The Structural Engineer 2021-04

 

 April 2021  Volume 99 | Issue Issue 4

Historic plaster ceilings (part 2)

 A low-carbon circular circular economy for steel

Big data and loading predictions

Making concrete progress Novel ultra-low-carbon concretes will be a key part of the R&D agenda required to achieve net zero by 2050

 

Jobs  Attract the right candidate for less -   Advertise for just £379 Only The Institution of Structural Engineers can provide such a dedicated and receptive audience, whose experience and creative abilities are sufficiently diverse to fill any vacancy, regardless regardless of seniority. Our five options offer various levels of targeting and visibility visibili ty.. These include:

 £379

 £879 DIGITAL & PRINT

DIGITAL

Job board ad live for 1 month, with logo

£1,575

Job board ad live for up to 3 months, with logo Featured in top section of search results Included on two job newsletters ¼ page in The Structural Engineer 

RAPID RESPONSE

Job board ad live for 1 month, with logo Featured in top section of search results Included on two job newsletters ¼ page in The Structural Engineer  Targeted email sent to matching candidates

“

Call 020 7     or email [email protected] to book your advertising today.

We managed to fill all the posts we advertised with the IStructE, and wish to thank you for the support and advice you provided during the process. I was really pleased with the spread and quality of responses we received — and have even managed to find a suitable candidate for a European office as well as filling the UK roles. roles.

”

Stephen Oakden, BE Design

 

 

30

Upfront 5  Editorial 6  Defining and shaping a ‘new norm’ to remain relevant in a rapidly changing world 8  Obituary: Leslie Earl Robertson 9  Notice of Extraordinary General Meeting 10   News 10

Climate emergency  14  An introduction to The Structural Carbon Tool 14  16   IABSE Henderson Colloquium 2020: Steps to 16 achieve a net-zero construction industry 18   Developing a low-carbon circular economy 18 for steel 20   Structural engineering innovation for a zero20 carbon world: an R&D agenda to match the carbon budget

   K    U  ,    P    U    O    R    G    E    R    B  ,    B    E    W    N    Y    T    R    A    M    /    R    E    T    S    N    U    D    W    E    R    D    N    A    ©    )    M    M    5  .    1    H    T    D    I    W    E    G    A    M    I    (    E    T    E    R    C    N    O    C    N    O    B    R    A    C      W    O    L      A    R    T    L    U    L    E    V    O    N   :    O    R    E    Z    T    E    N    S    D    R    A    W    O    T    D    &   :    R    R    E    V    O    C  

18

Professional guidance 27  Mediation – dispute resolution without the

courts

Technical 30   Historic plaster ceilings. Part 2: Survey, Survey,

assessment and methods of conservation

Opinion 34   Viewpoint: Embracing probability: could could big

data spell the end of safety factors as we know them?

38   Verulam

 At the back    1    2    0    2    l    i   r   p    A

44   Diary dates 45   Spotlight on Structures

20

46   The Drawing Board 47  Products & Services 48   Services Directory 49   TheStructuralEngineer  Jobs  Jobs

    │    4   e   u   s   s    I

    │    9    9

34

  e   m   u    l   o    V

3 thestructuralengineer.org | April 2021

 

Upcoming online CPD courses

Effective marketing for SMEs 5 May  10:00 – 18:00 BST

––– Price Standard: From £195 + VAT  Members: From £145 + VAT  Learning outcomes • Track and measure return on investment • Identify pro󿬁table pro󿬁table leads and focus on winning and retaining them • Understand the most important numbers for your commercial success. • Learn the easiest, most most commonly overlooked ways of improving quali󿬁ed sales leads, conversion rate, average spend, client lifetime and pro󿬁t margin

Understanding structural behaviour

Designing for blast resilience and resistance

17-18 May  17-18 M ay  10:00 – 17:30 BST

8 June 10:00 – 17:30 BST

––– –– –

–––

Price Standard: Stand ard: From £545 + VAT  VAT  Member s: From £415 + VAT 

Price Standard: From £335+ VAT  Members: From £255 + VAT 

Learning outcomes • Apply a qualitative approach to the solution of a range of framed structures • Apply checking checking protocols protocols for computer output and establish a reliable interpretation of the results • Apply the qualitative approach to the approximate analysis of structures as an aid to the creation of the structural model • Determine appropriate protocols for the development of these skills in the design of󿬁ce

Learning outcomes • Describe structural responses to blast loading with reference to ‘equivalent single degree of freedom’ analysis • Use pressure-impulse diagrams for approximate response assessment • Employ principles and guidelines for protective design against the effects of blast • Design reinforced reinforced concrete structures subject to blast loading • Apply American Society of Civil Engineers’ technical guidelines to practical structural design of blastresistant facilities

Seismic design of structures 10-11 June 10-11 Jun e 10:00 – 17:30 BST

––– –– – Price Standard: From £545 + VAT  Member s: From £415 + VAT  Learning outcomes • Identify situations situations where earthquake loading must be included in the design of structures and how to de󿬁ne this loading • Understand the basic

•

•

• • •

Book your place

istructe.info/courses

principles seismic design and selectof appropriate performance requirements for structures subjected to earthquake loads Select an appropriate structural con󿬁guration for a building situated in a seismic zone Analyse a building for combined service and seismic loading Design a bridge for seismic loading Design and detail reinforced reinforced concrete structures Design and detail steel and composite structures and detail them for adequate seismic performance

Editorial

Upfront

 

PRESIDENT Don McQuillan

BSc(Eng), CEng, FIStructE, FICE, FIAE, FIEI, FCIHT, FConsE, MAPM, MAE CHIEF EXECUTIVE Martin Powell EDITORIAL

HEAD OF PUBLISHING Lee Baldwin

MANAGING EDITOR Robin Jones

t: +44 (0) 20 7201 9822 e: [email protected]

Robin Jones Managing Editor 

EDITORIAL A SSIST SSISTANT ANT Ian Farmer

t: +44 (0) 20 7201 9121 e: [email protected]  ADVERTISING  ADVERTISIN G DISPLAY SALES

t: +44 (0) 20 7880 7632 e: [email protected]  RECRUITMENT SALES

t: +44 (0) 20 7880 6235 e: [email protected]  DESIGN

SENIOR DESIGNER Nicholas Daley 

New wrap, wrap, same filling

PRODUCTION

PRODUCTION DIRECTOR Jane Easterman EDITORIAL ADVISORY GROUP Will Arnold MIStructE Premma Makanji MIStructE  Allan Mann FIStructE Chris O’Regan FIStructE  Angus Palmer Palmer MIStructE Simon Pitchers FIStructE Eleana Savvidi MIStructE Price (2021 subscriptio subscription) n)

Institutional: £465.00 Personal (print only): £130 Personal (online only): £130 Personal (Student Member): £40 Single copies: £25 (incl. p&p) Printed by 

Warners Midlands plc The Maltings, Manor Lane Bourne, Lincolnshire PE10 9PH United Kingdom © The Institution of Structural Engineers. The Structural Engineer (ISSN 1466-5123) is published by IStructE Ltd, a wholly owned subsidiary of The Institution of Structural Engineers. It is available both in print and online. Contributions published in The Structural Contributions Engineer  are published on the understanding that the author/s is/are solely responsible for the statements made, for the opinions expressed and/or for the accuracy of the contents. Publication does not imply that any statement or opinion expressed by the author/s reflects the views of the Institution of Structural Engineers’ Board; Council; committees; members or employees. No liability is accepted by such persons or by the Institution for any loss or damage, whether caused through reliance on any statement, opinion or omission (textual or otherwise) in The Structural Engineer , or otherwise. The Institution of Structural Engineers International Internation al HQ 47–58 Bastwick Street London EC1V 3PS United Kingdom t: +44 (0)20 7235 4535 e: mail@istructe [email protected] .org The Institution of Structural Engineers Incorporated Incorporate d by Royal Charter  Charity Registered in England and Wales number 233392 and in Scotland number SC038263

 when opening your  YOU MAY MAY HA HAVE VE NOTICED NOTICED when magazine this month that it comes in a new, paper wrapper. The change from the previous, compostable wrapper – made possible by new technology at our printing house – is part of our eff orts orts to reduce the environmental impact of The Structural Engineer . The new wrapper should be more easily and widely recyclable by members and readers around the world. Please do recycle yours if you can! If you’d prefer not to receive a print copy of The Structural Engineer , don’t forget that you can opt out by emailing [email protected] [email protected].. All members receive online access to the magazine. Inside the wrapper, it’s business as usual, although this month’s striking cover image draws attention

Elsewhere in the issue, Scott Brookes concludes his short guide to historic plaster ceilings by discussing survey, assessment and methods of conservation (page 30); 30); Richard Garry explains the potential benefits of mediation for dispute resolution (page 27); 27); and Arthur Coates examines the role ‘big data’ could play in developing a more probabilistic approach to structural monitoring and more accurate loading predictions (page 34). 34). Lastly, make sure to take a look at Anthony McWatt’s winning entry to The Drawing Board (page 46). 46). Anthony was inspired by last month’s article on historic plaster. Submit your sketches to the next round of the competition by 31 May  (entries to [email protected] to [email protected]). ). We’re particularly keen to receive more sketches showing the early-stage

to the advances that the industry needs to make as part of the drive to achieve net-zero emissions by 2050. Developments in low-carbon concretes are  just one aspect of the R&D agenda agenda explored explored by Pete Winslow and colleagues on page 20. 20. The ‘Climate emergency’ section also includes articles discussing the key outcomes from last year’s Henderson Colloquium (page 16), 16), the potential for a circular economy for steel (page 18) and, 18) and, perhaps most importantly, a preview of the new Structural Carbon  Tool  T ool developed developed by Elliott Elliott Wood in partnership partnership with the Institution (page 14). 14). You can find out more about about the tool at www.istructe.org/the-structural-carbontool.. tool Recent articles on climate change and embodied carbon have generated a good deal of debate in  Verulam  Veru lam this month. Read these these and and others others on page 38. 38. Did you know that, as well as writing to Verulam, you can also comment on articles appearing in the magazine on Twitter or LinkedIn using the hashtag #TheStructuralEngineer #TheStructuralEngineer? ? March saw considerable discussion of several articles, with two posts on the 1 Triton Square article included among this month’s letters.

development of ideas.  As ever, ever, I hope hope you enjoy enjoy the issue.

5 thestructuralengineer.org thestructuralengineer .org | April 2021

Correction In the March issue, we neglected to include Peter Harris in the list of reviewers for The Structural Engineer during 2020. We apologise to Peter for the omission and are grateful for his support.

Upfront  View from the CEO  

Defining and shaping a ‘new norm’ to remain relevant in a rapidly changing world MARTIN POWELL Chief Executive

Institution of Structural Engineers

for its next iteration to 2030 and the longer-term period to 2035.  The acid tests of that 2014 review were fourfold: Ò| relevance in a changing world Ò| relevance to members Ò| relevance to the profession Ò| relevance in the wider community.

In my articles for The Structural Engineer in July 2020 and February 2021, I discussed the impact of change.  The July articl e considered the Cov id-19 pandemic and how we might embrace it as a catalyst when de fining what this means for the Institution as we emerge from the worst of its grip. The one presumption I made was that we will not rewind the clock to pick up where we left things when the pandemic struck.  The February arti cle focused on the incremental elements of change that continually underpin the importance for the Institution of remaining relevant in its support of the profession, and in ful filment of its public objectives and its obligations to the Charity Commission. Unlike to the pandemic, this is not a reactionary response, but an iterative process led by the Trustee Board in consultation with Council and the

 The simpli city of th e conclusions was to restate a vision for the Institution ‘to lead, support and nurture the development of structural engineering worldwide, communicating eff ectively ectively with all whose lives are shaped in any way by the impacts of structural design’.  The Board placed part icular emphasis on delivery through the two headline concepts of communities  and communities and competence and a strong desire to be inclusive for all with an interest in structural engineering such that we are (and I quote): ‘ An  An Institution committed to   recognising the signi ficant competency  recognising responsibility entrusted to structural engineers and the obligation placed on them to ensure the safety of all who use the structures they have designed.  At both formati ve education lev el and during ongoing career development,

Executive, recognising that relevance in a rapidly changing world means we remain static at our peril. In February, those discussions were continued by Council under the banner of ‘Structured for Success’ (S4S) – a suite of reforms and initiatives to support the Institution as it continues to develop in the years ahead.  The story really starts, howev er, way back in 2014 when the Board of the day under the Presidency of Nick Russell redefined its ‘Strategic Pathways’ intended to guide the direction of travel of the Institution from 2015–20 and to inform the longer-term period to 2025. It built on an earlier iteration of strategy developed under the leadership of President Sarah Buck in the lead-up to the Institution’s centenary in 2008. At regular intervals, the Board has revisited and refreshed the route map of 2014, but fundamentally it remains relevant and sets the scene on which to prepare

the Institution will be continually active in providing a wide range of opportunities for its members and others to develop, refresh and extend their personal competencies. ‘ A  A community Institution that Institution  that recognises both the breadth and depth of needs of its members and those in association. It seeks to provide opportunity for specialism as well as general interest such that the benefits of membership are enriched and continually value adding. ‘ An  that  An inclusive Institution Institu tion that welcomes all with an interest in structural engineering and the built environment to become associated with it. It recognises the power and leverage to be gained through eff ective ective collaboration with others in a world that increasingly depends on multidisciplinary innovation and solutions. In all it does, the Institution additionally additiona lly affi rms its commitment to

diversity of gender, nationality, race, religion, orientation and social inclusion’.  Along the way, we have made incredible progress against Board-set objectives. However, in the context of this article, now is not the time to recap those achievements for there continues to be much to do. Returning to the present, the values outlined above remain the focal point of the Institution’s activity in the broadest sense. Nothing in the ambitions of ‘Structured for Success’ undermines those core values and, perhaps more correctly, S4S should be considered as a reset of our organisational structure that better enables the Institution to deliver its core values through chosen activities. Permit me please to deviate for a moment, since I recognise that matters relating to organisational structure and governance within the Institution are of signi ficant importance to many but, quite frankly, probably of very little interest to many others – possibly the silent majority of the Institution’s membership. Here in the UK, our television screens are filled on an almost daily basis with ‘fly-on-the-wall’ property programmes of people aspiring to buy or develop their homes. The ambition of needing new space to meet changing lifestyles; the opportunity to repurpose existing dwellings by building extensions or by knocking down walls for open-plan living or to maximise usefulness of the property for the present occupants.  The parallel here i s that the buil ding works are a means to an end. They are enablers that allow people to fulfil

S4S SHOULD BE CONSIDERED AS A RESET OF OUR ORGANISATIONAL STRUCTURE THAT BETTER ENABLES THE INSTITUTION TO DELIVER ITS CORE VALUES

6  April 2021 | thestructuralengineer thestructuralengineer.org .org

 

 View from the CEO   View CEO  Upfront

a need or ambition. Bifold doors into a garden are not the ambition. They are merely the means by which the resident can combine internal and external living. Not wishing to trivialise the comparison, it is of course essential that our governance structures are appropriately transparent and democratic and that, above all, they enable members to find value and a sense of purpose, belonging, pride and belief in the Institution. Ultimately, however, the real test is whether those structures help facilitate the four acid-tests of relevance and better equip the Institution to deliver and develop appropriately. In that regard, much that is contained in S4S is about repositioning and repurposing – adaptations that the Board in consultation with Council believe will support our core values and programme of activities in the years ahead.  Alongside thi s issue of the magazine (or to follow very shortly afterwards), will be an e-communication explaining more about the changes that require approval from members at an EGM planned for 6 May. It also highlights some statistics showing the changes in membership composition over the past 30 years (brie fly touched on here in Figure 1). 1). How the Institution meets the needs of these changing demographics has helped inform the S4S initiative. For the rest of this article, I briefly highlight some of the other planned organisational changes not directly referred to in the e-communication.   The Institution Board  Three Board places to b e filled Ò| Three by open election by the general membership with any voting member eligible to stand for election, thus providing opportunity for young professionals and graduate members to join the Board. current 12 elector al regions (nine UK and three non-UK) to be simplified and replaced by five electoral regions such that each will elect a Vice-President to the Board via a two-stage voting process that will entitle every voting member to inform the final decision. The intention is eventually to have six  Vice-Presidents::  Vice-Presidents    The Americas; Africa/Middle East/  India; Australasia/Southeast Asia; Central/East Asia: one VicePresident each   UK/Europe: two Vice-Presidents.  Together with the President, President, Past Ò| Together President, Board Chairman and up to three external Board appointments made by an interview selection process, the Board will continue to consist of no more than 15, of which 12 will be directly elected by the Institution’s Institution’ s membership.

 

Non-UK

UK

Total

35000 30000 25000

20000 15000 10000 5000 0 1990

2000

2010

2020

ìFIGURE 1:

Growth in membership, 1990–2020

 The Ò| The

HAVE  YOUR  YOUR SAY  SA Y 

[email protected]

@IStructE

#TheStructuralEngineer

Ò| Succession

to the Presidency can be from any Board member at Fellow grade and will be determined in consultation with a revamped Nominations Committee (expanded to include three members of Council) and, as now, subject to final endorsement by Council. Ò| Elected Board members may serve a maximum of two terms of three years before a minimum compulsory break of one year. There is no current limit.   The Institution Council  The main functions remain unchanged. In summary, Council provides high-level guidance to the Board and monitors implementation of Institution policy and strategy. The composition of Council

that report directly to the Board or directly to the Engineering Leadership Group. Currently there is no formal mechanism for these important member-led committees to be part of Council. Ò| Eight places will be available for general election from across the worldwide membership of the Institution and, in future, will not be linked to the former 12 electoral regions. Ò| In due course, the Board would like to see more inclusive representation from Regional Groups so that in addition to a place on Council for each Regional Group Chair, there will also be an elected vacancy for a young professional (de fined as a

has remained largely unchanged for many years and the Board wishes to broaden reach and inclusivity of those elected and to do so via a slimmeddown Council where numbers are currently around 95.  To strengthen gover nance, the Ò| To Board will no longer automatically be members of Council and this will improve the legitimacy for Council to meet in its own right should it ever have cause to do so. In practice, the Board will routinely attend meetings in an invited capacity.  The President wi ll chair Counci l Ò| The and will be the formal reporting link between the Trustee Board and Council. As such, the President will be the only member of the Institution to hold a formal voting position on both Board and Council. Ò| 11 new places will be created on Council for elected representatives from each of the Committees

Graduate or up to two years postChartership and unlikely to be aged over 30) from each Regional Group.  This sets a very important message about the importance of new talent with new ideas and experiences  joining the In stitution’s governance and leadership group.  As a part of these reforms, reforms, the Ò| As Board believes that the time is right to commence a wider discussion among all Institution members about the role and nature of Regional Groups and their vital importance in bringing members together as part of the ‘community Institution’. While the Board can see a future for new ways of working, it is not pre-empting an outcome. The implementation of S4S in its current rollout does not therefore include any change to Regional Groups or the way in which they are represented on Council.

