Technical Assessment of existing buildings

How to approach the

assessment of an
existing building
SYNOPSIS ANDREW LAWRENCE
Assessing the safety of an existing building needs a very CEng, MIStructE, MICE, Conservation Accredited
Engineer
different indset ro desi nin a ne i din is Arup Fellow, London, UK
article discusses how to approach the assessment and
some of the key questions which need to be answered, such RICHARD HILL
as the extent to which we can rely on past performance CEng, MICE, Conservation Accredited Engineer
and at ar in o sa et is accepta e e artic e does Associate Director, Arup, London, UK

not claim to have all the answers, but it is hoped these can
STEPHEN FERNANDEZ
be covered in forthcoming guidance from the Institution of
CEng, FIStructE, MICE, Conservation Accredited
tr ct ra n ineers Engineer
irector and lobal uilding Retrofit Leader, Arup,
Nottingham/Birmingham, UK
NTU

Introduction
ntil recently, the appraisal and modification of
existing buildings were considered specialist
areas and not an ‘essential’ part of a structural
engineer’s training. The buildings were typically
built before the 20th century from traditional
materials, and it was generally assumed that
they had proven themselves and did not require
formal assessment.
However, events such as the collapse of
Champlain Towers South (Figure 1) in Florida
in 2021 have highlighted the risk of collapse of
existing buildings. With the new Building Safety
Act in England and Wales, there is now a legal
requirement to assess the safety of 13 000
multistorey residential buildings and a formal
NIST

recognition of the overlap between structural

and fire safety.
There is also an urgent need to adapt and
reuse our existing buildings where possible
(Figure 2), rather than build new ones,
to reduce the carbon footprint of the built
environment. This is starting to become
FIGURE 2: Successful
transformation of existing mandatory across the UK with local policies
Victorian buildings at introduced, such as by the Greater London
Nottingham Trent University Authority1, to consider opportunities for
materials optimisation, reclamation and reuse.
The vast majority of buildings with the most
FIGURE 1: Remaining part
of structure following collapse potential for adaption and reuse, and also the
of Florida apartment block majority of those covered by the Act, are 20th

10
October 2023 | thestructuralengineer.org

pp10-13_TSE_October23_Tech.indd 10 27/09/2023 12:07

 Assessment of existing buildings Technical

Box 1. Newton Building at Nottingham Trent University

This was a steel-framed tower and no vertical bracing was present to provide lateral
century steel and concrete buildings, rather stability in the long direction. However, masonry walls had been built tight up against
than historic buildings. However, even these the steelwork which provided structural sti ness. Removal of these walls as part of the
modern buildings are not necessarily as safe refurbishment meant that a new system needed to be introduced to replicate this sti ness
as we might expect – nearly all were built to that the walls were providing.
old codes, which often had lower factors of

STEVE FERNANDEZ
NTU
safety and were written at a time when some
design aspects were less well understood. For
e ample, concrete code rules for fire resistance
were substantially tightened in the 1980s.
When assessing an existing building, there
are several important questions that need to
be asked:
| Can we rely on past performance?
| Is the building ‘safe enough’?
| To what extent do we need to
undertake calculations?
| How many intrusive investigations
are needed?
| What are the risks for the client compared
with new-build?

These are complex questions and will need

to be the subject of future guidance from
the Institution of Structural Engineers. In the
meantime, this article discusses the questions
in more detail, to show some of the issues Further details:
which need to be considered when assessing ernande S. (2011) ‘Regeneration of ewton and Arkwright buildings at ottingham Trent
an existing building. Examples are presented in University’, The Structural Engineer, 89 (3), pp. 21–25
Boxes 1–3.

Can we rely on past performance?

