 45 mm and the design of RAAC
panels relies on the position of transverse reinforcement
welded to the longitudinal reinforcement being over the
BLUE DENOTES TOP BARS

bearing to provide end anchorage to the reinforcement.

The low strength of the AAC material, hence very low bond
stresses, means that assumptions for end anchorage
and pull-out resistance for traditional concrete cannot be
assumed for RAAC components.
Experience gained by the contributors has identified that
manufacturing and construction tolerances can mean that RED DENOTES BTM. BARS

the end transverse reinforcement can be misplaced and

cases of the bar being in front of the bearing face have been
found. In these cases, the resistance to sudden shear failure
is uncertain and there is the possibility that this mechanism
led to the failure reported in the SCOSS1 Alert.
Surveys to assess the end bearings are critical to assess the
CORRECTLY POSITIONED REINFORCEMENT
structural integrity of panels. PANEL

The Institution of Structural Engineers RAAC Inspection and Assessment February 2022
TYPICAL SECTION THR
BLUE DENOTES TOP BARS
1:5
RED DENOTES BTM. BARS
 9

7 Remediation Techniques

Depending on the findings of the condition surveys, the Repairs need careful consideration. Repair mortars
Structural Engineer may need to recommend further commercially available are both stronger and more dense
monitoring, remediation, strengthening or replacement of than RAAC. Large areas of concrete reinstatement may not
RAAC panels. These can include: be able to generate sufficient bond to remain in place.
• Emergency propping, when panels are deemed to be in a Galvanic cathodic protection may be appropriate at
severe condition stopping corrosion of the reinforcement and testing and
• Enhanced end bearing, to mitigate against known tests are underway. Repairs should address the possibility of
deficiencies or unknown/unproven end bearing conditions asbestos within any original surface coatings.
• Positive remedial supports, to actively take the loading
from the panels
• Passive, fail safe supports, to mitigate catastrophic failure
of the panels if a panel was to fail
• Removal of individual panels and replacement with an
alternative lightweight solution
• Entire roof replacement to remove the ongoing
management liabilities
• Periodic monitoring of the panels for their remaining
service life

End bearing strengthening Intermediate supports

The Institution of Structural Engineers RAAC Inspection and Assessment February 2022
10

8 Conclusions

Research is currently ongoing into the structural • Visual surveys will help to assess the condition of the
performance and assessment of aging RAAC panels. panels, but the nature of any warning signs of the sudden
The outcome of this research will be comprehensive failure at the bearings are not fully known.
guidance describing the material properties of RAAC • Surveys of the end bearings using non-destructive
particularly around their potential failure mechanisms. radar can be effective but there is a significant tolerance
In the interim, experienced gained by the contributors which needs to be considered and the intrusive works
suggests that care is required in the assessment of RAAC necessary to facilitate the survey may not be cost
and until further guidance is available a cautious approach effective in some situations or at scale.
is recommended.
• Not all defects are visible e.g. corrosion of the
Issues to be considered include: reinforcement. Panels which appear to be in a good
condition may conceal hidden defects which could
• Many RAAC panels designed during the 1960’s and
present a risk to the integrity of the panels.
1970’s are not performing as expected and structural
deficiencies are apparent. Some of these defects can • The corrosion of reinforcement could lead to large pieces
reduce structural integrity. of AAC falling which presents a risk to occupants.
• The sudden failure of panels has occurred on a small
number of occasions. Assessments of buildings with RAAC panels are
• Concerns exist regarding the adequacy of the end recommended to include a balance of risks for the
bearings of roof panels due to the risk of incorrectly continued use of the building against the benefit of
manufactured transverse reinforcement or incorrect strengthening or replacement of the panels. The
positioning of panels during construction. This risk may assessment should include a robust risk assessment
be reduced where higher bearing lengths were used. and include consideration to the on-going monitoring
• The concerns are greater where panels could have been and future management of the RAAC panels. The failure
cut after manufacture (either due to formed opening or of the panels which resulted in the SCOSS1 Alert was
services penetrations) or where modifications have been a sudden failure and could be an indication that it was
made after construction (often for services penetrations). due to a brittle shear failure at or close to the bearing.
Based on this a cautious approach to the assessment of
• Corrosion of reinforcement is a risk especially if near
RAAC panels is recommended and assessments should
to the supports and due to the nature of the RAAC
only be undertaken by a Chartered Structural Engineer
construction could have a greater impact upon the
with experience in the investigation and assessment of
structural capacity of the panel than would be expected
reinforced concrete structures.
in traditional concrete.
• Deflection in roof panels exceeding span/100 could
indicate that the panels are highly loaded and working
close to capacity.

The Institution of Structural Engineers RAAC Inspection and Assessment February 2022
 11

References

• IP10/96 – Reinforced autoclaved aerated concrete panels

designed before 1980, BRE1996
• IP7/02 Reinforced autoclaved aerated concrete panels
test results, assessment of design, BRE 2002.
• Failure of Reinforced Autoclaved Aerated Concrete
• (Precast Concrete Code of Practice CP 116(1965) British
Standard Institute
• BS EN 12602 Prefabricated reinforced components of
Autoclaved Aerated Concrete.

1
In 2021 SCOSS (Standing Committee on Structural Safety)
was integrated into CROSS (Collaborative Reporting for
Safer Structures). The role of SCOSS continues under this
new name.

The Institution of Structural Engineers RAAC Inspection and Assessment February 2022
12

Contributors

Martin Liddell MA (Cantab) CEng MIStructE MICE

Sweco UK Ltd

Rob Read MEng (Hons) CEng MIStructE MICE

Department for Education

Matthew Palmer MEng CEng FIStructE MICE

WSP

David Robertson MA MEng CEng MICE

Concertus

Prof Chris Goodier PhD FICT FHEA MCIOB MCS

Loughborough University

The Institution of Structural Engineers RAAC Inspection and Assessment February 2022
 13

Research Team

Loughborough University

Leeds Beckett University

Lucideon Ltd

Concrete Preservation Technologies Ltd

Sweco UK Ltd

iaconnects Ltd

The Institution of Structural Engineers RAAC Inspection and Assessment February 2022
The Institution of Structural Engineers
International HQ
47-58 Bastwick Street
London EC1V 3PS
United Kingdom

T +44 (0)20 7235 4535

E [email protected] Founded 1908 and incorporated by Royal Charter 1934
www.istructe.org Registered Charity No 233392