7 thestructuralengineer.org thestructuralengineer .org | April 2021

Upfront

Obituary

 

Obituary  Leslie Earl Robertson, 1928–2021 P.E., C.E., S.E., D.Sc., D.Eng., NAE, Dist. M.ASCE, AIJ, JSCA, AGIR, FIStructE

Few people have had as much in fluence on their industry as Leslie Earl Robertson did on structural engineering and architecture. In a career that spanned over 60 years, he led the design of many renowned buildings and expanded the possibilities of both disciplines. Les Robertson was a California-born high school dropout who lied about his age to join the US Navy near the end of World War II. After his discharge from the service, he attended the University of California at Berkeley on the GI Bill. He graduated in 1952 with a Bachelor of Science degree. His first job was as a mathematician in the electrical engineering department of an Oakland, California firm, Kaiser Engineers. Before too long, he was helping in the firm’s structural engineering department where, under the guidance of the chief engineer, he learned the basics of what would become his passion, structural engineering.  The nights and weekends weekends he spent teaching himself concepts such as slope deflection and the Hardy Cross method led to the deep understanding of the fundamentals of structural engineering that would become his hallmark. His mentor showed him graphical methods of structural engineering that captivated his imagination. He worked in a succession of di ff erent erent practices and eventually led Leslie E.

Robertson Associates. Actively working on projects into his 90s, he was recently affi liated with the Robert Bird Group.  Although Les was never in combat, the deaths in WWII of those he knew l ed him to become first a pacifist and then an activist-pacifist. He was active in antiwar, civil rights, climate change, women’s rights and other issues. Attending protests often resulted in arrests, which he downplayed as a ride to the police station followed by paperwork and release. His projects circle the globe. The list includes the IBM Building, Pittsburgh; the IBM Building, Seattle; the Federal Reserve Bank, Minneapolis; the AT&T Headquarters, New York; the Bank of China, Hong Kong; the Puerta de Europa, Madrid; the Miho Museum Bridge, Shigaraki; the International Finance Centre, Hong Kong; the Shanghai World Financial Center, Shanghai; the Lotte World Tower, Seoul; and the Merdeka PNB118, Kuala Lumpur, which will be the world’s second-tallest building when it opens in 2022. Les was in his 30s when he started leading the design of tall buildings. He noted that it was a time of young engineers (Bill LeMessurier was two years older and Fazlur Khan was one year younger). The Great Depression and WWII had created a hiatus in tall building

 Yamasaki, Gunnar Birkerts,  Yamasaki, Birkerts, Philip Johnson, I.M. Pei, and William Pedersen.  The project that dominated dominated much of his life was the World Trade Center, New York. The twin towers were the two tallest buildings in the world when they were completed in 1972 and 1973. Les was only 35 years old when he moved from Seattle to New Yo York rk to lead the project for his firm Skilling, Helle, Christiansen, Robertson, and he spent more than a decade on the design and construction.  After surviving a truck bombing bombing in 1993, the two towers collapsed on 11 September 2001, after each had been hit by a fuel-laden Boeing 767. The buildings survived the initial impacts but collapsed in the resulting fires. Although he wrote, ‘My sense of grief and my belief that I could have done better continue to haunt me,’ the tall building engineering community recognised that what brought down the towers was an attack of exceptional destructiveness, not a deficiency of engineering. Les Robertson was highly respected by the structural engineers with whom he competed for projects around the world. Most viewed him as an inspiration and mentor. With generosity, he would share his thoughts and experiences on issues that ranged from technical to ethical. Many looked forward to his annual holiday card in which he and his

design and these young engineers were looking at structural issues from a fresh point of view. With clear thinking and the aid of early computers, they created structural concepts and systems that are used to this day.  A structural designer with strong strong opinions but a winning personality, personality, Les had repeated collaborations with world-class architects such as Minoru

wife, to whom he was devoted, would recount the events of the past year along with a few comments about politics and society. In recent years, Les recorded his thoughts and work in the book, The Structure of Design: An Engineer’s Engineer’s Extraordinary Life in Architecture Architecture and  and the documentary film, ‘Leaning Out: An Intimate Look at Twin Towers Engineer, Leslie E. Robertson’. Les Robertson was awarded the IStructE Gold Medal in 2004. He was the first American to be so honoured since Nathan Newmark, 25 years earlier. Les is survived by his wife and collaborator,, the prominent structural collaborator engineer SawTeen See FIStructE; children Chris Robertson, Sharon Robertson and Karla Mei Robertson; and grandchildren. Another daughter, Jeanne Robertson, died in 2015.

LES ROBERTSON WAS HIGHLY RESPECTED BY THE STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS WITH WHOM HE COMPETED FOR PROJECTS AROUND THE WORLD. MOST VIEWED HIM AS  AN IN INSP SPIR IRA ATI TION ON AN AND D ME MENT NTOR OR 8 April 2021 | thestructuralengineer thestructuralengineer.org .org

William F. Baker

 April 2021 | thestructuralengineer thestructuralengineer.org .org

News

 

Upfront

Institution news

Notice of Extraordinary General Meeting Notice is hereby given that an EXTRAORDINARY GENERAL MEETING of MEETING of the Institution of Structural Engineers will be held on THURSDAY 6 May 2021 at 2021 at 9:00am (UK time) for the transaction, by Voting Members, of the business set out below. 1) To 1)  To read the notice convening the meeting. 2) To 2) T o read, read, confirm and sign the minutes of the  Annual  Annu al Gene General ral Meeti Meeting ng 2020 2020 held on 16 16 July July 2020 (published in The Structural Engineer , September 2020).

BYE-LAW AMENDMENTS – SCHEDULE 1 1) In 1)  In Bye-law 2, after ‘(g) Companions’ insert ‘(h) Graduates, who may use the initials “GIStructE”’. BYE-LAW AMENDMENTS – SCHEDULE 2 1) In 1)  In Bye-law 1, replace ‘Executive Board’ with ‘Trustee Board’. 2) In 2)  In Bye-law 16, replace ‘Executive board’ with ‘Trustee Board’ and ‘board’ with ‘Trustee Board’ and add ‘(hereinafter referred to as “the Board”)’ after ‘board’.

3) To 3)  To consider and, if thought fit, to adopt the following Special Resolution:  THAT, subjec  THAT subjectt to the appr approval oval of Her Her Majes Majesty’ ty’s s Most Honourable Privy Council, Bye-law 2 of the Institution be altered and amended as set out in Schedule 1 hereto, subject to such changes, if any, as the Privy Council may require and the Board of the Institution accept. 4) To 4)  To consider and, if thought fit, to adopt the following Special Resolution:  THAT, subjec  THAT subjectt to the appr approval oval of Her Her Majes Majesty’ ty’s s Most Honourable Privy Council, Bye-laws 1 and 16 of the Institution be altered and amended as set out in Schedule 2 hereto, subject to such changes, if any, as the Privy Council may require and the Board of the Institution accept. 5) To 5)  To consider and, if thought fit, to adopt the following Special Resolution:  THAT, subjec  THAT subjectt to the appr approval oval of Her Her Majes Majesty’ ty’s s Most Honourable Privy Council, Bye-law 15 of the Institution be altered and amended as set out in Schedule 3 hereto, subject to such changes, if any, as the Privy Council may require and the Board of the Institution accept. By order of the Board D.M. POWELL Chief Executive

1 April 2021

Notes: 1) The meeting will be held online/remotely, whereby an invitation to attend is sent to all Voting Members. 2) Regulation 5.7.1 defines ‘Voting Member’ as a Chartered or an Incorporated Structural Engineer or a Technician Member or a Graduate, whose subscription and other membership payments have been paid. 3) Under Article 8 of the Royal Charter, a Specialbe Resolution forathe alteration of the Bye-laws must, for approval, passed by two-thirds majority of the members present, entitled to vote and voting. 4) Schedule 4 sets out for information the relevant Bye-laws and the proposed amendments thereto. 5) In accordance with Regulation 5.3, only the business specified in this notice may be considered at the meeting.

BYE-LAW AMENDMENTS – SCHEDULE 3 1) In 1)  In Bye-law 15, replace ‘O ffi cers’ with ‘Trustees’ and ‘the board’ with ‘Trustee Board’. 2) In 2)  In Bye-law 15, replace ‘not more than five  Vice-Pr  Vice -Presid esident ents, s, and and an an Honor Honorary ary Trea reasur surer er of the Institution (hereinafter referred to as the “offi cers”)’ with ‘a President-Elect, a Past President, Vice-Presidents, and Board members of the Institution (referred to in the Royal Charter as the “offi cers”) who shall be the Trustees of the Institution. The number of Vice Presidents and Board members shall be prescribed in regulations’.

BYE-LAW AMENDMENTS – SCHEDULE 4 EXISTING BYE-LAW

PROPOSED BYE-LAW (words underlined are additions or amendments)

2. There shall be the following grades of membership of the Institution: (a) Honorary Fellows, who may use the initials ‘HonFIStructE’ (b) Fellows, who may use the initials ‘FIStructE’ (c) Members, who may use the initials ‘MIStructE’ (d) Associates, who may use the initials ‘AIStructE’ (e) Associate-Members, who may use the initials ‘AMIStructE’ (f) Technician Members, who may use the initials ‘TIStructE’ (g) Companions (h) Graduates (i) Students

2. There shall be the following grades of membership of the Institution: (a) Honorary Fellows, who may use the initials ‘HonFIStructE’ (b) Fellows, who may use the initials ‘FIStructE’ (c) Members, who may use the initials ‘MIStructE’ (d) Associates, who may use the initials ‘AIStructE’ (e) Associate-Members, who may use the initials ‘AMIStructE’ (f) Technician Members, who may use the initials ‘TIStructE’ (g) Companions (h) Graduates, who may use the initials ‘GIStructE’ (i) Graduates (j) Students

1. In these Bye-laws, and the regulations, unless the

1. In these Bye-laws, and the regulations, unless the

context otherwise requires, words and phrases defined in the Charter shall bear the same meanings and (a) ‘the Board’ means the Executive Board of the Institution;

context otherwise requires, words and phrases defined in the Charter shall bear the same meanings and (a) ‘the Board’ means the Trustee Board of the Institution;

Executive board

Trustee Board

16. The board shall consist of at least seven persons and of not more than fifteen persons elected or appointed in accordance with the regulations.

16. The Trustee Board (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Board’) shall consist of at least seven persons and of not more than fifteen persons elected or appointed in accordance with the regulations.

Offi cers and staff

Trustees and staff

15. There shall be a President, not more than five  Vice-President  Vice-Pr esidents, s, and an Honorary Honorary Treasur Treasurer er of the Institution (hereinafter referred to as the ‘offi cers’).

15. There shall be a President, a President-Elect, a Past President, Vice-Presidents, and Board members of the Institution (referred to in the Royal Charter as the ‘offi cers’) who shall be the Trustees of the Institution. The number of Vice Presidents and Board members shall be prescribed in regulations.

 All matters matters relat relating ing to the election election and terms terms and period of offi ce of such offi cers shall be prescribed in regulations. The board may appoint a chief executive (by whatever title determined) of the Institution and may delegate to such chief executive the power to appoint and dismiss other employees of the Institution.

9

 All matters matters relat relating ing to the election election and terms terms and period of offi ce of the Trustees shall be prescribed in regulations. The Trustee Board may appoint a chief executive (by whatever title determined) of the Institution and may delegate to such chief executive the power to appoint and dismiss other employees of the Institution.

thestructuralengineer.org thestructuralengineer .org | April 2021

Upfront

News

 

Institution news

Recognising Recognisin g lo lon ng-ser g-serving ving members The President and Council congratulate the following Fellows, Members and  Associates who have completed completed 25, 30, 40 or 50 years’ membership of Structural the Institution as a Chartered Engineer during the course of 2020. In writing to each member, the President recorded this milestone of achievement and expressed the hope that they will continue to enjoy many more years of association with the Institution. 25 YEARS OF MEMBERSHIP Fellows  Ahmad, Mohann Mohanned ed Kamal Kamal Mustafa Mustafa Bartram, Carolina Ellen Rosaria Bullock, Alan Kevin Carr, Jonathan Francis Chryssanthopoulos, Marios Chung, Kwok Fai

Deavy, Cormac Peter Duggins, Andrew Robert Harvey, William John Haynes, Bruce Jonathan Helm, Barry Jonathan Ji, Tianjian Kugananthan, Ratnam Lam, Siu Shu Eddie Lilley, David Martin Long, Shaun David McCormick, Fergus John Mehrkar-Asl, Shapour Nair, Shanker Matathodiyil Narayanan Ng, Shiu Yuen David Quah, Lye-Hock Scott, Paul Alexander Smith, John Reginald Tam, Chat Tim Taylor, Brian John West, Stuart Wright, Alan Yates, Megan Roe Zalka, Karoly Andras Members  Adams, Way Wayne ne Deloy Deloy  Adegbite,  Adegbit e, Christopher Christopher Babatun Babatunde de  Alcock,, Douglas  Alcock Douglas James James Stuart Stuart  Al-Saidi,, Alaa Hasan Najim  Al-Saidi Najim  Anderson,  Anderso n, Michael Michael  Annandale,  Annanda le, Graham Graham Stuart Stuart  Au, Choi Wa  Au Yeung, Yeung, Wai Key Badcock, Mark Stephen Ball, David Henry John Barber, Ian David Basray, Basil Jawad Batt, Finbarr

Baxter, Alan Joseph Toby Beaven, Thomas Daniel Birch, William Roy Bisp, Andrew John Blincow, Neil Christopher Blundell, Wendy Suzanne Booth, James George Bernard

Brandt, Ian Hugo Browne, Michael A. Buckton, Timothy Burton, Kenneth Byrne, Enda Joseph Cairns, John

Hilton, Carl Jack Ho, Andrew Hoi Tung Ho, Chun Yan Hoang, Christopher Chison Holland, Jonathan Derek Hughes, Michael Wynn Nicholas

Murphy, Conor J. Murphy, John Justin Murray, Graham Robert Newham, David George Nobbs, Gordon Kenneth Nottage, Paul Nicholas

Caraher, Darrell Glyn Care, Nicholas John Carney, George Paul Carvill, Denis John Cham, Ebrima Chan, Swee Meng Chan, Chi Ming Maverick Chan, Wai Hung Chapman, David Kenneth Chapman, Peter Charalambous, Adonis Cheung, Kam Shing Cheung, Wai-Fung Henry Cheung, Yau Keung Chew, Michael Chee Keat Ching, Sai Hung Choi, Chi Pang Bernie Chu, Vincent Chun Lap Clarke, Robert William

Hughes, Steven Kenneth Hullah, Paul Nicholas Hung, Koon Tung Huxtable, Bruce Ip, Wai Leung Janjic, Srdan Jethwa, Mahesh Jones, Anthony Hayward Kan, Ming Kwong Stephen Karunasekera, Ben Veera Kennedy, Bernard Kerwick, Gregory Arthur Kilcar, James Crawford Kissack, Samuel John Haydn Krakowska, Teresa Ludwika Lai, Wing Hong Lai, Yee Yan Lam, Pak Hung Jeremy Lambard, David Gerald

O Brien, Andrew Paul O’Mahony, John Patrick O’Shea, Mark Robert Panayiotou, Panicos Panesar, Ravinder Singh Patel, Rusper Kersasp Pearce, Allan Christopher Pearson, Brian James Perry, Paul John Gerard Pigozzo, Dario Porter, Craig Poyser, Andrew William Premachandra, Asela Premkumar, Sabaratnam Priestley, Philip Rawcliffe, Dominic Francis Richards, David Alan Richards, Ian Roger Richardson, Andrew Philip

Cochrane, Brian Graeme Mcintyre Cochrane, David Collins, Paul Charles Anthony Considine, John Peter Cormack, Paul Coupe, William Michael Cowie, Stephen William Cowley, Alan Christopher Crampton, Teresa Catherine Crewe, Adam John Cullinan, Peter Edward Curran, James Joseph Damaj, Walid Taha De Pellegrin, Marco Derewicz, Michael Dickinson, Nathan Duffi eld, Stephen John Duffy, Patrick Martin Duke, William John Dunford, John Leslie Eccleshare, Mark Andrew Edwards, Andrew David Edwards, Derek Oswald Farrow, John David Fewtrell, Richard Finch, Jane Flewitt, Ian Ronald Frame, Scott Davidson Fung, Chung Hang Francis Gale, Ian Charles Gangji, Firoz Abdulrasul Gee, Philip Stephen Gill, Narinder Singh Gleghorn, Hilary Janice Greenbank, Christopher Greenwood, Paul Greeves, Kerry Rachel Grieve, Thomas Gerard Hamwene, Haapaku Kufamuyeke

Langeveldt, Deon Larkins, Raymond James Lau, Man Ching Matthew Lau, Wing Leung Lee, Kwok Wai Lee, Shung Tim Timothy Lee, Wan Cheung Lee, Wah Lee Leung, Bing Man Leung, Chi Lai Leung, Chi Wing Leung, Hon Wai Leung, Wai Ming Li, Yuk-Lam Liddell, Martin Crawford Ling, Siu Por Lloyd, Ian George Lo, Hon Kin Frederick Lo, Tak Fai Loades, John Martin Long, Ian Robert Lowenthal, Richard Philip Lyon, Malcolm Mackie, Allen Gordon MacMillan, Donald MacPherson, Donald Madzikanda, Tendaivanhu Zachariah Marginson, Andrew Paul Mariyaselvam, Sandanam Marshall, Andrew Stuart Martin, Andrew Russell Mason, Mark Christopher Maynard, Andrew McCarey, Brian McGrath, Martin Patrick McNeill, Rory Anthony Mehta, Dipakkumar Chandulal Mirzai, Nader Gholi Mitchell, Michael Frederick

Rickman, Brian Ernest Rizzuto, Joseph Patrick Roberts, William Tudor Roberts, Stephen Robson, Stuart Keith Roe, Timothy Paul Rourke, Charlotte Emma Rushen, Phillip Scopes, Jonathan Paul Scott, Richard Michael Sharpe, Christopher Andrew Shaw, Sara Jane Slade, Graham Edward Smith, Lester Smith, Alan Collin Smith, Michael John Smollett, William Robert Snel, Petrus Annetta Hubertus So, Yui Chit Damon Southgate, Martin Raymond Southgate, Stephen John Stainsby, Alan Munro Sutherland, Kirsten Ann Syan, Parminder Singh Tam, Patrick Chi-Pang C hi-Pang Tam, Wai Chiu Taylor, Graham Geoffrey Thompson, Joseph Nigel Thomson, Robert George Thurlow, Simon Miles Tilley, Neil Too, Anthony Chie C hie Houng Tran, Vinh Cong Tsang, Hing Kuen Tsang, Wai Man Tse, Wai Keung Ben Tso, Sik Hing Walsh, Paula Walton-Sharp, Robert Michael

Han, Yow Kim Pierre Harper, Colin Stuart Heard, Andrew Charles Hedley, Kevin Neil Heung, Kin Man Heward, Gary Paul Hibberd, Simon David

Moffatt, Andrew Moore, David Brian Moorey, David Neil Morley, Colin Howard Morrison, Duncan Graham Moses, Julian Warrick Mou, Yun Ming

Derrick Ward, Iain Colin Warren, Jonathan Peter Watson, Stephen Paul Wegener,, Richard Bryant Wegener Welland, Bruce Richard Wijesinghe, Keerthi Conrad

10

'

 April 2021 | thestructuralengineer thestructuralengineer.org .org

 