The primary aim of any structural assessment
must be to ensure that a structure has an Likewise, even though the 1909 London warning, also warrant a greater degree of caution.
adequate margin of safety against structural and County Council Act2 advised an o ce load Whereas for a new building, we can rely on
structural fire risks. allowance of 100lb/ft2 for reinforced concrete the prescriptive safety factors built into codes
Past performance only shows that the buildings, equivalent to 4.7kPa, it is not of practice and standards, for existing buildings
structure can continue to carry the same loads reasonable to assume that there is spare it is often necessary to weigh up the risks
it has actually experienced in the past (assuming capacity in an existing reinforced concrete against the cost and disruption of strengthening,
that there have been no alterations, deterioration frame if now considering a ‘lighter’ current-day so that we can make the risks as low as
or damage that might have weakened it since imposed load. reasonably practicable.
the last ‘heavy’ load). It does not show that it This balance is now legally required under
has the same factor of safety or fire resistance Is the building safe enough? the Building Safety Act, and it is hoped that
as a modern structure, or that these are Improvements in design codes mean that the engineers will be given some guidance on
necessarily adequate. factor of safety of existing buildings is often quantifying the value of risk reduction achieved.
Parts of existing structures are lower than that for new structures. There is he impact of fire on the structure is the most
occasionally found to be very close to failure, also the risk that a severe fire might trigger likely reason that risks might be considered too
and it is important to identify these, and the a disproportionate collapse because the high, e.g. if a collapse might be triggered early
consequences of such failure. There are resistance to both fire and disproportionate on in a fire due to a vulnerable cast iron element
also historic forms of construction which collapse is typically lower than it would be at low level.
are already known to be defective, such as today. The question then arises as to whether a
1960s large-panel system (LPS) buildings, building is safe enough. To what extent do we need to
as well as others highlighted in CROSS While the current draft of EN 1990-2 undertake calculations?
(Collaborative Reporting for Safer Structures) (‘Assessment of existing structures’) recognises There are two broad reasons for undertaking
reports (www.cross-safety.org). that a lower factor of safety may be acceptable calculations.
It is a mistake to assume that a structure will for existing structures, it does not quantify this. First, when a change is proposed causing
be able to carry the loads for which it should More detailed guidance is given in BRE Digest the loads in some elements to increase (or
have been designed at the date of construction; 366 Part 33 and in the draft fib ‘Model Code for reducing beneficial’ loads), then calculations will
this would assume ‘perfect’ design and Concrete Structures 2020’. be needed to ensure that they have adequate
workmanship, which is rarely the case. For here are definitely cases when it is appropriate spare capacity. Consideration will also need
example, concrete structures built before about to check a structure using modern factors to be given of how much of the structure to
1970 will probably be unable to support the of safety. Examples would be where there check depending on the type and extent of
loads in the codes of practice at the time, as is a significant increase of load, where there the proposed modifications. here is, too, an
the shear strength of concrete was not fully are already signs of distress, or for forms of implied requirement (once Building Regulations
understood and so there were e ectively errors construction with known defects, such as LPS are triggered) that the a ected structure should
in the code. buildings. Brittle structures, which can fail without have the same design life as a new-build.

11
thestructuralengineer.org | October 2023

pp10-13_TSE_October23_Tech.indd 11 27/09/2023 12:07

 Technical Assessment of existing buildings

Box 2. George Green Library at

University of Nottingham
and whether any elements are close to failure, to be statistically meaningful; the minimum
This was a concrete structure designed which would be a particular concern for more number needed will depend upon the
in the 1960s. Major structural defects brittle elements. variability of what is being tested.
were only discovered when refurbishment However, determining how – and how hard
works commenced on site, as the defects – a structure is working is not straightforward. Undertaking investigations upfront will help
were hidden behind finishes. The defects There are usually few or no records of the reduce the risk of unexpected issues arising
were located at the junction between construction available, and even when drawings during the works. However, investigations
precast and in situ concrete elements and are available, they might not represent what are expensive and disruptive, and the
on the elevations with the most exposure was actually built, or the building might have structural engineer will be under pressure to
to the elements. been modified since construction. his is minimise the amount needed. In addition,
fundamentally di erent to new build work, no amount of investigation and testing can
Further details: where we dictate what the building ‘looks like’. fully determine what has been built. At best,
Fernandez S. (2017) ‘Transformation of a In addition, existing structures are often investigations will only capture typical details
1960s concrete structure – George Green indeterminate’, with multiple di erent load paths and workmanship. For example, nine out of
Library, Nottingham University’, The sharing the load. 10 similar locations on the building might be
Structural Engineer, 95 (10), pp. 18–24 Lastly, the building may not be working as the adequate, apart from the one which was built
designer originally intended and may even be unsupervised on a Saturday.
relying on non-structural elements for support. eing aware of typical deficiencies with the
For example, facades and partitions may be form of construction or with the codes at the
contributing to the strength under everyday date can help focus the investigations and
wind loads, but might fail under an especially identify hidden risks. For example, knowledge of
strong wind, throwing all the load back onto to the deficiencies in the assessment of concrete
the primary structure. Alternatively, replacement shear strength in codes before about 1970
of the facades as part of a refurbishment might might be an indication to look carefully for
inadvertently reduce the structural strength and/ hairline cracks near beam supports that might
or sti ness of the building. otherwise have been missed.
Therefore, the investigation and assessment Or knowing that the UK design wind loads
of an existing building will always be iterative: for taller buildings before about 1970 were
| Review the available information. substantially lower than those used today, and
ARUP