News

Williamson, Ian Joseph Wong, Kwok Mun Wong, Michael Cham Wing Wong, Chi Hong Wong, Ha Wong, Kwan Pak Dick Wong, Shui Leung Wong, Wai Lam Wright, George Wyatt, Gary Andrew George Yeung, Alan Chung C hung Lun Yin, Kek Kiong Yu, Hing Wai Randy Yu, Wai Ho Yuen, Kin Keung Larry Yusuf, Osman  Associates  Associates Baker, Geoffrey Martin Browne, Herbert Emerville Gibbon, Donald Vernon McKeen, William John Oosthuizen, Andries Petrus Pretorius, Jock Milne Vogt, Simon John 30 YEARS OF MEMBERSHIP Fellows  Abdul-Wahab,  Abdul-W ahab, Hashim Hashim Muhamm Muhammed ed Said Bates, Paul Broughton, Peter Brown, William Franklin Carfrae, Tristram George Allen Chan, Kam Wai Chan, Yin Nin Cheung, Kwan Tar Cunnington, David John Ellis, John William Garber, Melbourne Alexander  Akiremii  Akirem Harkins, John Steven Jones, Roger Hugh Kelly, James Lauw, Su Wee Lee, Chi Chuen Lee, Hoi Yuen Liu, Sik Wing Ma, Siu Cheung Mander, Timothy David Marrai, Bruno Melbye, Alexander Christopher Mok, Chi-Wah Martin Morris, Kirsten Margaret Navaratnarajah, Kalaichelvi Partridge, John William Shaw, Fergus Adrian Toplis, Paul Thomas Tweedie, Alan Edwin Wood, Gary Antony Members

 Adams, Robert Robert Jackson  Armstrong,  Armstro ng, Kevin Geoffrey  Au, Richard Richard Che Yin Yin Baisden, Keith George Frederick Baker, Timothy Shaun Barnes, Keith Paul Barnett, Ian Charles Barnett, Steven Martin Batchelar, Warren Clive Beausire, Charles

Upfront

Beavis, Colin Nigel Beavor, Nigel Paul Bell, Alexander William Beresford, Peter Daniel Birdwood, James Gresford Brodrick Brewster, David William Brookes, David John

Goddard, Mark Goodchild, Philip Trevor Grindley, Stephen Gupta, Arun Kumar Hales, Michael Alexander Hamilton, Thomas Robertson Hanson, Stephen

Nichols, Donald John Norton, Stephen Alfred Oliver, Roger William Orr, Graeme Scott Parker, Michael John Parsons, Stephen Douglas Patel, Bhasker

Brown, Lionel Brown, Glenn Antony Burden, Alan Roy Burgess, Martin Charles Burnett, Alexander Robert Burridge, Jenifer Ann Burrows, John Esme Butterworth, Martin Andrew Buxton, Nicholas Charles Byron-Moore, Colfax Piers Caddye, Mark Glen Campbell, Hugh Carruthers, Paul Robert Cassidy, John Andrew Patrick Chan, Chi Kwong Chan, Chi Ming Saul Chan, King Yuen Chan, Wai Tai Cheng, Kam Tong Cheung, Lap Yuen Chiu, Tin Chung Ernest Chiu, Tze Ming Choi, Chi-Keung Tony Chow, Yuen Yee Silla Choy, Chun Chuen Chung, Yiu Tak Clark, Stephen Richard James Clarke, Adrian John Clifford, John Paul Cockayne, Stephen Reginald Cole, David William Collings, Clayton Matthew Corbett, Kevin Allan Cordingley, Brian Walter James Corsie, Alan David Craik, Norman Andrew Cram, Richard Michael Cryer, Nicholas John Cumming, Andrew John Dean, Richard Deasy, Paul Anthony

Harding, Christopher Paul Harmon, Stuart Owen Harriette, Terry Harrison, Ian Stuart Heathcote Hartshorne, Richard Yates Harvey, Philip Steven Hassan, Miah Mohammad Benzir Hindson, Kelvin John Hobbs, Stewart John Horwill, Adrian Keith Hyde, Gabriel Francis Irvine, David Irvine, Kenneth Campbell James, Kevin Stuart Jethwa, Anilkumar Damji Jones, Arthur Brian Jones, Kevin Kaya, Mehmet Soyer Marc Keeler, Andrew James Kenchington, Nicholas Simon Kenny, John Bernard Edward Kilcran, Mark Kilgallon, John Barry Kinnear, Brian Walter Kubik, Leszek Aleksander Lai, Chi Kin Lai, Kwok-Fai Patrick Lai, Shui Kwan Kelly Lai, Wing Kai Lam, King-Kong Lam, Siu Yu Lam, Tung Kiu Nelson Lau, Kay-Shui Lau, Kwok Chu Law, Chi Lim Charles Law, Mei Lun Alan Lee, Kuan Hong Lee, Joo Sum Lee, Chiu Chun Lee, Chung Hay Johnny Lee, Kok Hong

Patrick, Ian Pearson, Andrew William Jonathan Penfold, Stephen John Perkins, David Anthony Ponsford, George William Beavis Pope, David John Pope, Graham Michael Prichard, Stephen John Procter, Stephen Leslie Rafiq, Mohammed Rankine, Gordon Alexander Rawlins, John Anthony Redmond, John Lee Richards, David Arthur Richardson, David Linden Richardson, Philip Roberts, Keith Rogatzki, Paul Pierre Rowton, John William Ryan, Patrick Alain Scutter, Ralph Edward Sharples, Jeremy Robin Sheppard, Anthony David Shoebridge, Geoffrey Adrian Siu, Wai-Leung Allen Sivagnanasundaram, Markandu Smart, William Sherrit Smith, Andrew Carrick So, Wing Yiu So, Kwok Leung Sparkes, Peter Wittcome Sreeves, Christopher Matthew Steele, Mark Stephenson, Tony Stevenson, Martin Christopher Stewart, Jeffrey Norman Strauss, Richard Peter Sutcliffe, Jill Carleton Swann, Walter Sweetlove, John Colin Szeto, Wah Yiu

Deely, Sean Christopher Dickens, Christopher William Dickinson, Martin Hyett Druse, Paul Duffi n, John Henry Eccles, David Michael Edden, Lisa Kaye Ensor, James Martin Fan, Kam On Fenner, Andrew Stephen Fenton, David Stewart Ferguson, James Mcleman Field, Richard Alan Fitzpatrick, Gerard Forristal, William Patrick Foster, Ian Fox, Adrian Kenneth Martin Fray, Sarah Fung, Wai Huen Gabbitas, James Gabrielczyk, Jacek Robert Jakub

Leung, Kin Ming Chung Leung, Siu Liu, Sing Pang Lockwood, Stephen Elliott Lomas, Mark Gowan Lonergan, Patrick James MacFarlane, Ian Machin, Stephen MacInnes, Alasdair Fraser Mackie, Stewart Gordon Malcolm, Ian Richard Martin, Kenneth Frederick Martin, James Andrew Roxburgh Mashoof, Massood McCallum, Ian McEwan, Robin Alexander McSorley, Steven Edward McSweeney, John McVicar, Alan Mark Meadows, Colin Leslie Miller, Michael Dennis

Tang, WaiJohn John Taylor,,Chi Taylor Peter Taylor, Russell John Wale Tee, Andrew Christopher John Thiemann, Peter Martin Richard Thomas, Paul Thomas, Mark Richard Tiffney, Steven George Topping, Barry Hilary Valentine Tovey,, Michael Alford Tovey Travis, David Alan Trivett, Christopher Paul Tse, Chau Tong Tse, Chun Tat Tso, Man Lun Simon Tsoi, Wai Tong Martin Turnbull, Clifford Anthony Van Zyl, Rocco Radyn Viapree, Ian Stuart Walsh, Mark Stephen Paul Wardle, John

Garrison, Philip Mark Georghiou, Andreas Ghavami, Ciamak Gilbride, Nigel William Glenister, Derek Hubert Goacher, Philip John Goddard, James Neale Ashley

Millett, Anthony Thomas Ng, Wai Ho Ng, Kong Sang Ronald Ng, Ngok Kong Ng, Lik Kwok Andy Ng, Wing Yiu Ngo, Kwok Keung

Warren, David John Warriner, Glenn Douglas Watt, Geoffrey George Wealleans, Kim Royden Wendler, Stephen Karol Werran, Geoffrey Raymond Westrope, Sean Keith

11

thestructuralengineer.org | April 2021  

Upfront

News

Wheeler, Nicholas Charles White, Steven Leslie White, Robin Williams, Andrew Robert Williamson, Clive Simon George Wilson, Christopher Wong, Wai Hing Wong, Hang-Sing Wong, Wing Cheung Dennis Yau, Sun Keung Yau, Hoi Ngan Alan Yau, Sun Ming Samuel

Harper, Christopher Derek Hayes, Anthony Hugh Hernon, Anthony George Hewett, Martin Roy Ho, Shiu Fai Hutcheson, Mark Robert Johnson, Brian Donald Kallias, Ierotheos Costa Lawson, Robert Mark Lee, Kai-Hoi Lewis, Geoffrey Michael Little, Gordon Hugh

Mawditt, John Maurice McCabe, David John McLagan, Gibson Hogg Mottershaw, Trevor James Palmer, Keith Paterson, Alastair Craig Pexton, David Lawrence Rigby, Alan Rolfe, Robin Christopher Shearing, Terry Shewan, John Leslie Short, Colin Edward

McGuinness, Terence Meacock, Peter John Minshall, Barry John Mistry, Nagindas Narottam Moore, Graham Anthony Moores, David Meredith Morris, Brian John Morris, Roy Robert Munday, John Patrick Orford, Terry Alfred Pandit, Madhav Pralhad Parkin, Paul Edward

Yeung, Hung Biu

Llewellyn, Raymond John Longthorne, John Lugsden, James Roger Lyness, John Francis Ma, Lee-Tak MacLaren, Malcolm Maguire, Trevor Ingram Mak, Bing Leung Rufin Matthews, Paul Robert Mazzetti, Mark Mok, Kin-Yau Daniel Moody, Keith Andrew Mullineaux, Trevor Malcolm Murphy, John Robert Newton, Stephen William O'Brien, Lewis Robert Onions, Clive Ooi, Heong Beng Pearson, Nigel James Pinkney, Michael William Purdy, Stuart Kenneth Cyril Rennie, Robert Robinson, Glyn Harold Robinson, William John Smith, Colin Stirling, James Martin Tam, Ka Pui Tappenden, Graeme Henry Taylor, Malcolm James Ja mes Twist, Charles Charle s Vijayendran, Muthiah Thiyagarajah Walsh, Stephen Patrick Warren, Keith John Whiteman, Joseph John Wong, Chi Tong Wong, Ka-Chan Wood, Charles Norman Woods, Rodney Timothy

Singh, Harbhajan Slade, Ronald Ernest Stewart, John Peter Stringer, Paul Philip Thurrell, Bruce Harry Townsend, Gerald Hughes Tricklebank, Alan Howard Tyler, Peter Henry Thomas Ward, Anthony William Yeung, Koon-Fat Gordon

Payne, Ian Warren Peacock, Thomas Peter Ponnuswamy, Sankaralingam Price, Edwin Stuart Procter, Robert Leslie Ray, Krishnadas Reed, Brian Rock, Norman Frederick Roy, Pabitra Sample, John Alexander Saville, John George Shaw, John Joseph Sinclair, Alastair Aitken Snelling, Robert Edward Charles Spibey, Richard Frank Steel, Venantius Anthony Vincent Steven, Henry Orr Strachan, Richard David Sutcliffe, Reginald George Swindells, Barry Tang, Shik-Tsun Thomas Tanner,, Richard Beresford Tanner Taylor, Brian Taylor,, Rodney George Taylor Thom, Peter John Townshend, John Somerville Vickers, Michael Edward Weston, Douglas Richard Williams, David Leonard Williams, Peter Norman Wilson, Leo William Wragg, Allan Victor Yoheann-Roberts, Clive Alfonso Young, Colin Jonathan

40 YEARS OF MEMBERSHIP Fellows

 Adams, Derek Derek Albert  Ainsworth, Peter Robert Robert  Atkinson, Howard Robin Robin Crawford Crawford Barton, John Richard Bhogal, Satpal Singh Billington, Colin John Brade, Ralph Gregory Camilleri, Denis H. Cheng, Yan-Kee Cunningham, Ronald Fung, King Cheong Haynes, John Cecil Ho, Peter Tak Sum Isgar, Philip Jones, James Leslie Kaminski, Mark Peter Khonji, Ismail Abdulwahed Kidd, Steven Philip Laver, William Greig Henry McColl, James Lambie McKittrick, Robert Alexander Michaelides, Andreas Georgiou Moh, Za Lee Owen, Andrew Roger Pang, Paul Tat-Choi Peattie, Geoffrey Charles Pepper, Michael John Pratt, Howard Stanley Priestley, Christopher Lionel Seward, Norman John Smith, Lawrence Richard Thomas, John Sylvanus Tomlinson, Martin James Train, Norman Charles Whitehead, Andrew John Woodward, Denver Alfred Wright, Howard David Members

 Aherne, Kevin Kevin John  Allan, Andrew Andrew John  Aspley,, Graham  Aspley Beal, Nigel Stuart Bernau, Allan James Millais Blackman, Terence Richard Brennan, John James Brown, Michael Robert Buck, Michael David Bull, Alwyn John Butler, John Bernard Cannon, Eamonn Padraig Carr, David Alan Chan, Chu Fai Edmond Choi, Ngai-Chiu Davis, James Alan Derby, Trevor James Duff, Gavin Hugh Dunn, Richard Hugh Durrant, George Nicholas Fisher, Anthony Duncan Gibbons, Rodney Trevor Gohil, Harilal Bhagwanji Graham, Peter Richard Haines, Paul Stephen Hallam, Michael Bernard

50 YEARS OF MEMBERSHIP Fellows

Members

 Ablewhite, Derek Michael  Ablewhite,  Allen, John John Louis Bates, David Harold Belton, Gordon Benham, David John Boyles, Michael Winston Kenneth Bright, Allan Thomas Brogan, James Colin Brown, Colin Robert Brown, Peter Stafford Brown, Michael George Buckell, Rodney Campbell, Robert Hugh Carson, William Clarke, John Richard Cockerill, Raymond Edward Coker, David Edward Collins, Thomas John Cookson, Raymond Alec Crowe, Barry John Davies, Eric Philip Donoghue, Leonard William Michael Dore, Richard David Dow, Alan Malcolm Earwood, Graham David Eatherley, Michael John Fairhall, Jeffrey William Ferris, Peter Frankland, John

The President and Council are also pleased to announce that the following Fellows and Members have completed

 Amoss, John William John William  Astley,, Robert  Astley Bennett, Robin James Macdonald Borzyslawski, Wlodzimierz A. Brierley, Vincent Cameron, Alexander Paul Corcoran, Brendan Joseph John Cox, Ronald William Cranch, Alan John Croll, James George Arthur Davies, John Michael Doogan, William Maurice Evans, Stephen Graham Flint, Anthony Ray Fowler, David Henry Freeman, Alan Alfred Grace, John Patrick Hill, George Roland Hobson, Brian Geoffrey Hughes, Barry Peter Hughes, Brian

Garratt, Raymond Gill, James Walter Keith Glanville, Richard Eric Graham, Philip John Griffi th, Arthur Edward Hall, Colin Hallum, James Frederick Hambly, David Geoffrey Hargreaves, David Andrew Harrison, John Benson Hawkins, David John Hepburn, Alan Holloway, David Grant Hornsby, Kevin Hudd, John Leslie Isherwood, Ian David James, Brian Trevor James, William Jaskiewicz, Grzegorz Jefford, Graham Francis Kasriel, Andrew Thomas

60 years’ membership of the Institution as a Chartered Structural Engineer during the course of 2020.

Hussain, Naeemullah Johnston, Bernard Jones, Glyn Jones, Robert Alan Lo, Yiu-Ching Manning, Dennis Michael Manson, Matthew Lowry

Koteeswaran, Venkatraman Lau, Chi-Wan Lee, Anthony John Leslie, William Lim, Chin Tian Matthews, Kenneth George McCulloch, Alexander Allan

She  eld, Peter Srinivasan, Seshadri Turkington, William Kenneth Somme Welford, Paul Alexander White, Terence Clive

12

60 YEARS OF MEMBERSHIP Fellows

Blake, Ronald James Bulson, Philip Stanley Dean, Charles Michael Dines, Edward Lawrence Gollins, Donald Edwin Gregory, Henry Catchick Keys, Gerald Lambert, Michael Francis McFarlane, John Nekoo, Rustom Kerikhusroo Phillips, Lionel Reynolds, David Edward Holden Robson, Ronald John ffi

 April 2021 | thestructuralengineer thestructuralengineer.org .org

News

 

Members

Members

Butler, Robert Divan, Malhar Shivaram Foulger, Francis Charles Ghosh, Utpal Krishna Gill, Michael Brendan Mary Gray, Walter Smith Harkin, Michael Edward Hewson, Kenneth Norman Jones, Ian Maynard, Arthur Leslie Searle, Michael George Sillett, Donald Frank Spacey, Geoffrey Upton, David John

Geldard, Wayne Jones, Trevor Peter Kent, David James Kingston, Thomas James Morfitt, Stephen Andrew Patel, Urwesh Harihar Stokes, Stephen Michael Weeden, Robert Steven Worship, Andrew

The President and Council congratulate the following Fellows and Members who have completed 25 or 30 years’ membership of the Institution as an Incorporated Structural Engineer and then as a Chartered Structural Engineer during the course of 2020. In writing to each member, the President recorded this milestone of achievement and expressed the hope that they will continue to enjoy many more years of association with the Institution. 25 YEARS OF MEMBERSHIP Fellows

Byatt, Matthew Cameron, Brian Pragnell, Robert John

Duke, Gary Lane, Gordon William Martin, Francois Regis McCarthy, Gerard Thomas Milnes, Darren Michael Mottershead, Michael John Rogers, Paul Gregory Senaratne, Angunnegamage Nihal Palitha Smith, Alexander Watters Smith, Donald Elliot Speed, Paul Swindale, Steven John Tomas, Adam Bradley Watson, Andrew Malcolm

O’Driscoll, Graham Oliver, David Andrew Peet, Alan John Porter, Stephen Glyn Salt, Jonathan Richard Shute, Michael Colin Smith, Adrian Keith Martin Smith, Roger William Sparrow, Paul Stockbridge, Neil Robert Tadier,, Colin Alfred Tadier Thompson, Anthony Stuart Vaughan, Douglas John Whittlestone, Andrew John Wooldridge, Alan James

25 YEARS OF MEMBERSHIP  Associate-Members  AssociateMembers

Fellows

Lowe, David Herbert Members

 Allen, Matthew Matthew Charles Charles Benton, Geoffrey John Booth, Stephen John Chastell, Colin James Chisvo, John Gift Gooding, Andrew Charles Hackett, Martin Spencer Haywood, Clive Ip, Wai Wing Albert Mansfield, Julian Nathan McGovern, Ian James Oates, Jonathan James Pegg, Barry Martin Refoy, Christopher John Stokes, David John Watkins, Gareth

Banda, Zanganini Hillam Brookes, Michael Dennis Davenport, Martin Douglas, Jonathan Paul

Jubb, Robert Simon Lambourne, Clinton Neville John Leow, Ronald Francis Anthony Levy, Hugh Oliver Loizou, Andrew Lynas, Christopher Charles Mace, Ronald William David McPherson, Colin Sutherland Millard, Felicity Daphne Morris, Adrian Lee Mott, David John Nazar Zadeh, Hedayat

milestone of achievement and expressed the hope that they will continue to enjoy many more years of association with the Institution.

30 YEARS OF MEMBERSHIP

30 YEARS OF MEMBERSHIP  Associate-Members  AssociateMembers

Barber, Nicholas Peter Barton, Lee Rochester Bhambra, Trebheven Singh Corfield, Derrick Edward Erskine, Graeme John Evers, Harry Gallie, Roy Grady, Andrew Joseph Grange, Stephen Clive Hodgson, David Hopkins, Steven Thomas Istead, Stephen Robert James, David Ashby Jones, Stephen Richard

The President and Council congratulate the following  Associate-Members who have have completed 25, 30 or 40 years’ membership of the Institution as an Incorporated Structural Engineer during the course of 2020. In writing to each member, the President recorded this

Upfront

40 YEARS OF MEMBERSHIP  Associate-Members  AssociateMembers

Bates, Roger Clifford Counsell, Michael Colin Densley, Roger Edward Green, Kenneth Simon Kingdon, Geoffrey Francis Leaper, John Mark Lowen, Alan Kenneth McCarthy, Vincent George Phillips, Raymond Paul Pillinger, Alan Harold Shepherd, Adrian John Shergold, Alan James Thwaites, Andrew Van Klaveren, Michael

Institution news

Trustee and Council Election 2021: Notice to voting members  As we embrace the culture of a truly international Institution and increased participation on Board and Council by all voting members, under the planned reforms of ‘Structured for Success’ (see page 6), the Institution Vice-Presidents are to be elected from five worldwide electoral regions and all voting members are eligible to stand for election as Board Member and Ordinary Member of Council. Nominations are sought for candidates for the Trustee and Council Election 2021: Ò| Vice-President  Vice-President (Trustee) (Trustee) 2022–24: 2 vacancies to be filled by election – Vice-President elected from the electoral region Africa, region Africa, India and the Middle East

  – Vice-President  Vice-President elected from the

electoral region Australasia region Australasia and South-East Asia Ò| Board Member (Trustee) 2022–24: 3 vacancies to be filled by election Ò| Ordinary Member of Council 2022–24: 4 vacancies to be filled by election   Chartered Members who have submitted a current Institution Continuing Professional Development Return are invited to consider standing for election as a Vice-President 2022–24. Chartered and Incorporated Structural Engineers, Technician Members and Graduate members (who have submitted a current Institution Continuing Professional

13

Development return) are invited to consider standing for election as Board Member or Ordinary Member of Council 2022–24. Further information and nomination forms (which must be completed by the candidate and supported by 10 other Voting Members) are available at www.cesvotes.com/istructe www.cesvotes.com/istructe.. In due course, voting documents will be issued and you will be able to vote either electronically or by post.  The results will subsequently be published in The Structural Engineer , in the e-newsletter and on the IStructE website.   For further information or clarification, contact Dr Kristy MacDonald, Board Secretary ([email protected]) ([email protected])..

thestructuralengineer.org | April 2021

 

Climate emergency Planning application  The Structural procedures procedur Carbon Carbon es Tool Tool Opinion  

2.Low carbon

 An  A n introduction to The Structural Carbon Tool Penny Gowler and Will Arnold preview Arnold preview a new embodied carbon tool that has been developed by Elliott Wood and the Institution of Structural Engineers.

In August 2020, the IStructE released How to calculate embodied carbon

(‘HTCEC’)1 to enable engineers to calculate emissions in a consistent and robust way, allowing them to make meaningful carbon comparisons between designs, and identify opportunities for carbon reductions in their schemes. In March 2021, this was followed by the launch of The Structural Carbon Tool  (‘the

tool’; www.istructe.org/  the-structural-carbon-tool/ ), an opensource Excel-based carbon estimator developed by Elliott Wood Partnership Ltd in conjunction with the IStructE.  This article provides a brief overview of the functionality of the tool for the firsttime user.

understand rough differences understand rough between diff erent erent structural options  the impacts of Ò| communicate communicate the decisions to the design and client team. Ò|

 The tool has been set s et up primaril y for building structures (new and reuse) but is also applicable to infrastructure projects*. It is provided on an opensource basis, and while all non-input cells are initially locked to prevent errors, the password is provided on the User Guide tab. We encourage engineers to integrate the tool into their existing digital work flows, and to share their modi fications with others in the spirit of www. structuralengineersdeclare.com .

Use

Inputs

Reflecting the fact that the engineer’s first priority in the climate emergency is to minimise upfront embodied carbon emissions, the tool is intended to be used to inform decisions about how best to reduce carbon in a design. It can do this by helping the engineer to:  the amount of carbon in Ò| estimate estimate the diff erent erent parts of the design identify carbon Ò| identify  carbon hotspots and  to target for opportunities to opportunities material reduction

 To use the tool, the engineer  To engineer starts by entering some basic project information (GIA and construction budget as a minimum), before opening the first Scheme tab (Figure 1). 1). In total, up to six options can be entered on di ff erent erent Scheme tabs. Here the engineer will need to determine their expected material quantities using a method suitable for *

éFIGURE 1:

Scheme input table

the design stage (refer to HTCEC for guidance). The engineer should remain mindful of the level of uncertainty, uncertainty, and should consider whether nonstructural items need including, such as fire protection. Inputting data into the Scheme tab is as simple as selecting a material specification, structural element type (aligned with RICS BCIS standard form2), and then inputting the volume or mass of material. For concrete elements, there is then an option to add in a predefined reinforcement quantity, or this can be entered separately on a new line.  The tool then multiplies the quantities by the relevant carbon factors. By default, this is calculated using data from HTCEC, but these can be modified, or the user can add their own (in the Custom Data tab) if appropriate.

THE TOOL IS INTENDED TO BE USED TO INFORM DECISIONS ABOUTCARBON HOW BEST TO REDUCE

For infrastructure projects, certain parts of the spreadsheet may need editing by the user, e.g. updating A5a site activity emissions to reflect a more appropriate value for the work, and switching ‘GIA’ for ‘Functional Area’ or similar.

14

 April 2021 | thestructuralengineer thestructuralengineer.org .org

 

Structural Carbon  The Structural Carbon Tool Tool 

Climate emergency 

ëFIGURE 2: Outputs on Scheme page

éFIGURE 3: Outputs on Comparison page

Outputs and interpretation  A ser ies of output s are d ispla yed on

any sequestration, based on the

the individual Scheme tabs (Figure 2),, as well as the Comparison tab 2) (Figure 3). 3). On the Scheme tabs, the aggregated A1–A5 and A–C emissions are displayed, along with sequestration and module D benefits/burdens. The distribution of carbon throughout the scheme is shown on a pie chart to identify carbon-intensive aspects of the design, allowing targeted conversations around how to reduce material use. A SCORS rating and some comparison metrics are also shown to enable discussion with others. On the Comparison tab, scheme emissions are compared by lifecycle module as well as by aggregated  A1–A5 and A– C emissions. emis sions. A carbon/time graph is also provided showing the temporal eff ects ects of

forward-looking approach3.

REFERENCES

Penny Gowler CEng, MIStructE Penny is Associate Director at Elliott Wood with over 15 years’ structural engineering experience. She is passionate about the sustainable design and refurbishment of buildings.

1) Gibbons O.P. O.P. and Orr J.J. (2020) How (2020)  How to calcul calculate ate embodied embodied carbon, London: IStructE Ltd

HAVE  YOUR  YO UR SAY  SA Y 

  Will Arnold MEng, CEng, MIStructE Will is Head of Climate Action at the IStructE. He leads the Institution’s response to the climate emergency, bringing this action into all aspects of its work, including the publication of bestpractice emergency guidance.

15

[email protected]

@IStructE #TheStructuralEngineer

2) RICS (2012) Elemental Standard Form of Cost Analysis: Principles, Instructions, Elements  and De Defi  nitions (4th (NRM) ed.)

[Online] Available at: www.rics. org/globalassets/rics-website/  media/products/data-products/  bcis-construction/bcis-elementalstandard-form-cost-analysis-4thnrm-edition-2012.pdf nrm-edition2012.pdf (Accessed: March 2021) 3) Hawkins W. (2021) ‘Timber and carbon sequestration’, The Structural Engineer , 99 (1), pp.

18–20

thestructuralengineer.org | April 2021

 

Climate emergency Planning application Steps toprocedur procedures net zeroes Opinion  

1.Get informed

IABSE Henderson Colloquium Colloquium 2020: Steps to achieve a net-zero construction const ruction indust industrry Mike Cook  summarises  summarises the outcomes of the IABSE British Group’s annual debating forum, setting out key actions that stakeholders in the construction industry can take to enable a transition to net zero. Introduction  The IABSE IABSE British Group held its annual Henderson Colloquium virtually in September 2020. Over two days, with 40 invited contributors drawn from multiple sectors, we explored the actions needed across the industry, the professional institutions, the financial sector, government and education to achieve a net-zero-carbon construction industry. We arrived at a view on the outcomes required and key actions ahead across this wide spectrum of influencing bodies.  Although  Althoug h the focus of of the colloquiu colloquium m was the UK, most, if not all, of the outcomes and actions are applicable universally and can be adopted by local bodies in other countries. The climate emergency we all face is, after all, a global issue and the need for structural engineering to bring benefit and avoid harm applies globally.

Outcomes and actions  The colloquium colloquium mapped out the concerted response needed from the industry, our professional institutions, clients and investors, government, and educators. 1. Investors, clients, insurers It is essential that we engage our clients, investors and insurers in the eff orts orts to achieve radical change in project planning, procurement and delivery. Without them, the industry cannot achieve the necessary changes towards net-zero construction. Key commitments and actions Ò| Procure new projects based on desired valued and agreed outcomes. Ò| Set annual, diminishing carbon targets for project portfolios. Ò| Ensure that all buildings and infrastructure projects carry out a carbon assessment – embodied and

whole-life. Ò| Seek refurbishment over new build, as a priority. Ò| Reconsider economic/business models and ensure they are fit for purpose and fit for the future. Ò| Consider impacts on future generations within all development appraisals. Ò| Consider stranded asset risks of all developments. Example: The adoption of future Example: The scenario testing by investors and developers such as Lendlease (www.lendlease.com/uk/company/  sustainability/climate-related- financialdisclosure-tcfd/).. disclosure-tcfd/) 2. Education Engendering ‘planet literacy’ is crucial. Rethinking education, driven by needs of all generations equally and providing the attributes and skills that are needed in a world of accelerating change.

Key commitments and actions Ò| Re-focus on developing new skills and learning outcomes for future built environment professionals that is far more diverse that STEM. Ò| Encourage innovative, low- or negative-carbon approaches to design, with less emphasis on new build and more on practical reuse and social benefits. Ò| Systems thinking and systems literacy should be central to education to allow people to handle complexity and change. Ò| Rethink accreditation of tertiary education courses to define new learning outcomes to fit new needs. Ò| For civil and structural engineering, the Joint Board of Moderators is leading the way in accreditation – this example should be followed by other construction-related professions. Royal Academy Academy of Enginee Engineering ring Ò| The Royal National Engineering Policy Centre

should lead coordinated change across education in all engineering professions.

KEY CONCLUSIONS

1) The 1)  The UK construction industry needs to find a united voice and vision driven by the future needs of the planet and the way the industry can and will support these. 2) The 2)  The design community community must prioritise repurposing existing buildings buildings ahead of new construction, construction, and ensure a ‘pre-feasibility design stage’ that balances the social benefits with the planetary harm of a project. 3) Institutions must unite to de fine the ethical principles of the professions, driving change through the standards they set, the education and skills they promote and the targets they set for upfront and in-use carbon. 4) Business models must move away from growth for its own sake to consider health and prosperity of future generations, and the r isks of climate change being unabated. 5) Government must recognise how central the construction sector is to achieving net-zero-carbon targets, and becoming a partner in the sector’s transformation. 6) Education must change to ensure future generations’ thinking is not constrained by the traditional discipline silos and business-as-usual practices; promoting cross-disciplinary empathy and creativity to foster the ability to solve the challenges ahead.

16

 April 2021 | thestructuralengineer thestructuralengineer.org .org

Steps to net zero  Climate emergency 

 

  Example: The Example:   The new new learning learning outcomes outcomes now agreed by the Joint Board of Moderators (https://jbm.org.uk/medi (https://jbm.org.uk/media/  a/  u44b1lld/guidelines-for-developingdegree-programmes.pdf) and as discussed at the IStructE Academics Conference 2020 (www.istructe.org/  2020 (www.istructe.org/  resources/training/developing-learningoutcomes/).. outcomes/)   3. Institutions/professions

THE UK CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY NEEDS TO FIND  A UNITED VOICE V OICE AND VISION V ISION DRIVEN BY THE FUTURE NEEDS OF THE PLANET

Our professional institutions have a responsibility to inform and guide the design professions through their members, and influence the regulations that govern their behaviours, skills and professional standards.   Key commitments and actions Ò| Commit to making changes to regulatory frameworks and codes of practice that will help achieve the transformation required. Ò| Standardise ways to assess climate and ecological impact. Ò| Set targets to achieve reduction in harm from construction and increasing benefit. Ò| Change what good looks like: celebrate zero-carbon, regenerative design outcomes. Ò| Commit to assisting the retraining and upskilling of the professions. Ò| Drive changes to the education curriculum and learning outcomes, and the criteria for the accreditation of further education courses. Ò| Raise the importance of climate response as core to the ethical base of the professions. Ò| Build influence and lead at policy level in collaboration with other institutions to speak with one voice.    The creation of the Climate Example: The Example: Emergency Task Group (www.istructe.

Ò| Create

a better-connected industry with active alliances of clients and businesses that are committed to change. Ò| Learn from international best practice and connect globally globall y. Ò| Share knowledge, through learning feedback loops from research and experience. Ò| Work towards future climate scenarios, emphasising the future value we can deliver. Ò| Recognise that personal and business ethics are crucial. Ò| Recognise that public opinion (voter/  client opinion) matters and will redefine demand. Ò| Speak with one voice, building towards a real tipping point.   Example: Bodies Example:  Bodies such as the UK Green Building Council, the Construction Industry Council and the Construction Leadership Council are all driving a climate emergency response agenda and working towards COP26 in November 2021 (https://ukcop26.org/) 2021  (https://ukcop26.org/)..   5. Government  The constructi construction on industry industry needs needs stable and clear support from government, to recognise construction as a cross-cutting sector for industrial strategy and to deliver to the UK’s net-zero-carbon targets.  

org/resources/report/climate-emergencytask-group-end-of-year-report/) ask-group-end-of-year-report/) at  at the IStructE to help inform and drive change across the profession.   4. Industry: constructors and designers/specifiers Industry, pulling together, needs to demonstrate its capability to deliver the green future and to demonstrate what is needed to strengthen it. There needs to be a clear, consistent message from representative organisations, contractors and design practices, to achieve change.  This will make us better better partners partners with government and allow the construction industry to pull together with others to deliver to the net-zero agenda.   Key commitments and actions Ò| Build a uniting vision to meet the demands for achieving zero carbon ahead of 2050.

Key commitments and actions  Appoint a chief chief adviser adviser for construc construction tion Ò| Appoint (or the built environment) with a specific remit to ensure we have a built environment that will support longterm health, safety and prosperity. Ò| Be honest and include all consumption-related carbon generated both onshore and off shore, shore, based on consumption not production. Ò| Rebalance taxation on construction activities to favour renovation and reuse over demolition and new build, to reduce construction’s carbon footprint. Ò| Base procurement for the government estate on setting outcomes required from the development and delivering value to the health and wellbeing of present and future generations – true value rather than lowest cost. Ò| Favour reuse and refurbishment of existing building stock when making

17

procurement decisions and seek to minimise demolition. Ò| Mandate carbon budgets (in-use and embodied) for all new housing projects, moving to the Passivhaus Standard by 2025. Ò| Require all buildings and infrastructure projects to carry out a wholelife carbon assessment and set increasingly tight performance targets.   Example: The UK government’s push Example: The to encourage all businesses in the construction industry to join the UN’s Race to Zero (https://unfccc.int/climateaction/race-to-zero-campaign) and action/race-to-zero-campaign)  and the creation of a ‘built environment day’ at COP26 (www.architectsjournal.co.uk/  news/cop26-climate-summit-to-examinerole-of-buildings).. role-of-buildings)  

What can I do now?  These notes provide provide a reminder reminder that that every individual engineer is working within a wide set of ‘systems’ – all these are important and need to change if we are to achieve our carbon reduction targets. Setting out the systems here should help individuals develop their own climate emergency response and encourage them to connect to others whom they can influence. It is important for us each to find ways to communicate the need for change across as wide a sphere of in fluence as we can, with colleagues, collaborators, clients and beyond.

 Acknowledg  Ackno wledgement ement HAVE  YOUR  YOUR SAY  SA Y 

[email protected]

@IStructE

#TheStructuralEngineer

I am grateful to Ian Firth FREng, FIStructE for inviting me to chair the 2020 IABSE Henderson Colloquium and for wholeheartedly supporting an agenda devoted to the urgent issues of climate emergency response.   Mike Cook MA, PhD, CEng, FREng, FIStructE

Mike Cook is a Consultant (Past Senior Partner) at Buro Happold and Chair of the Institution of Structural Engineers Climate Emergency Task Group.  

IABSE Congress 2021 IABSE is holding a congress in Ghent, Belgium on 22–24 September 2021. The theme will be ‘Structural Engineering for Future Societal Needs’, comprising building and maintaining safe and reliable buildings and infrastructures under the effects of climate change in a world with scarcer resources and the ambition to reduce humanity’s CO2 footprint. Find out more at https://iabse.org/ghent2021

 

thestructuralengineer.org | April 2021

 

Climate emergency Planning application Low-carbon procedures procedur steeles Opinion  

2.Low carbon

Developing a low-carbon, Developing low-carbon, circular economy for steel Walter Swann explains how structural engineers can support a transition to a low-carbon steel industry through their design and specifying decisions.

Introduction Steel has a significant role to play in the circular economy, but one key component is missing – the balance of supply with demand1. Even though most scrap steel arisings are captured and recycled or reused, the global demand for steel is such that it exceeds the availability of scrap by a factor of 3. Furthermor Furthermore, e, global steel demand is not predicted to peak until mid-century, with scrap volumes not matching demand until even later.  Therefor  Ther efore, e, witho without ut a dram dramatic atic decr decrease ease in mater material ial usage, there will continue to be a need for primary steelmaking to meet the demands of society well into the second half of the century.  The challenge, lenge, ther therefor efore, e, is to transi transition tion to carbon-neutral carbon-neu tral primary steelmaking as a matter of urgency, while manufacturing products that support lean design. This article outlines ways in which the structural engineer can engage with and support the steel industry in that transition.

Production

ECF of ~500kgCO2e/t and that from DRI-EAF ~1000kgCO2e/t.

Scrap, steelmaking and module D Scrap is an integral and important part of the steelmaking process. Consequently, the steel industry itself drives demand for scrap. A 2012 UK survey revealed that 93% of structural sections were recycled and 7% were reused4, so specifying recycled content has little impact on overall recycling rates, as they are already close to the practical maximum.  The endend-of-l of-life ife valu value e of BF-B BF-BOF OF steel steel is not not realised until it enters the recycling loop for the first time. Here, it often becomes the scrap charge for the EAF, and in doing so displaces the need for steel made from primary resource. This results in an environmental benefit that can be thought of as the A1–A3 ECF for BF-BOF minus that for EAF.  Typica  T ypicall module module D bene benefits of BF-BOF steel are in the range of 1600–1800kgCO2e/t, and, of course, once in the loop steel can be recycled many times over.