| Visually inspect the structure. in some cases only required that the aspect
| Postulate the likely load path, and undertake ratio of the building be less than 2:1 to satisfy
rough calculations to understand whether the lateral stability, might encourage a more critical
load path seems credible. look at the lateral stability generally.
| Undertake detailed surveys and intrusive Before specifying testing, think about what
investigations to find key missing information you will do with the results, whether favourable
and also to check any areas of concern or unfavourable. If the outcome will be the
(members are often sized for serviceability, same, then the tests may not be necessary.
but investigations should be targeted to While some non-destructive testing techniques
areas which are critical for strength and are available, they all rely on combination with
hence safety). physical testing to give definitive results.
| If the load path does not prove credible, then Remember that tests measure in situ
investigate alternative paths. This means that strengths and need to be converted to
it will typically be necessary to undertake two design strengths.
rounds of investigations, with time in between All investigations should be undertaken with
for calculations and assessment. appropriate caution and supervision, especially
where the load path is uncertain or where
How many intrusive investigations elements are potentially highly stressed, to
are needed? ensure that no damage is done which might
What and how much to investigate should be impair the safety of the building.
Second, although the Building Regulations thought about carefully:
are only triggered if there is an alteration or | Avoid asking for too much to be surveyed What are the risks for the client
change of use, this does not mean (even if too early. or e ample, it is not e ective use compared with new-build?
there is no alteration or change of use) that it is of the client’s money to ask for all timber Understandably, clients prefer the predictability
acceptable to leave a defective structure in that joists to be strength graded, if (as is usually associated with standard new-build forms of
condition. Therefore, calculations will also be the case) a simple calculation shows that construction. If we are to encourage more reuse
needed when there are signs of distress, when they are relatively lowly stressed because the of existing buildings, we need to be able to help
assessing a form of construction with known original design was governed by vibration. our clients navigate the risk and uncertainty
defects, such as LPS, or when inspection of the | Start with a dimensional survey to help associated with work on existing buildings,
building and/or drawings raises concerns. understand how hard elements are working. and this can be as important as managing the
Since the building is likely to be occupied, | Focus investigations on areas of concern, technical aspects. There are many reasons for
the investigations needed to undertake reliable such as where knowledge of the form the uncertainty.
calculations will be expensive and disruptive, of construction suggests there may be Since no amount of investigation and testing
so the investigations and calculations should hidden defects. can fully determine what has been built, the
be targeted towards the potential issues | Remember to test di erent populations’ (e.g. client must always bear more risk compared
identified. his will allow a view to be taken as both columns and slabs). with new-build, where responsibility for design
to whether the factors of safety are acceptable, | Ensure that enough tests are undertaken and workmanship can be fairly passed on to

12
October 2023 | thestructuralengineer.org

pp10-13_TSE_October23_Tech.indd 12 27/09/2023 12:07

 Assessment of existing buildings Technical

Box 3. 1 Triton Square, London

ARUP
The existing building at 1 Triton Square in London was expanded significantly to enable three
additional storeys to be added over. A variety of strengthening strategies were adopted ranging
from strengthening steel plates, concrete jackets, fibre-reinforced polymer wrapping, to justifying
the structure and foundations without the need for any strengthening. All approaches required the
structural engineer to fully understand the capacity of the existing structure.