Steel products can be manufactured entirely from recycled scrap (‘secondary steel’), or from a mix of recycled scrap and new steel created from iron (‘primary steel’). Let’s start by recapping the ways in which these processes

Mapping products to processes Globally, 1800M tonnes of crude steel is Globally, produced each year, year, with a 70:30 split between BOF and EAF. For the EU28, this figure is 160M tonnes per year, with a 60:40 BOF:EAF split (from 60 blast furnaces and 150 electric arc furnaces). The UK produces 7M tonnes per year of crude steel, with an 80:20 BOF:EAF split.  According to World World Steel data, buildings and infrastructure account for approx. 50% of global steel consumption.  This split between BOF and and EAF manufacture manufacture is not reflected equally across all products. Cladding, decking, hollow sections and plate are manufactured almost entirely using BF-BOF, whereas reinforcement, reinforcement, open sections and sheet piling are manufactured using either BFBOF or scrap-EAF. In developed economies with mature, well-established scrap flows, there is a natural transition toward scrap-EAF production of engineering steels, reinforcement and sections.  This is evidenced in Europe Europe and the USA in

1: Global steelmaking by (1) íFIGURE

can vary. Ironmaking is part of the primary steelmaking process (Figure 1). 1). Globally, around 1200M tonnes2 of iron is produced annually in the blast furnace (BF) process using coke to reduce iron ore. Another 100M tonnes 2 is made by reducing iron ore, often with natural gas (CH4), in the direct reduced iron (DRI) process to produce solid ‘sponge’ iron. Once you have iron, you can create primary steel in either a basic oxygen furnace (BOF), furnace (BOF), or an electric arc furnace (EAF). furnace (EAF). In a BOF, steel is made by injecting oxygen into the liquid BF iron to remove excess carbon. Scrap steel is used as a coolant, the percentage varying from plant to plant, but typically 10–15%, with a technical maximum of around 30%. The  A1–A3 embodied carbon factor (ECF)3 for steel from the BF-BOF route is ~2500kgCO2e/t.  An EAF can be used to produce steel from from DRI iron (DRI-EAF), 100% scrap steel (scrapEAF), or a mixture of both. Steel produced though the scrap-EAF process has an A1–A3

production route, (2) metallic input, (3) source of iron1

18

 April 2021 | thestructuralengineer thestructuralengineer.org .org

Low-carbon steel 

 

higher percentages of EAF manufacture relative to the global average, which will, of course, increase over time.  

Journey to carbon-neutral steelmaking  As part of ArcelorMittal’s ArcelorMittal’s commitment to the Paris Agreement, the firm is developing two routes to carbon-neutral primary steelmaking.  The first involves displacing fossil carbon in the blast furnace with circular carbon (biowaste materials from forestry and agriculture)5 and coupling this with carbon capture and use (CCU) to produce bioethanol, and carbon capture and storage (CCS). The first industrialscale pilot plant in Europe to do this will go live in 2022.  The second method method involves a transition to 100% hydrogen DRI, initially with fossil-based hydrogen, and ultimately transitioning to green hydrogen from the electrolysis of water using clean electricity5. The first industrial-scale DRI plant to run entirely on hydrogen is anticipated

Climate emergency 

 Acknowledgements  Acknowledgem ents

RESEARCH AND WORK WITH YOUR SUPPLY SUPPL Y CHAIN CHAI N TO DETERMINE WHICH PRODUCT GROUPS  ARE AVAILABLE AVAILABLE BY WHICH PROCESSES uses less steel and less concrete to do a similar  job to a re-entrant re-entrant profile (although this may need to be balanced with fire and acoustic considerations).  manages deflection. Computers are Reduce manages Reduce binary and can’t make engineering judgements on deflection criteria. Engineers can. Does 1mm over the code limit warrant a 10% increase in weight/carbon? Pre-sets and pre-cambers for permanent load can be used, especially where 9

to  come on stream in 2025.

there’s repetition – use the two-thirds rule .  

So, what should a structural engineer do?

Support the commitment to decarbonise

Step 1: Follow 1: Follow the refurbish  – reuse  – reduce refurbish – reuse – reduce   – recycle hierarchy. Step 2: Design 2: Design like a steel fabricator – skin down the loads, design for least weight, design to a unity factor of 1.00, manage deflection, then review through the lenses of cost, carbon and pragmatism. Step 3: Support 3: Support steelmakers that support the Paris Agreement.    is a very e ff ective ective means of Refurbishment is Refurbishment reducing demand for construction materials; many of the barriers to reusing  existing steel reusing existing elements are perceived rather than real, and

In the UK and Europe, steelmakers work to the same environmental standards and legislation in terms of emissions, ensuring a level playing field and preventing carbon leakage. Agree with your clients and design team to support those steelmakers that are certified to ResponsibleSteel10 – a broad environmental, social and governance standard where alignment with the Paris Agreement is mandatory. Understand the complexities of the supply chain. Specifying that all steel should be from an EAF source, or specifying a minimum recycled content percentage, is understandable but does

can be overcome if approached early enough in the design process6,7. Reduce starts Reduce  starts with grid selection. The grid should play to the strengths of the material being used. Think holistically: what o ff ers ers better carbon value – a short span sitting on a transfer or a clear span throughout?  challenges inappropriate structural Reduce challenges Reduce zones, yet understands that structure, facade and servicing all have to interface with one another. If an option leading to suboptimal structural design off ers ers greater carbon reductions overall, through operational carbon associated with space heating/cooling and material savings in facade, then it might be a better overall choice8.  favours high-strength steel where Reduce favours Reduce it delivers carbon value. Any S355 column in multistorey construction that is a 305 UC 137 or greater will deliver an approx. 30% reduction in weight and a minimum reduction of 30% in CO2e when redesigned in S460.  favours trapezoidal decking, which Reduce favours Reduce

not address the need to decarbonise primary steelmaking. Nor does it address the fact that, while technically possible, not all construction products are currently made solely by the scrapEAF process. Researching and working with your supply chain to determine which product groups are available by which processes can help to establish an honest ECF.  

Conclusion  To help create a low-carbon and circular world,  To support those companies that are investing in creating suffi cient supplies of future scrap, and that are making primary steel with low-carbon technologies. Design steel frames as e ffi ciently as possible, taking advantage of high-strength steels where it makes sense to do so, and build on and improve the inherent demountable nature of steel-framed construction to promote increased steel reuse. Where W here that’s that’s not possible, rest assured that the steel will be captured, recycled and made into new steel products.

19

My thanks goes to Alan Knight, Neil Tilley, Diego Padilla Philipps and Will Arnold for their valuable comments.   Walter Swann BEng, CEng, MIStructE Walter is a chartered structural engineer who has worked in consultancy, steel fabrication and steel manufacture. His current role is as a Steligence Construction Engineer with  ArcelorMittal in the UK.

REFERENCES

1) ArcelorMittal (2019) Climate Action Report, 1 May 2019 [Online] 2019 [Online] Available at: https://  storagearcelormittaluat.blob.core.windows.net/  media/hs4nmyya/am_climateactionreport_1.pdf (Accessed: February 2021) 2) World Steel Association (2020) 202  2020 0 World World Ste Steel el  in Figu Figures res [Online]  [Online] Available at: www.worldsteel. org/steel-by-topic/statistics/World-Steel-in-Figures. html (Accessed: February 2021) 3) Orr J., Gibbons O. and Arnold W. (2020) ‘A

brief guide to calculating embodied carbon’, The Structural Engineer , 98 (7), pp. 22–27 4) SteelConstruction.Info (2012) Recycling and  r euse [Online] euse [Online] Available at: www.steelconstruction. info/Recycling_and_reuse (Accessed: February 2021) 5) ArcelorMittal (2020) Climate Action in Europe  Europe  [Online] Available at: https://corporate-media.

arcelormittal.com/media/yw1gnzfo/climate-actionin-europe.pdf (Accessed: February 2021) 6) Drewniok M. (2021) ‘Enabling steel’s circular

economy potential’, The Structural Engineer , 99 (3), pp. 14–15 7) Girão Coelho A.M., Lawson M., Lam D. and  Yang J. (202  Yang (2020) 0) P428: Guidance on demountable

composite construction systems for UK practice, practice,  Ascot: Ste  Ascot: Steel el Con Constr struct uction ion Ins Instit titute ute 8) ArcelorMittal (2019) Steligence; the intelligent

construction choice [Online] choice [Online] Available at: https://  steligence.arcelormittal.com/ (Accessed: February 2021) 9) Rackham J.W., Couchman G.H. and Hicks S.J. (2009) Composite slabs and beams using steel

decking: Best practice for design and construction  construction   (rev. ed.), Ascot: Metal Cladding & Roofing Manufacturers Association/Steel Construction Institute, p. 59 10) ResponsibleSteel (2019) ResponsibleSteel Standard , Version 1.0 [Online] Available at: www. responsiblesteel.org/standard/ (Accessed: February 2021)

thestructuralengineer.org | April 2021

 

Climate emergency Planning application Innovating procedures procedur for zero es carbon Opinion  

2.Low carbon

Structural engineering innovation for a zero-carbon world: an R&D agenda to match the carbon budget Pete Winslow, Winslow, Mike Sefton a Sefton and nd Will  Will Arnold set Arnold set out a vision for a net-zero structural engineering sector and the R&D that we as a profession need to tackle to get there. Introduction

 This artic article le set sets s out out a rese researc arch, h, development and innovation agenda, aiming to promote, inform and steer

 The IPC IPCC C Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5°C1 shows the importance

ff 

to our planet and society of limiting global temperature increases and offurther the emissions reductions required to achieve this. Reaching net zero by 2050 is the headline target, but it is also critical to reduce carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions by 45% by 2030 compared with 2010 levels2, and to keep total greenhouse gas emissions below the global 440GtCO2e ‘budget’ (for the period 2021–50, derived from IPCC data1). As discussed by Arnold et al .3, this means we need to make significant annual emissions reductions of around 10% per year, year on year, starting now.  This arti article cle con conside siders rs the these se re reduc ductio tions ns within construction split into ‘now and next’ (Figure 1). 1). The ‘now’ harnesses a cultural shift in design using existing technology to reduce emissions in the immediate years ahead. In the past year year,, the Institution of Structural Engineers has published significant amounts of guidance to support this. However, at some point we will reach the limit of emissions reductions through this approach. At which time the ‘next’ phase will need to be ready to provide further reduction opportunities.  The ‘ne ‘next’ xt’ pha phase se relies ies on tec techno hnolog logyy which currently requires either new fundamental research or, more realistically within the timeframe required, the scaling-up of existing technology and the development and implementation of emerging technology. It is imperative to boost this research, development and innovation work now in order that, as the gains of the ‘now’ phase lose pace, we have new approaches to continue making carbon reductions year on year over the coming decades.

the collective ort – of both– practising engineers anderesearchers to rapidly and coherently transition to a zero-carbon world. No single initiative identified is a ‘silver bullet’ and simply waiting for new technologies is not a viable pathway to keep warming within 1.5°C. While this portfolio of needed technologies and approaches is in development, we still need to take as much action as possible on today’s projects, to enable optimal outcomes within current parameters.  Althou  Alt hough gh the primary mary focu focus s of of this this art articl icle is greenhouse gas emissions reductions, the importance of biodiversity cannot be overstated. This has been reinforced by the recent publication of The Economics

ìFIGURE

1: Carbon reductions ‘now and next’

20

of Biodiversity: The Dasgupta Review 4, which promotes nature-based solutions to enhance biodiversity and is also a key part Climate of the ‘UK Structural Engineers Declare & Biodiversity Emergency’ movement. Low-carbon construction has little meaning without the biodiversity needed to sustain life, fertilise crops, etc., and so a key tenet flowing through all R&D – from industrial ecology of timber to novel structural manufacturing processes – will be the need to consider and improve biodiversity; a critical topic for many future articles.

Challenges of today   The age agenda nda set out in this art articl icle re reflects the orders of magnitude of emissions that the structure contributes at each stage of an asset’s lifecycle.

 April 2021 | thestructuralengineer thestructuralengineer.org .org

 

Innovating for zero carbon  Climate emergency 

 The upf upfron rontt embo embodie died d carb carbon on (modules A1–A5) of a building can account for as much as 55% of the

 Visio  Vi sions ns of net ze zero ro 20 2050 50 Several institutions and organisations have produced route maps which build possible

gains14, including those set out in the ‘Climate emergency’ series of articles in The Structural Engineer  through  through 2020 and 2021, reducing demand for materials which can in turn support new paradigms and opportunities in industrial ecologies (with a system-based approach to material stocks/ flows). Ò| Carbon pricing/shadow carbon pricing implemented industry-wide, e.g. building on and implementing BEIS figures15. document entati ation on and rec record ord syst system em to Ò| A docum provide a whole picture of ‘structures/  buildings as material banks’. Ò| Zero non-reusable waste enforced at all stages of production, fabrication and construction.   On carbon capture utilisation and/or storage (CCUS) Several of the industry route maps referenced above (and that of the IEA) include CCUS as a major source of

whole-life emissions for an ultra-low5 energy build  (and a higher percentage for non-building structures). It is therefore clear that tackling upfront emissions with full force is a priority due to their relative magnitude and also the immediacy of their impact in reducing carbon emissions. However,, in the future, as we reach closer However to net-zero emissions, we will need to look beyond upfront embodied carbon alone to eliminate greenhouse gas emissions and waste at all stages in a structure’s life.  The inin-use use emb embodie odied d carb carbon on (mo (module dules s B1–B5) associated with building maintenance, repair and replacement, etc. has been estimated to be as much as 20% of whole-life emissions5. Much of this may be fitout and facades,

pictures and the challenges that will needof to2050, be tackled to reach net zero.  These  The se inc includ lude e the the Int Interna ernation tional al Ene Energy rgy  Agency  Age ncy (IE (IEA) A)6,7, the UK’s Sixth Carbon Budget8, industry roadmaps from the Mineral Products Association and UK Concrete9, the British Constructional Steelwork Association10, and the European Ceramic Industry Association11. The UK FIRES report, Abso report, Absolut lute e Zero Zero12, provides a broad cross-sector position and is recommended reading to all IStructE members.  The R&D are areas as defined in the next section draw on the key route maps referenced above and many other articles from a range of institutions and bodies, as well as extensive formal and informal

emissions reduction. This may transpire to be the case and, given the scale and importance of global decarbonisation, the material-production foundation industries will need to continue to develop CCUS technology and should be supported in doing so (Figure 3). 3). However, just as the UK COVID-19 Vaccine Taskforce Taskforce did not rely on a single vaccine programme/  technology platform (any one of which had a significant risk of low eff ectiveness ectiveness or delays during development and upscaling), we should not rely on CCUS preventing the majority of carbon emissions. Installed CCUS capacity is currently equivalent to just 0.1% of global emissions 16  and there is significant future cost and technological uncertainty17. It is thus

but structure and its relation on these elements can influence the environmental demand. This provides opportunity for development and normalisation in practice of methods to reduce embodied use emissions in current building stock and to design for minimisation of these in future construction. Operational carbon (modules B6–B7) is estimated to be around a further 23%, with the typical contribution of the structure being the impact of thermal mass.  The act actual ual pro proces cesses ses in the end end-of -of-li -life fe stages (modules C1–C4) may be only 2% of the whole-life emissions5 but, crucially, these stages provide significant potential for reducing the upfront emissions for subsequent structures. Challenges lie both in designing new buildings for reuse in years to come (after a long life), but also in enabling the reuse of existing structures (in their entirety or their constituent parts) with as a high a value as possible.

discussions (both specifically in the course of preparing this article and the authors’ other work). Nevertheless, they have been developed and written from a pragmatic standpoint through the lens of the structural engineering profession. This R&D agenda is considered appropriate for a future industry/  profession in which the following principles are already established and in operation as the de facto norm: Ò| Mandatory universal and coherent carbon assessment and reporting with high-quality digital information throughout all stages of a structure’s structure’s lifecycle. plannin ning g and and des design ign pro proces cess s whic which h Ò| A plan enforces the 10 Rs (Figure 2)13, maximises circularity, and represents a paradigm shift in terms of when we build (if it all) and what we build (and its functionality). Ò| Implementation of all the easy wins, lowhanging gains and aggregated marginal

essential to also pursue other approaches, especially within one’s engineering sphere of influence, that can minimise emissions much further in the first instance. Furthermore, a focus on regenerative, nature-based solutions which promote biodiversity while reducing greenhouse gas production can have multiple benefits, as opposed to CCUS solely engaged to capture emissions from current processes. UK FIRES12 states that ‘until we face up to the fact that breakthrough technologies won’t arrive fast enough, we can’t even begin having the right discussion’ and rules out reliance on CCUS. The authors of the current article have endeavoured to focus the R&D agenda on adjacent, rather than radical breakthrough, technologies, but do not take such a black-and-white view on CCUS. It is therefore assumed here that some CCUS capacity will be available towards 2050 as needed to tackle the last stubborn emissions to get us to net zero.

ëFIGURE

2: 10 Rs and

circularity13  

21

thestructuralengineer.org | April 2021

   

Opinion Climate emergency Planning application Innovating procedures procedur for zero es carbon

Today’s research, development and innovation challenge areas to help reach zero carbon In this section, we consider areas of construction which can contribute in the shift to a net-zero future, and identify research, development and innovation needs which could facilitate this (Table 1). 1). These areas of R&D require urgent attention within the next few years, if the structural design community is to increase its range of low-carbon options in time for the ‘next’ phase starting in 2029 (Fig. 1). 1).   Design and process 1) Transform normal construction typologies. T typologies. To o reach net zero, current standard construction responses to typical building challenges will be completely transformed, prioritising net-zero emissions. Current structural typologies have developed over a long period of time and are engrained in culture, code and supply chains. Research needs to overcome this inertia and drive change quickly to enable carbon-optimal approaches which respond to local material supplies and needs with net-zero emissions. Critically, this also means reconsidering the levels of functionality provided: everything from m2 /de  /desk sk to presumed optimal height for building, to structural performance and reliability levels.   2) Balancing a circular and sustainable supply chain  chain   will be a characteristic feature of a sustainable future with more considered use of materials. The assumption of an infinite global material supply chain will not be valid. The concept of waste will be eliminated and we will have grown databases of available materials (prioritising those stored in existing buildings over new) that form a platform to balance use against availability within regions to achieve zero emissions across the industry. Design will start from available materials, so procurement and early linking-in of the supply chain will become an integral part of concepts.   3) Data-driven automated calculations and decision-support tools. Design tools. Design calculation will be based around automatic material optimisation with solutions predicated on off -site -site construction typologies, using accurate carbon intensity data for manufacture and transport, underpinned by more eff ective ective use of data-rich building information models (BIM) running through a structure’ structure’s s lifespan.  These  The se princi nciples ples of of desi design gn are ess essent ential ial to tak take e advantage of reused steel, cost-eff ective ective timber, and productised novel cements. Design calculation and analysis will be truly statistically based; not using historical (often empirical) partial factors, material grades, loads, etc. Software will have reliability analysis embedded to ensure appropriate performance; no more no less.   4) New approaches to design concept and scheming will work with modern methods of manufacture (beyond ‘modern methods of construction’) to drive new carbon-optimal typologies, saving cost and time, and enabling project teams to continue honing down carbon and resource use. Structures made from speci fic

advanced manufacturing processes, becoming certified products and assembled as part of a fully integrated considered off -site -site system, will be the norm.   Materials 5) Natural materials (timber, materials (timber, biobased materials, stone, low-impact blocks/bricks) are typically already the most carbon-effi cient option for the construction of short- to medium-span aboveground structures, bridges and buildings, and there is no reason to assume that this won’t continue to be the case. Prioritising lower-embodied-carbon materials for these uses will reserve the limited (by carbon budget) steel and concrete quantities for applications where only they will do: wind turbine towers, high-load foundations, lowcarbon transport infrastructure, etc. (which may see substantial growth in volumes if society is to decarbonise suffi ciently quickly).  Trul  T ruly rapidl rapidly rene renewab wable, le, low low-ca -carbo rbon, n, nat natura urall materials will be preferred to those extracted from finite resources. The production methods of these materials will still need to decarbonise over coming years, and these industrialised production processes will need to find balance

Case study 1. Ultralow-carbon precast concrete Network Rail’s low-carbon platform components project, a national programme running in the UK from 2020–28, is reducing embodied carbon of precast concrete elements by up to 80% by using lower-carbon novel cements and reinforcement, and optimised design approaches. The project team includes Expedition Engineering,  Amcrete,  Amcr ete, Studio Studio One, Gtech Gtech,, BRE, the National Composites Centre and the University of Cambridge.

with need ofAthe environment that they the are ecological being taken from. better understanding of the wider industrial ecology will be achieved; understanding material stocks, flows, impacts, abilities to meet supply and demand and whole-life/  whole-system impacts at national and international levels.  

éFIGURE 3: Abatement and remaining emissions for manufacturing and construction subsectors in 20508

22

   L    I    A    R    K    R    O    W    T    E    N  

 April 2021 | thestructuralengineer thestructuralengineer.org .org

 

Innovating for zero carbon  Climate emergency 

TABLE 1: Research, development and innovation challenge areas   Theme

Challenge area

Research, development and innovation need Develop new construction typologies that can truly respond to locally available materials and minimise transport energy demands.

1) Transform normal construction typologies

Develop building systems and typologies that provide alternatives to those currently dependent on wet on-site OPC, e.g. screeds. Consider benefits of off-site manufacture including carbon, cost and speed drivers. Reimagine foundations; with timber and stone superstructures in 2050, by far the largest remaining embodied carbon would be in concrete foundations and substructures requiring research into alternative zero-carbon approaches/norms. Develop and nurture alternative zero-carbon construction systems for building typologies currently dependent on traditional brick – be it future-generation straw-bale SIPPS for non-structural partitions or prefabricated ultra-low-carbon brick slip panels. Develop effective ways to store the right BIM information in a common open-source accessible manner to support best highvalue ongoing use of structural materials. To facilitate extended lifespans, refurbishment, structures as material banks and maximise end-of-life value in terms of carbon emissions.

Design and process

2) Balancing a circular and sustainable supply chain

Reimagining the design process with material sourcing and early supply chain data/input as a critical part of concept development. Research to define where, in a 2050 resource-critical world, each high-impact material should be used (and not used) so that it plays to its strength and best complements overall industrial ecologies. Develop smarter, quicker structural surveys, assessments and re-justification of existing structures aided by new digital tools and performance-based approaches. Understand the limits of existing assessment and re-justi fication techniques, i.e. what types/  classes of structure are currently just on the wrong side of the reuse-refurb vs demolish equation.

3) Data-driven automated calculations and decision-support tools

Development of software tools that optimise materials and construction process for carbon emissions that are no harder to use than traditional ones and link in with resource availability data.

4) New approaches to design concept and scheming, 

Identify and develop products and systems which implement a true industrialisation of construction which is driven by and enables a sustainable-first approach.

Harness big data to gather true statistical models for all code parameters (in place of pre-prescribed characteristic strengths, partial factors, characteristics loads, etc).

working with Harness the best aspects of current construction approaches that have been honed over many years, e.g. lean fast-to erect steel modern methods of frames, and ensure these are not lost with the push to platform builds/modular/off-site systems, etc. manufacture   Understand how to balance industrialisation and optimisation of material production processes with the ecological need of the environment that they are being taken from.   Develop construction norms (inc. design guides and accessible codes) for timber, stone and other natural materials, particularly in all types of short- or medium-span/rise superstructure, including off-site innovations and industrialisations to drive cost competitiveness. Reimagine low-cost, low-tech, flexible (in supply chain), historical forms of construction that are much more accessible to the layperson for appropriate forms of construction.

Materials  

5) Natural materials – timber,

Overcome fire considerations to make timber viable against steel at mid-rise.

biobased materials, stone, low impact Reach consensus on, and ‘solve’ end-of-life carbon release challenge for timber and other biobased materials. blocks/bricks R&D to bring step-change reductions in drying energy and/or novel timber-based materials/elements with reduced need for drying18. Connect construction to forestry, develop local supply chains which promote biodiverse forestry increase in harmony with construction harvesting. Develop local-first sustainable sourcing of stone, with consideration to a finite supply source, positive social impact and promotion of biodiversity during extraction and after. Develop low-carbon, renewable block-type, brick replacement materials.

23

thestructuralengineer.org | April 2021

  

Opinion Climate emergency Planning application Innovating procedures procedur for zero es carbon

TABLE 1: Research, development and innovation challenge areas (continued)  Develop industry-wide databanks for fabrication models without barrier to entry/access. Enable easy application of leaner structural elements types ( fish belly, intermediate catalogue sizes, roll to order). 6) Steel

Investigate the viability of impurity tolerance metallurgies (one of the downsides of closed-loop EAF/low-grade scrap inputs) for different structural applications, together with scrap processing routes to ensure low-impurity steels (e.g. rail sections, structural sections) remain high-value not mixing with low-grade scrap. Development of zero-carbon fire protection options which are essential for much steel use.

7) Brick

Develop design standards and guidance for low-carbon bricks/blocks; essential to drive widespread use. Research and develop second-generation AACMS/novel cements that do not use PFA or GGBS. Research and develop long-term supplementary cementing materials (eg LC3, calcined clays, due to limited PFA and GGBS).

8) Concrete

Develop and implement approaches to reduce quantities and carbon intensity of rebar, e.g. higher-strength/more widespread high-spec fibre-reinforced concrete/use much less rebar/basalt (to improve overall steel industrial ecology situation as well as making direct carbon reductions). Develop a suite of carbon-optimal local speci fications in response to available proximity of material supply and environmental conditions for durability du rability..

9) Site and transport emissions

Develop new approaches to information systems (in the broadest sense) to ensure the right information is readily available when choices are being made, e.g. currently a designer speci fies a material but rarely has the detailed travel distance/mode – yet this data could exist – and should become more possible to access easily with the rise of end-to-end cloud quality assurance systems collating big data across the sector. Democratising high-tech production/fabrication vs centralised approaches with greater transport distances to consider which is better in terms of carbon is still an open question. It will rise in importance as certain forms of transport rapidly decarbonise while others don’t, and researching the benefits of each is key to achieving the lowest-carbon project for many materials, structural typologies and projects.

10) Understanding Develop a standardised measuring, collation and reporting approach for upfront carbon in construction for comparison to and eliminating the predictions in design to feed back to wider industry is to be developed. performance gap

Construction, maintenance and deconstruction 11) Design for low embodied   carbon during maintenance and refurbishment

12) Maximising the value of demolished materials

Find new forms of maintenance/recoating/reconditioning/replacement that are very low/zero carbon. The structures built today, in 2021, will typically have an expected life to first major maintenance of 20–25 years, taking us to 2045–50; the moment at which we as an industry need to be hitting zero carbon. Forensic research is needed to better understand which aspects/components/constituent parts of structures are causing limits on real lifespan, and develop ‘failure mode, effects and criticality analysis’-type approaches to systematically design out the weak links. Find new ways to reuse each and every system/element/component/material at its highest value and biggest net carbon bene fit; taking account of practical construction considerations in addition to theoretical material properties. Ensure high value from end-of-life concrete either via smart crushing-type approaches (applied to structures that have already been built) or by reimagining reinforced concrete as something which can be demounted and reconditioned/reused (for structures not yet built).

6) Steel – Steel – steel in developed countries (with a mature built environment) will have full circularity in 2050; the demand for new will be limited to the tonnage of scrap arisings. All steel could

8) Concrete – concrete will not be reliant entirely on ordinary Portland cement (OPC) chemistry chemistry.. Rather there will be many more classes of novel cement and cement replacement in use depending on

10) Understanding and eliminating the performance gap will gap  will be required to ensure that the embodied carbon calculated in design is producing intended results.

then, in principle, be reused or recycled by renewables-powered electric arc furnaces (EAF).  This will be enabled enabled through through reduced reduced demand demand for steel, with structural engineers using effi cient design, optimisation and aggregating all possible marginal gains14 alongside the increase in market share for natural materials in superstructures. Developed countries will target the provision of a net export of recycled, EAF steel to countries with expanding built environme environments nts to reduce the reliance of the rest of the world on basic oxygen steel (with/without CCUS). Specific categories of steel structure will be reused without remelting, enabled by digital systems which better retain smart fabrication models and match supply to demand.   7) Brick  –  – existing bricks will be reused, and new bricks will be made via non-fossil furnaces – be they electric or hydrogen-powered. This will also be accompanied by increased use of alternative low-impact bricks.

specific applications, including second-generation alkali-activated cementitious materials (AACMs) (which don’t rely on pulverised fuel ash (PFA) and ground granulated blast-furnace slag (GGBS) as their already limited supply will diminish), calcined clays and other cements such as magnesium oxide-based chemistries. New chemistries and placing, curing and testing requirements will mean a very large proportion of concrete is precast, and likely ‘certified products’ underpinned by broader performance requirements (in future editions of PAS 8820).   Construction, maintenance and deconstruction 9) Site and transport emissions will emissions will be reduced through universal use of electric and hydrogenpowered transport and site-plant. Combined with increased off -site -site construction, this will eliminate construction-phase emissions. Long-distance shipping, especially by sea, will remain a challenge to decarbonise, so prioritising semi-local sourcing will be important.

  11) Design for low embodied carbon during maintenance and refurbishment will refurbishment will be normal in 2050 to maximise structural life, but not at the expense of upfront embodied carbon, as research into improving future technologies will continue to boost the ability to extend life with low-carbon interventions. Circular economy principles will be critical to achieving this, e.g. design for easy separation of layers, use of reversible fixings.   12) Maximising the value of deconstructed materials from materials  from existing structures that need to be demolished will be essential. For example, concrete will be smart-crushed to extract clean aggregate, clean sand and, via chemical processing, ensure full carbonation of all the cement paste to absorb CO . Steel reuse will be 2 maximised via retention of fabrication models and by smart sensing – big data which captures the actual loading through the life of the material, enabling calculation of the residual fatigue life for that component.

24

 April 2021 | thestructuralengineer thestructuralengineer.org .org

Innovating for zero carbon  Climate emergency 

 

 

Bringing research into practice  A viabl able netnet-zer zero o futu future re nee needs ds res resear earch ch and development to provide fresh opportunity for developing a truly sustainable construction industry. It needs to do this at a fast pace, in a not-done-before, joined-up manner between academics, designers and contractors, such that: Ò| research starts now and is carried out at a fast enough pace and a large enough scale to respond to the emergency Ò| research is focused on areas with real-world application and viability Ò| engagement ensures that construction avoids the ‘valley of death’ between proving a technology/approach in the lab (or a one-off  trial)  trial) and it becoming usable at scale across the industry Ò| industry and academia are able to work eff ectively ectively together end-to-end

2050 IS TOO SOON TO WAIT AND HOPE FOR RADICAL BREAKTHROUGH TECHNOLOGIES TO DELIVER NETZERO EMISSIONS

through research, development, and delivery; enabled by appropriately configured bodies and institutions and innovative funding mechanisms.    The key cha challe llenge nge ar areas eas set out in the agenda above show there is much work to be done across the structural engineering profession and the construction industry more widely. 2050 is too soon to wait and hope for radical breakthrough technologies to deliver netzero emissions and tackle the biodiversity emergency, so the focus is necessarily on today’s today’ s current and adjacent technology and approaches; developing, scaling, endeavouring to make them business as usual for the whole sector via innovation acceleration.  

Pete Winslow MA, MEng, PhD, CEng, MIStructE

Pete is Practice Lead for R&D and a board member at Expedition Engineering and the Useful Simple Trust. He directs a portfolio of engineering innovation projects, focused on resource effi ciency and carbon reduction, and sits on the IStructE Research Panel.   Mike Sefton MA, MEng, CEng, MIStructE

 Acknow  Ack nowled ledge geme ments nts  Thank you to our rev  Thank review iewers ers for all of the fantastic ideas contributed to this article:  (Senior Technical Research Laura Batty  (Senior Engineer Engineer, HTS), Damian  (Associate Eley  (Associate Director,, ,Expedition Director Engineering), Professor Tim Ibell (Associate Dean of the Faculty of Engineering and Design, University of Bath), Steve (Director,, WSP and IStructE Matthews (Director Research Panel), Dr Andrew Minson  Minson  (Director,, Global Cement and Concrete (Director  Associa  Asso ciatio tion), n), Dr Michael Sansom  Sansom  (Associate Director, Steel Construction Institute), Judith Sykes (Senior Director,, Sykes (Senior Director Expedition and National Infrastructure Commission Design Group) and Emily Walport (Senior Walport (Senior Engineer, Arup  Advance  Adva nced d Digit Digital al Eng Engine ineeri ering). ng).

HAVE  YOUR  YOUR SAY  SA Y 

Mike was previously a key figure in Buro Happold’s sports structures group, focusing on lightweight and long-span design and contributing to awardwinning international international projects. He now concentrates on sustainability work and is a member of the IStructE Climate Emergency Task Group.

  Will Arnold MEng, CEng, MIStructE

[email protected]

@IStructE

#TheStructuralEngineer

Will is Head of Climate Action at the IStructE. He leads the Institution’s response to the climate emergency, bringing this action into all aspects of its work, including the publication of bestpractice emergency guidance.  

Case study 2. 

Low-carbon bricks from natural materials Strocks are an ultralow-carbon block/brick made by H.G. Matthews from natural materials – unfired clay and straw. A testing and development programme is currently under way, towards more widespread use as a viable alternative to conventional loadbearing brickwork while saving over 50% of the embodied carbon.

   S    W    E    H    T    T    A    M  .    G  .    H  

25

thestructuralengineer.org | April 2021

   

Opinion Climate emergency Planning application Innovating procedures procedur for zero es carbon

REFERENCES

1) Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (2019) Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5°C 

[Online] Available at: www.ipcc.ch/  sr15/ (Accessed: January 2021) 2) UN Environment Programme (2019) Making Peace with Nature 

[Online] Available at: www.unep. org/resources/making-peacenature (Accessed: March 2021) 3) Arnold W., Cook M., Cox D., Gibbons O. and Orr J. (2020)

‘Setting carbon targets: an introduction to the proposed SCORS rating scheme’, The Structural Engineer , 98 (10), pp. 8–12 4) HM Treasury (2021) The Economics of Biodiversity: The Dasgupta Review – Abridged Version [Online] Available at: www.

gov.uk/government/publications/  final-report-the-economics-ofbiodiversity-the-dasgupta-review (Accessed: February 2021) 5) Gibbons O.P. and Orr J.J. (2020)  How to calc calculat ulate e embod embodied ied carb carbon on 

[Online] Available at: www.istruct www.istructe. e. org/resources/guidance/howto-calculate-embodied-carbon/ (Accessed: January 2021) 6) International Energy Agency (2020) Cement Tracking Report  

[Online] Available at: www.iea. org/reports/cement (Accessed: January 2021) 7) International Energy Agency (2020) Iron and Steel Technology Roadmap [Online] Available

at: www.iea.org/r www.iea.org/reports/ironeports/ironand-steel-technology-roadmap (Accessed: January 2021) 8) Committee on Climate Change (2020) The Sixth Carbon Budget: The UK’s Path to Net Zero [Online]

 Available at:  Available at: www. www.theccc theccc.org. .org.uk/  uk/  publication/sixth-carbon-budget/ (Accessed: March 2021) 9) Mineral Products Association, UK Concrete (2020) UK Concrete  and Ceme Cement nt Indu Industry stry Roa Roadmap dmap to Beyond Net Zero [Online] Available

at: www.thisisukconcr www.thisisukconcrete.co.uk/  ete.co.uk/  TIC/media/root/Perspectives/MPAUKC-Roadmap-to-Beyond-NetZero_October-2020.pdf Zero_October -2020.pdf (Accessed: (Access ed: March 2021) 10) British Constructional Steelwork Association (2020) Steel (2020) Steel Construction: Carbon Credentials 

[Online] Available at: www. steelconstruction.info/images/d/  df/Steel_construction_-_Carbon_ Credentials.pdf (Accessed: March 2021) 11) European Ceramic Industry  Association  Associa tion (201 (2012) 2) Paving the way to 2050: The ceramic industry

 roadmap  roa dmap [Online] Available at:

http://cerameunie.eu/topics/  cerame-unie-sectors/cerame-unie/  ceramic-industry-roadmap-pavingthe-way-to-2050/ (Accessed: March 2021) 12) UK FIRES (2020) Absolut  Absolute e  Zero: Deliv  Zero: Deliverin ering g the the UK’s UK’s clim climate ate change commitment with  incremen  incr emental tal chan changes ges to toda today’ y’s s t echnologies echnologies [Online] Available at:

conflict pain

https://uk fires.org/absolute-zero/ (Accessed: March 2021) 13) Image adapted from Ellen Macarthur Foundation (2017) based on Cramer J. (2014) ‘Moving

doubt

Towards a Circular Economy in the Netherlands: Challenges and Directions’, Proc. HKIE Environmental Division Annual Forum: The Future Directions  and Bre Breakth akthrou roughs ghs of Hong Hong Kong’s Environmental Industry ,

Hong Kong, 17 April, pp. 1–9 [Online] Available at: https://  wp.hum.uu.nl/wp-content/  uploads/sites/32/2015/04/PaperHongKong-JC-april-2014.pdf (Accessed: March 2021) 14) Wise C. (2018) ‘MaGIC:

Marginal Gains in Construction – a UK industry strategy to deliver more value with less cost’, Plenary Lecture, UK Steel Construction Day, SCI, 8 November  15) Department for Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy (2020) Valuation of Energy Use and Greenhouse Gas: Supplementary  guidanc  guid ance e to the HM Treas reasury ury Gre Green en Book on Appraisal and Evaluation  in Cent Central ral Gov Govern ernment  ment , Table 3, 19

March [Online] Available at: www. gov.uk/government/publications/  valuation-of-energy-use-andgreenhouse-gas-emissions-forappraisal (Accessed: January 2021) 16) Global CCS Institute (2020)   Global Status of CCS 2020  [Online] Available at: www. globalccsinstitute.com/wpcontent/uploads/2020/12/GlobalStatus-of-CCS-Report-2020_ FINAL_December11.pdf (Accessed: January 2021) 17) Pamenter S., Myers R.J. (2021)

‘Decarbonizing the cementitious materials cycle: A wholewhole-systems review of measures to decarbonize the cement supply chain in the UK and European contexts’, J. Indust. Ecol ., ., pp. 1–18; doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/jiec.13105

 war

Resolution Relief  Certainty Peace

Nearly all disputes revolve around individuals – regardless of scale and type of problem. Therefore, Therefor e, ability to deal with w ith personal psychology is a vital skill which supplements understanding the t he issues. SOME TYPES OF DISPUTE  

PROPERTY

 

CONTRACT

 

BOUNDARY

 

HR

 

NEGLIGENCE

PARTNERSHIP  

CONSTRUCTION

BACKGROUND

self employed structural engineer for 30 years and Party wall surveyor Eye for detail Ability to be dispassionate Compassionate listening and observing Extensive studies in psychology and philosophy

18) Ramage M.H., Burridge H., Busse-Wicher M. et al . (2017)

‘The wood from the trees: The use of timber in construction’, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev ., ., 68 (1), pp. 333–359; doi: https://doi. org/10.1016/j.rser.2016.09.107

020 8886 0400 / 07958 484898 Email: [email protected] 

26  April 2021 | thestructuralengineer thestructuralengineer.org .org

 

Mediation   Professional guidance Mediation  

Mediation – dispute resolution resolution without the courts Richard Garry explains how mediation can offer a

pragmatic alternative to legal action to resolve a dispute. MEDIATION CAN BE A VALUABLE, VALUABLE, nonadversarial, speedy and cost-eff ective ective way to resolve disputes of many kinds. These include contractual, personal, family family,, property, construction and partnership or directorship disputes. This article provides a short guide to the mediation process and the benefits it can bring.