Further details:
Robertson A. and Sturel E. (2021) ‘1 Triton Square, London – low-carbon development through
reuse of an existing building’, The Structural Engineer, 99 (3), pp. 30–35; https://doi.org/10.56330/
MWVI4065

others. This will also impact insurance and Investigations and assessments will be REFERENCES
warranties. To some extent, therefore, the needed, but the amounts needed will vary on
amount of investigations will be a balance of the a case-by-case basis. The structural engineer
client’s appetite for cost and risk. must be aware of typical details and defects 1) Mayor of London (2021) The London Plan
Hidden problems are often uncovered during with the relevant form of construction, so that [Online] Available at: www.london.gov.uk/
programmes-strategies/planning/london-plan
the works. More investigations upfront can investigations and assessment can be focused.
(Accessed: September 2023)
reduce the risks if the client is prepared to pay However, the construction and condition can
for them. never be fully known. 2) London County Council (General Powers)
It is di cult to define in advance how much he engineer will then need to udge whether Act 1909 [Online] www.legislation.gov.uk/ukla/
Edw7/9/130/contents/enacted Available at:
e ort may be needed to ustify a particular the structure is adequately safe, part of which
(Accessed: September 2023)
element for a change in loads, especially when a requires them to decide on an adequate factor
structural engineer is tendering for the work at a of safety for the di erent elements. his is very 3) Matthews S. (2012) DIG 366 Part 3: Structural
time when the load path and element sizes and di erent from the prescriptive design of new appraisal of existing buildings, including for a
material change of use, Bracknell: BRE
strengths are uncertain. Typically, more analysis buildings, and will depend on many factors, e.g.
e ort will yield higher strengths and enable whether anything is changing, whether there
strengthening to be reduced or even eliminated. are any highly stressed brittle elements, and the
Thus, higher fees in the design stages of a consequence of failure, as well as the cost and Box 4. Current IStructE
pro ect will invariably lead to lower overall costs disruption of any strengthening work. resources on reuse and
for the client, but are rarely accepted. Clients need to retain more risks than is the repurposing
Given the uncertainty over both design and case for new-build, and it is important that the
strengthening requirements, the challenges client and their insurer understand these. Publications
can be even greater for design-and-build The Institution of Structural Engineers is in the | Institution of Structural Engineers
contracts. Some clients are now at least moving process of preparing training and guidance for (2010) Appraisal of existing structures
to two-stage tenders to give time for some members on the issues discussed in this article, (3rd ed.). London: IStructE Ltd
investigations and assessment to help reduce both to help them meet their obligations under | Gowler P. et al. (2023) Circular
the uncertainties before final costs are agreed. the Building Safety Act, and also to encourage economy and reuse: guidance for
owever, there can still be conflict since the adaption and reuse as much as possible to help designers, London: IStructE Ltd
investigations needed to price the work will be reduce the carbon footprint of construction.
di erent from the larger number of investigations This new guidance will address Events
needed to ensure structural safety. contemporary issues such as the safety of the | CPD course on ‘Historic timber
radical retrofits now needed to avoid demolition structures: assessment and reuse’,
Conclusions and rebuilding, how to ensure risks are as 16 November 2023
Understanding both how an existing building low as reasonably practicable, and combined | Conference on ‘Reusing existing
is working and how hard it is working is a very structural and fire risks. urther details of training buildings’, 7 December 2023
di erent skill from designing a new building and guidance will be shared in The Structural | Webinar series on ‘Analysis and
following codified rules; there are many Engineer and through other IStructE channels as strengthening of concrete buildings
additional challenges that an engineer will need they become available. (built between 1950 and 1985)’
to grapple with. Relevant current guidance is listed in Box 4.

13
thestructuralengineer.org | October 2023

pp10-13_TSE_October23_Tech.indd 13 27/09/2023 12:07