Why seek mediation? Employing mediation to resolve a dispute, instead of going down the legal route, could save very high levels of cost. Because it can be arranged and concluded within a few weeks, there is also the enormous benefit of a resolution within a very short time scale. This is particularly the case in 2021, when the UK courts are very stretched, which means that parties can have to wait 18 months for70% an actual hearing.  Around  Aro und of med mediat iation ions s end end in agr agreem eement ent and, usually, both parties leave feeling they have some degree of ‘win’ and relief that the problem is behind them. In a legal case, there is usually one winner and one loser – and even the winner can't recover more than around 65% of their costs.  Anothe  Ano therr adva advanta ntage ge is that that opt option ions s whic which h are are not available in legal proceedings are open to the parties – solutions can be non-standard, and parties can have direct input into the solution. In many cases, the need can be non-financial, despite a contrary appearance at the outset. It’s not about ‘right’ and ‘wrong’, rather solutions which work for both sides.

What is the role of the mediator? Mediation is a voluntary, confidential and informal process by which constructive conversation between parties is facilitated. The mediator is completely impartial and does not o ff er er personal views or advice. Any agreement is determined solely by the parties.  There  The re ar are e two two sch school ools of of thou thought ght wit within hin the profession as to the level of specialised knowledge needed – each having some merit. One is that the mediator has to have knowledge of the area of work or activity about which the parties are in dispute. The other is that there is no need for such specialised knowledge, as the mediator doesn’t get involved in the technical details.  The med mediat iator or nee needs ds to be able to to listen, isten, observe keenly and set aside any personal feelings or ideas about the people concerned or the rights and wrongs of the events under dispute. Any questions asked by the mediator need to be open and dispassionate. For example, each party is asked what their best and worst outcome would look like, their feelings about the

other party and so forth – the idea is to get them to start thinking more closely about the situation and to face it fully. What would be good enough? ‘What if’ questions are usually very useful.  The cen centra trall idea dea is tha thatt ther there e usua usually lly nee needs ds to be an attitude shift, and this is relevant to personal disputes as well as those involving large corporations, because there are always individuals dealing with problems. There can be fixed views about the other party (they are the sole cause of my problem), and of themselves (I am a victim; nothing that I have done or omitted to do has contributed to the problem), and that there is an objective ‘truth’. This type of shift is not easily attained through logic (to which lawyers tend to resort). The mediator’s role is often to help undo blockages, e.g. ideas of revenge, vindication, retribution, over-riding sense of injustice, self-esteem, need for control, a strong sense of a certain value, a prejudice or assumption.

How does the process work?  The pro proces cess s is sta starte rted d when when bot both h part parties ies understand that mediation is the most appropriate way forward. In the UK, the GOV.UK website strongly encourages a disputing party to go through mediation before the legal route.  The cou courts rts ten tend d to to take take a poor poor vie view w of of a par party ty (or both) if they have not tried alternative dispute resolution of some kind. An internet search can

BOX 1. WHERE TO FIND A MEDIATOR IN THE UK 

 Academy  Academ y of of Expert Experts s (https://academyofexperts.org/)  Acas  Aca s (www.acas.org.uk/) BIMA (www.bimagroup.org/) Chartered Institute of Arbitrators (www.ciarb.org/) Civil Mediation Council (https://civilmediation.org/) Conflict Resolution Centre (www.conflictresolutioncentre.co.uk/) Consensum Mediation (https://consensum.org/mediation/) Clerksroom (www.clerksroom.com/) Mediator Network (www.mediatornetwork.org/) Property Litigation Association (www.pla.org.uk/) SCMA  (http://scmastandards.com/)  (http://scmastandards.com/) Talking Works  Works  (www.talkingworks.org.uk/)

be a good place to start, or there are various bodies which can help (Box 1), 1), many of which have their own code of professional conduct.  There  The re is also also a Euro Europea pean n Code Code of Con Conduc duct. t. Costs vary a great deal dependent on the type of dispute, the parties involved, the time taken, the amount of preparation needed prior to the actual meeting, and whether premises need to be arranged. The Civil Mediation Council website (https://civilmediation.org/) provides (https://civilmediation.org/)  provides a simple scale of fees which may be appropriate.  The pro proces cess s ofte often n star starts ts with eac each h part partyy sending the mediator documents which outline the history of the dispute. It can be carried out online (and has to be during restricted access conditions), with the mediator meeting each party and their representative (if they have one) to find out more about their position and needs. The parties need to commit to having the appropriate equipment and100% proper connection, to be able to give of internet their time when with the other party or the mediator, to having no distractions, to treating the process as confidential, and to having the complete ability to make decisions about a settlement (e.g. not to be restricted to certain sums of money).  The par parties ties first meet together so that the process can be introduced. It then involves a number of individual meetings during which arguments, claims, defences, responses and settlement positions are discussed and analysed.  The med mediato iatorr willll try try to to undo undo the kno knott of of fixed ideas and strong emotions. The method usually involves an exchange via the mediator of certain items of information or off ers. ers. Mediation is a fluid process and depends on the parties’ personality, the nature of the dispute, and whether there are support parties (e.g. solicitors, friends). Usually, the process ends with both parties meeting and agreeing a form of resolution. They then draw up their agreement in the presence of the mediator, who can facilitate if needed. The agreement is binding and legally enforceable, but everything up to that point is without prejudice, so that if the sides cannot agree, nothing of what has preceded can be presented in court. If the parties cannot agree on the day, or if one party leaves early, it is possible for the matter to be revisited on a subsequent occasion.

Richard Garry  BSc, MSc, DIC, CEng, MICE, FFPWS Richard has had his own structural engineering  engineering   practice since 1990 and has worked as a party wall surveyor since 1995. He qualified as a mediator in 2018. Web: www.peacebuildmediation.co.uk

27 thestructuralengineer.org thestructuralengineer .org | April 2021    

Professional guidance

Mediation

CASE STUDY: KIDS’ BOOKS LTD V FLAT & LEVEL LTD

Because mediations are confidential and notes are not retained, any ‘case study’ must by nature be hypothetical. This case study is based on a real scenario and illustrates how mediation could have been beneficial. Kids’ Books Ltd is a moderately successful book publishing company, specialising specialisin g in children’s educational books. It entered into a contract with Upward Building Co. for the construction of a prestigious new factory and bookproduction plant at a site in Wales. When the building construction was virtually complete, cracks began to appear in the floor of the factory factory.. Within months, large sections of the floor had ‘lifted’ from the concrete base. The floor had been laid by Flat & Level Ltd, a specialist flooring subcontractor.. It had used a technique subcontractor involving the laying of two coats of a

mediation. The mediation will be attended by Don Panic, Chief Executive of Kids’ Books Ltd, and by Major Stress, a Director of Flat & Level Ltd. This situation is taken from an actual case and portrays a typical conflict in the consumer world: one party produces, sells and delivers a product the other

party claims to be defective. Each party makes allegations of fault against the other and neither is prepared to back down. Both have commercial interest in swift resolution, yet they end up in litigation. The actual case went from the High Court to the Court of Appeal to the House of Lords. Below is shown how the dispute could have been resolved with mediation.

MOCK MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT

 On or before the [ ] of [ ] 200[ ], Flat & Level Ltd shall commence repair works at the 1. On 1. premises of Kids’ Books Ltd at [ ]. The repair works shall comprise: [e.g. the complete replacement of the factory floor]. 2. Flat & Level Ltd undertakes to complete the repair works on or before the [ ] of [ ] 200[ ].The repair works shall be deemed to have been satisfactorily completed when so fi

magnesium oxychloride composition on a screeded concrete base. It argues that the new flooring had been properly laid, but this particular type of floor required careful and continuous maintenance, involving daily ‘damp-mopping’ and polishing over the entire area of the floor throughout the first three months. It contends that this had been fully explained to the architects engaged by Kids’ Books, but the required maintenance had clearly not been implemented. Kids’ Books denies all or any fault, and has issued a claim against Flat & Level Ltd as follows: Replacement flooring (including investigative treatment): £53 000 Storage of books and machinery

certi ed by a Building Surveyor appointed by Kids’ Books Ltd.

during remedial works: £3 000 Lost wages: to employees during remedial works: £90 000 Loss of profit during temporary closure: £45 000 Fixed overheads producing no returns: £16 000

Signed:

Total:

3. Upon satisfactory completion of the repair works, Kids’ Books Ltd shall take all such 3. Upon steps as may be necessary to discontinue the existing proceedings in the Central London County Court under Claim number CL123456. 4. Each party agrees to bear its own litigation costs to date, save for the mediation fees. 4. Each 5. The parties will instruct their legal advisers to prepare and submit to the Court an Order 5. The which accurately reflects the terms of this Memorandum. 6. In the event of any dispute as to whether or not Flat & Level Ltd has failed satisfactorily 6. In to comply with its obligations under this agreement, the parties agree to submit such dispute for further mediation, failing which the parties may proceed with the action. 7. This 7.  This agreement is in full and final settlement of all claims by all parties.

Major Stress …………………….. On behalf of FLAT & LEVEL LTD

£207 000 Don Panic

Flat & Level Ltd is defending the claim on the grounds that Kids’ Books caused the cracking by its failure to maintain and, in any event, in law it does not have a contract with Kids’ Books and thus owes a contractual duty only to the main contractor, Upward. However, this second line of argument will not protect its reputation, so it has abandoned it for the purposes of the mediation. In view of the cost of litigation and the urgency of the situation, both parties have agreed to

……………………… On behalf of KIDS’ BOOKS LTD

………………………  The Med Mediato iatorr Dated

28  April 2021 | thestructuralengineer thestructuralengineer.org .org

 

PROFESSIONAL INDEMNITY  INSURANCE SOLUTIONS Always Happy to Talk

Run-Off Cover available when you cease trading

Structural Engineers and Associated

Fast Quote Turnaround with

Property Professionals

Efficient Expert Service

Great Rates for Established Firms and New Start Up Practices

Pro-active Claims Service Interest Free Instalments Available

Exclusive In-House Scheme with a

Complimentary Legal Review Service Available

Major UK Insurer

Surveying Equipment And Office Insurance

Wide Choice of other Insurers available to quote

Public Liability and Employers Liability Insurance

 When the Insurance Insurance Market changes, changes, find your your port in a storm. Anchorman Anchorman Insurance at your service. Specialist Professional Indemnity Insurance Brokers focussed on Sole Tr Trader, ader, Small to Medium Sized Enterprises and New Start Up Practices since 1998.

Call us on 01837 55777 [email protected]

   www  www.anchormaninsurance .anchormaninsurance.co.uk .co.uk Proud members Proud mem bers of of Purp Purp e art artners ners p: ea ng n epen ent Insuran Insurance ce Broker Broker Networ Networ

Authorised and Regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority.

 A faster, faster, safer, safer, and more efficient efficient way to design and build

Many of our solutions are already compatible with circular economy principles. In addition, we provide DELTABEAM® Green which cuts CO2  emissions by up to 50%. Lightening environmental footprint - together www.peikko.co.uk

Technical

Historic plaster ceilings (part 2)

 

Historic plaster ceilings. Part 2: Survey Survey,, assessm assessment ent

and methods of conservation

SCOTT BROOKES  BEng, MSc,  BEng, MSc, CEng CEng,, MIStr MIStructE  uctE 

Conservation Accredited Engineer;  Associate  Associ ate,, Rambol Ramboll, l, Lond London, on, UK

Introduction Following last month’s article on the historical development of plasterwork and the typical root causes of ceiling failure1, part 2 now goes on to outline the practical assessment and interpretation phase: methods of underside and topside ceiling inspection, how to interpret the inspection’s findings, and specifying an appropriate maintenance or remedial strategy.  

Ò 

| Movement Movement across  across phases of

 An engin engineer eer may be aske asked d to car carry ry out out a survey as part of a regular scheduled certification inspection arising from ABTT Guidance Note 202, or in response to noticeable changes in the ceiling’s line, level or finish.  As with with all hist historic oric fabr fabric, ic, during ng the the survey they must often consider several stages of repairs, redecoration programmes and alterations which may obscure the original form. It is the role of the conservation engineer to decipher the fabric’s chronological development, so as to specify investigations and remedial works appropriately.

construction tells a diff erent erent story to movement within a single phase or feature. With respect to lath and plaster, the plaster isn’t secured to the frame by the hooked nib alone, with anecdotal evidence showing the plaster’s adhesion to the underside of the laths and at the ‘key’ to be at least equally important. Close attention to the presence of this key at damaged ceiling topsides may allow a more sympathetic conservation strategy. Ò| Enrichment Enrichment –  – check the fixity of heavy mouldings, often over 100kg, e.g. cartouches, bosses, scrolls, swags, pendants. Look or scan for nailed or screwed fixings. Mouldings could

  Underside Inspection of the ceiling underside should be alongside a suitably experienced plaster specialist; it is foremost visual and tactile, relying on manual and digital level checks and the gentle application of pressure to qualitatively assess the plaster bond and support. Broadly speaking, the inspection should check the following: Ò| Cracking (position, direction and extent) – craze cracking can suggest shrinkage. Rectilinear cracks usually correlate with support members over. Diagonal cracks can indicate twisting. Ò| Detachment – applying pressure from the underside will help identify potential problem areas where support is limited or has been lost. This may be delaminated plaster or failure of the support wad or key (Figure 1). 1). Beware mistaking thick layers of peeling paint for inter-coat plaster delamination.

comprise wood, lime plaster, cartonpierre, Bielefeld or composition. Ò| Past repairs – repairs – record the extent, technique, material employed and its suitability, and consider the likelihood of defect recurrence. level – measure the Ò| Ceiling line and level – shape and magnitude of distortion. Is it original to the construction, recent but static, ongoing and progressive, or cyclical? The plaster diaphragm, being rigidly fixed to the primary building structure, correctly interpreted can often acutely show underlying building issues such as subsidence of perimeter walls or issues with the structure of the floor above. It should be remembered that lime plaster plaster,, particularly earlier earlier,, more haired mixes, can sustain significantly greater deflection than later, stiff er, er, thicker lime mixes, as well as fibrous plaster. form – covings, domes or Ò| Ceiling form –

Ceiling surveys

éFIGURE 1: Typical

lath-and-plaster buildup in cross-section with typical fracture location

fi

vaulted ceilings are at signi cantly lower risk of collapse than flat areas, with independent, de-bonded plaster benefitting from arching action. staining – note the presence, Ò| Moisture staining – extent and timescale. The surface can be powdery through salt permeation. Check for corresponding void service leak or roof failure. issues – paint flakes and drips Ò| Ongoing issues – on the floor can steer investigations.   Remote methods

Remote survey methods, such as point cloud laser scanning and high-resolution photogrammetry, allow production of reflected ceiling plan spot level or distortion maps (Figure 2). 2). These can diagrammatically represent levels of movement at each coplanar feature at up to ±3mm accuracy relative to an agreed horizontal datum level or previous scans. If the map shows movement, follow-up hands-on inspections can be targeted, avoiding the need for high-level access to the whole ceiling every one, two or five years. The raw data collected can also serve as the basis of a 3D model of the underside and void spaces that can be used to create or tie into BIM models.    Access  Acce ss

Getting to ceilings of publicly accessible spaces in small windows of time can prove tricky. Ladders and scaff old old towers are quick but can pose risks and are only suitable for small areas of relatively low ceilings. If floor structure and access routes permit, cherry pickers and scissor lifts can be brought in and out in small windows of

30  April 2021 | thestructuralengineer thestructuralengineer.org .org

 

Historic plaster Cracking ceilings of concrete (part 2) Technical Technical

 

time. A cherry picker is typically preferred to a scissor lift as the articulation and horizontal projection of the boom can reach over immovable obstacles or into niches.  Track  T racked ed ‘spid ‘spider er-typ -type’ e’ che cherry rry pick pickers ers can move up steeper inclines and through doorways. If warranted, a full bird-cage sca ff old old or crash deck (Figure 3) can 3) can be installed over the full floor area below to prop the ceiling off , protect the public and allow tactile inspection/repair of the full ceiling without disruption.

POINT CLOUD LASER SCANNING AND HIGHRESOLUTION PHOTOGRAMMETRY ALLOW PRODUCTION OF REFLECTED CEILING PLAN SPOT LEVEL OR DISTORTION MAPS

Topside  The tops topside ide surv survey ey shou should ld map map the the structural morphology of the ceiling frame with respect to the underside features, gauge the key materials, and investigate any defects and discontinuities. It should be tactile as far as possible, ensuring safe passage through the space. If you are called out to a ceiling exhibiting significant sagging/delamination, every eff ort ort should be made to get topside access before making any recommendations; in isolation the underside presentation can look far more onerous than the reality.  The following owing should should be consi considered dered before accessing a void: Ò| Asbestos  Asbestos –  – check the asbestos register for test record and certification and, if present, consider options to safely enter to very gently clean the space, or whether you could encapsulate discrete areas of the void without restricting future inspection or air flow ow.. spaces – does it constitute a Ò| Confined spaces – confined space? Are suitable health and safety procedures and a risk assessment and method statement (RAMS) established?  Access and and loading oading –  – review the existing Ò| Access access-way; what member(s) does it bear onto? Does live loading cause excessive deflection in the frame? It may require design of a new suspended access-way from primary structure or slab soffi t over. Rope access specialists may be employed to avoid loading of frames entirely, say, during asbestos removal, investigation or walkway construction, or to drop into deep voids or coving cavities. Ò| Equipment – non-destructive tools such as dental mirrors and hand-held metal detectors are critical to the survey. It is not uncommon for wadding ties to contain wires or for later metal retro fitting to be concealed. Always wear fall restraint harnesses suitably tied off , in line with RAMS. Decay-detecting drilling by a suitably experienced engineer or timber specialist may be employed to determine the extent of fabric loss; this can also provide approximate relative timber density for later analysis.

éFIGURE 2: Reflected ceiling plan spot levels (red) and distortion mapping (blue)

ìFIGURE 3: Ceilings

with support issues can be temporarily propped off full scaffold crash deck, taking care not to  jack ceili ceiling ng or rest restrict rict access to face for conservation works

31 thestructuralengineer.org thestructuralengineer .org | April 2021

 

Technical

Historic plaster ceilings (part 2)

systems or with asbestos encapsulation. Deep coving and corners warrant special consideration. education – those that Ò| Liaison and education – occupy and work around the ceiling in question will be best positioned to manage its condition, being most familiar with its typical appearance and the building’s operation. Establishing standardised protocols and appointing an in-house ‘ceiling champion’ is often the best way to address issues promptly. Interaction with the ceiling is most common within the void space and where the most significant damage is typically seen. At the majority of theatres, new show ‘get-ins’ sadly give visiting crews free licence to cut and break historic fabric for rigging points. A void-access permit system requiring submission of a plan of work can be eff ective ective in reducing such unchecked damage. Keys for locked doors/hatches to the void are then only provided to conforming signatories.

Where void access isn’t possible, consider opening up floors or ceiling finishes. Coring small boreholes allows a steerable borescope with integrated torch to reach into voids. Lifting of floorboards above, or the creation of new permanent access hatches are other options. Such hatches are destructive, but can prove warranted for the long-term conservation of the ceiling asset. Such invasive strategies will need specific heritage approval.  The most com common mon poin pointt of failure ure is at at the interface between plaster and frame and these areas should be duly focused on. Establishing regularly sized test zones of lath-and-plaster ceilings allows quantification of the length/number of broken nibs or missing keys over a known area, from which percentages can be derived. At fibrous plaster ceilings, individual wads can be tagged and their condition logged over time.

Conservation Continued, proactive maintenance addressing the root causes of deterioration

Repair and strengthening

should eff orts: orts: underpin all ceiling conservation cleaning – poor Ò| Regular inspection and cleaning – accessibility allows debris, including vermin, pigeons, dust and building waste, to accumulate. This waste imposes additional loading, obstructs sight of the fabric, increases the fire risk and acts as a medium for moisture retention. Tightly controlled cleaning through very gentle brushing and vacuuming can be undertaken, taking utmost care around keys/wads. Ò| Roof repair – repair – a slipped tile or a blocked rainwater goods are the most common cause of moisture ingress. While comparatively simple to repair, these are the most commonly overlooked part of a number of cultural buildings, with the internal space the focus of most investment. Ò| Addres  Addresss ventil ventilation ation – ceilings are frequently insulated on their topside, which reduces air flow and acts as a sponge for moisture. Avoid creating stagnant spaces when installing access

those thatby area aesthetic, shouldexperienced be executed conservationist with historic building work, rather than a contemporary fibrous plasterer. They should be proportionate in consideration of the survey observations, ceiling risk pro file (room use, height) and heritage significance. With increased demand for assessments in recent times, contemporary fibrous plasterers with little to no conservation experience have stepped into the breach. All too frequently this results in ‚Äòany and a‚Äôll defects being labelled as critically high-risk, leading to considerable overspecification of costly intervention or netted encapsulation. Light-touch conservation requires balancing the dual drivers of risk and fabric preservation, often leaning heavily on the specifier’s experience in the field. If the ceiling has not collapsed, there will be a certain factor of safety present. Further assessment, be it qualitative or  margin in of safety quantitative, may show the marg to be too small and intervention warranted

Repairs to a historic ceiling, particularly

êFIGURE 4: Cross-

sectional void drawing compiled from point cloud scan data

to ensure its continued safe performance. Repairs and strengthening should look to use the existing structure where possible, avoiding unnecessary introductions which will add dead load and change existing load paths, cause damage during installation and further restrict movement within a void space.  The ceiling ing shou should ld be be clean cleaned, ed, de-loaded to allow for frame recovery (including furniture at floor over) and moulds taken of unique details before any repairs are made. Be careful in introducing new structure; stiff er er repaired sections will scar the fabric and may not behave homogenously. Examples of repair and strengthening methods are set out below: Ò| New wadding ties should always be wired, mechanically fixed and use quad-axial glass in lieu of hessian. Ò| Poorly fixed cast-plaster or timber enrichment is best re-supported by pinning from the underside with  TimberLOK  Timbe rLOK scr screws ews or by by wiring ring aro around/  und/  through the mould. Fine timber splints can be adhered to the backside of enrichment to tie snapped pieces. Local sections of inde-bonded plaster can be re-supported situ with shallow situ recessed stainless steel washers secured through the face with a wire and strapped to a stable support structure above. Ò| Where patches or whole sections of ceiling have limited integrity, reinforcement may be introduced in the form of additional battens or strips of quad-axial glass-fibre mat applied to the ceiling back, with gypsum overlay. Quad-axial glass should be preferred to hessian, as it has superior material properties and is resistant to decay.  Access con constra straints ints and plas plaster’ ter’s Ò| Access susceptibility to movement can rule out  in situ situ repairs of defective timber support framing. Consider re-supporting unseated beam ends with face-fixed brackets, angles or shoes. Ò| Shallow ceiling members can also support the floor above and will flex under live loading. These can be stiff ened ened within the structural zone with glass-fibre or steel plating. Ò| 

32  April 2021 | thestructuralengineer thestructuralengineer.org .org

 

Historic plaster ceilings (part 2)

Ò| Loose-fitting

lightweight strapping can be employed as a fail-safe to hold an already dropped ceiling in stasis. Like-for-like replacement of defective hangers may not be possible due to temporary works requirements and potential impact to in to in situ situ   plasterwork.    A damag damaging, ing, but still used used,, method method of repairing lath and plaster involves pouring of plaster of Paris, sometimes even a cementitious mix, directly onto the ceiling over wire mesh. This not only adds water and weight in the short term, but upon curing creates a rigid slab that locks the ceiling in a deflected form, conceals the support structure from future inspections and transfers deflections to the margins, which may cause further destabilisation.  

Conclusions  The chie chieff vulner vulnerabil abilities ities of trad traditio itional nal plas plaster ter ceilings are moisture, movement and impact damage. By engaging with the owner/operator to improve operations and maintenance, we can monitor the underside condition, keep the topside dry and free from infestation, as well as control ongoing use of the ceiling void, above.  These  Thes e simple mple prac practice tices s can can signi gnificantly reduce deterioration and risk over the medium to long term.  The cont continue inued d functi functioning oning of the majo majority rity of

well-maintained plaster ceilings, often beyond the material service life, is testament to their integrity under stable environmental conditions.  Althoug  Alth ough h inher inherentl ently high-risk gh-risk by virtu virtue e of the their ir weight and location, regular inspection and sympathetic intervention by experienced professionals can manage the threat of instantaneous collapse, while preserving the aesthetic and historical integrity of the ceiling asset.  

 Acknow  Ack nowled ledgem gement ents s  The auth author or is grate grateful ful to Richa Richard rd Ire Ireland land for his direction and Conisbee for its support.  

Contact details  To contac  To contactt the the autho authorr in rela relation tion to this this article, cle, email [email protected]  [email protected] ..  

Technical

REFERENCES

1) Brookes S. (2021) ‘Historic plaster

ceilings. Part 1: Development and causes of failure’, The Structural Engineer , 99 (3), pp. 20–24 2) Association of British Theatre Technicians (2015) ABTT  ABTT Guid Guidance ance Note 20: Suspended Fibrous Plaster Ceilings: Survey and Inspections 

[Online] Available at: www.abtt.or www.abtt.org. g. uk/resources/guidance-note-20suspended- fibrous-plaster-ceilings/ (Accessed: December 2020)

FURTHER READING

plastering , British Standards Institution (1990) BS 5492:1990 Code of practice for internal plastering, ‘Section 7. Fibrous plasterwork’, London: BSI (superseded; withdrawn) Historic Scotland (2002) Technical Advice Note 2: Conservati on of Plasterwork, Edinburgh:

Historic Scotland Ireland R. (2020) ‘Investigation and assessment of decorative plaster ceilings’, JBSAV  ceilings’, JBSAV , 9

(3), pp. 228–245

Sawyer J.T. (1951; reissued 2007) Plastering Plastering,, Donhead/Routledge

33 thestructuralengineer.org thestructuralengineer .org | April 2021

 

Opinion Probabilistic application structural procedures procedur monitoring es Opinion Planning

 

 Viewpoint

Embracing probability: cou co uld big data data spe spellll the the end end of safety factors as we know them?  Arthu  Ar thurr Coa Coate tes s calls on structural engineers to push for the adoption of postmonitoring sensors to provide better data on building performance and, ultimately, more accurate loading predictions. Big data We are fascinated by data; our phones collect information on everything we do, where we travel, our heart rate, our sleeping patterns and now even fertility. Over the past decade, data has become one of the most valuable commodities

Internet of Things devices, such as smart watches, or even monitoring CO2 levels6 would help analyse movements of people around buildings and other infrastructure, granting us an insight into how they are loaded over time. The most sustainable building in the world in 2016,

Similarly, the Met Offi ce has created the Virtual Met Mast system9 which uses site-specific wind data to help optimise the location and design of wind turbines. Obtaining wind data from crane anemometers could be a good starting point in creating a localised, yet universal, dataset for

globally.. The combined market1 capitalisation of globally  Amazon, Micro  Amazon, Microsoft soft and Apple  exceeds the gross domestic product of Japan, the world’s third largest economy. Contrastingly, the construction industry, in particular structural engineering, has been very slow in its uptake of data analysis techniques.  There  Ther e are are sensors sensors on watches watches that can measur measure e our blood oxygen levels, but very rarely are structural loads measured in practice.

 The Edge in Amster Amsterdam, dam, come comes s very very close close to to this reality, reality, where occupancy can be measured using Bluetooth to the individual’s smart device7. Unfortunately,, this data is not fed back to the Unfortunately structural engineers. Understanding wind loading on buildings is also an important task. London’s Highpoint tower set a precedent with a series of pressure sensors installed on the building to understand how the correlating wind speed aff ected ected building sway8.

future structural design.

What data is useful to structural engineers?

îFIGURE

 The handf handful ul of build buildings ings that measur measure e performance in service2,3 typically utilise strain gauges and accelerometers, which help an engineer’s engineer’ s understanding of the serviceability performance of the structure. These are usually only implemented on unique, high-profile projects where the equipment is funded by research institutions. However,, this data is not always meaningful. However  Although  Altho ugh we we have have a good good under understand standing ing of of how how individual structural elements move in controlled loading applications, there is no indication of the magnitude or nature of the applied loading in real building scenarios. We may know that a truss has moved, say,  x  mm  mm since construction, as on the new Google offi ce development in London4, but inferring imposed loads from deflections means making broad assumptions about stiff ness. ness. As such, drawing a conclusion on the effi cacy of a structure under realistic loading scenarios is a complex task. To tackle this, we must collect useful data on the actual imposed loads on buildings.  There  Ther e are ar e various various ways in which which this this could could be carried out. Sensors exist in everything now; there are four diff erent erent types of motion sensor in an iPhone5. Using infrared heat maps, personal

The problem with imposed loads In statistical terms, data represents a reduction in uncertainty.. As the famous saying by Grace uncertainty Hopper goes: ‘One accurate measurement is worth a thousand expert opinions’. Data off ers ers unique pieces of information which allow us to understand whether our past decisions were correct, and equally to make informed decisions

1: Imposed loading comparisons

         









                                                                           

 





 

















    

     

 



                                     

   

                         





 









      S    R    E    Y    M    &    E    C    I    R    P  



 

  









   







  

                                     

                           

                



































34  April 2021 | thestructuralengineer thestructuralengineer.org .org

 

Probabilistic structural monitoring

in the future.  Assessmen  Asse ssmentt of impo imposed sed floor loads has been the repeated focus of many e ff orts orts historically10–12. Despite this research, there has been little impact on most built projects13. Recent studies by MEICON14,15 demonstrated the almost ludicrous magnitude of current imposed loads for commercial buildings (Figure 1). 1). This is reinforced by a recent occupancy study from the British Council of Offi ces which found that the average density of offi ce space is only one person for every 9.6m2,16, equivalent to 0.1kN/m2. On top of unlikely loading requirements, a partial safety factor, γ f , is usually applied (Figure 2). 2). Typically, this adds an additional 50% for imposed loads when assessing strength parameters using BS EN 199017. But what does a partial safety factor represent? In simple terms, it is a measure of the uncertainty in our belief about loading. And there lies the problem: engineers have no idea how buildings are loaded in reality reality.. Our estimation of loading may not be wrong, but it is arbitrary given we do not make the eff ort ort to understand whether this estimation is true. In the growing agenda of carbon e ffi ciency in

Opinion

   I    D    S    R  :    B   F    A   P    O    H   O    S   Y    T   B   E    R   H    C   D   S    O   S    A   E   U   H   F   E    R   T   R   S   D   I    N    T   N   E   I    T   P   L    X   A   H   I    E   R   T   R   N   N    E   G   O   B   I    O  .    D   I    C   S    S    U   I    O   D   E   B    E    N    D   S  .    T   N    I    E    )    T   A   H    O   D   I    R   R   S   I    T     p    B   T    M    P   A   B   o    E   D   (    R   O   M    R   N   D   E   E   O   h    /    E   P   B   R   S    A    O    T    F    T    T   I    I    I    S    N   S  c   m   o    M    N   S    L   A    T  .    H    L    C    A    A  p    O   S    I    I    I    S    S    R    S   T    M  u   r    S   I    D   E   D   R  o    I    R   R   T   R   O   i   g    M    B   A   A   A   F   s    R      D   M    D   Y   b  .    E   M    N   S   N   P  w    P    I    A      O   A    R   T   H   T   O  w    F   S   T   S   C  w

buildings can withstand these characteristic imposed loads; therefore, therefore, we assume we can continue to use these design loads in the future. Even BS EN 1990 states that imposed loads and safety factors are based on ‘calibration to a long experience of building tradition’. Whether we are aware of it or not, we make decisions every day on what imposed loads to use in the design of buildings, whether strictly following codes of practice or not. Choosing to design an offi ce building for 2.50kN/m2 is a

éFIGURE 2: Uncertainty factors from BS EN 199017

continually update our belief of the load exceeding x  –  – say, 2.50kN/m2 for an offi ce – given y  loading  loading has occurred in the past. The more data we have, the less uncertain our prediction becomes over time.  This raise raises s the quest question ion of of whether whether the past past deterministic methods of using safety factors in design are now still appropriate, when probabilistic methods of analysis are available and the ways to collect and interpret data exist. 21

design, it is imperative that structural engineers improve best practice by challenging historic assumptions. This article will focus on the assumptions around the uncertainty in the variability of actions on structures. Ultimately, Ultimately, the question is: is the current safety factor framework of limit state design still appropriate?

decision we make. Equally Equally,, applying a safety factor of 1.5 on top of this is a decision on how uncertain we feel. Without feedback, we cannot understand the uncertainty within our decision-making. Research studies seem to suggest that we are  just rein reinfor forcing cing poo poorr, ill-informed -informed decisions. sions. But how close are we?

Limit state design  The safety safety facto factorr framewo framework rk that that we we use in the the UK is prescribed by the limit state design process within Eurocodes. Engineers must design structures to satisfy strength and stiff ness ness criteria, or limit  limits s. Given variable loads can be diffi cult to estimate for the design life of a building, designers use a nominal characteristic load, a constant value, for design based on historic upper limits (such as from BS EN 1991-118).  These are deriv derived ed assumin assuming g an accep acceptabl tably low low probability of exceedance (Figure 3) and 3) and then a constant partial safety factor is applied.  These  Thes e limit  limits s have been constructed deterministically; precedence shows us that

Education in probability and inference Structural engineers should have a better appreciation of the uncertainty in loads and the associated reliability of a structure, i.e. its probability of failure. This was argued nearly 20 years ago by McRobie, who declared that ‘structural engineers [should] be educated’20 in Bayesian theory; the notion of considering probability as a belief.  The funda fundamenta mentall concept concept of Bayesi Bayesian an theory theory is of conditional probability: we can make an updated and refined poste  posterior  rior  probability,  probability, given  prior information. What this means in terms of the loading on structures is that we can íFIGURE 3:

Theoretical density function of imposed loading19

   N    O    C    I    E    M

In 2001, Calgaro and Gulvanessian  claimed that BS EN 1990 was the first operational code that recognised the possibility of using probabilistic design methods. Yet Yet 20 years on, many engineers do not realise that Annexes B and C explicitly describe these methods using reliability analysis.  A probab probabilist ilistic ic appro approach ach could could replace ace the the current safety factor framework, if enough data exists. If I am certain how a building is loaded, then the factor of safety can be justifiably reduced. Using a Bayesian approach, we can rationally combine the codified certainty levels with objective data to modify our beliefs in a systematic way. way. For instance, I believe the current offi ce loading requirement of 2.50kN/m2 is too conservative. Using current levels of uncertainty from BS EN 1990 as a starting point, i.e. γ q = 1.5, I could update this characteristic load with data collected from previous buildings.  This would result result in either ther a more more accurate accurate imposed load requirement – say, 2.00kN/m2 – or a more accurate level of reliability – say, γ q =1.1 – or even a balance of both options. The tools for doing this are in our hands and eventually we should be able to iterate and refine our safety factors to a minimum. In many buildings, the dead load far exceeds tthe imposed loading. The method proposed by Smith22 uses reliability and Bayesian analyses in tthe context of structural monitoring of dead load at completion to identify any surplus capacity tthat could be used to unlock the ‘loading credit’ for future building expansions, potentially fi

generating signi cant carbon savings.

How are other industries embracing probabilistic methods? Whether we admit it or not, the construction

35 thestructuralengineer.org thestructuralengineer .org | April 2021

 

Opinion

Probabilistic structural monitoring

industry is decades behind the innovation shown by other sectors23. Within the automotive industry,, the emergence of self-driving cars has industry shown the opportunity for real-time probabilis probabilistic tic methods in statistically diverse environments.  Autonomou  Auto nomous s cars cars make make extrem extremely ely important mportant decisions based purely on prior data, i.e. is it currently safe for me to change lanes? Similarly,, within the insurance industry, risk can Similarly now be priced and insurance sold using real-time data. A specialist drone insurance company24 recently introduced an insurance product that models hyper-localised meteorological meteorological data and transport conditions, as well as mining Twitter Twitter to assess potential crowding influences at street level, in real time. This results in an extremely accurate, short-term risk profile.  Although  Altho ugh the manufa manufacturi cturing ng landsca landscape pe of of replicative products, products, such as cars, is currently very diff erent erent to that of bespoke infrastructure, similar probabilistic methods could be used for the real-time analysis of building structures through current sensor and artificial intelligence technology.

What might the future look like for structural monitoring systems?  As there there is a push for smart smarter er,, more more techtechenabled buildings, we should harness this innovation to begin collecting data on the loading and structural performance of all buildings. Embedding sensors in frames could help build an intelligent risk profile over a building’s design life. This could determine, in real time, how reliable structures are; almost like a Fitbit or telematics-style ‘black box’ for buildings, continually monitoring its health (Figure 4). 4). With the cost of access to customised monitoring systems and services dramatically reducing25, engineers should provoke clients into considering these measures at an early stage.  The value value may may not not all be in the desig design n of new buildings, but more in the assessment of existing buildings and how they could be adapted and restored for the future. In that sense, the ‘return on investment’ on probabilist probabilistic ic structural monitoring systems would be more suited to institutions with long-term viewpoints, such as governments or large-scale asset managers.

ëFIGURE 4: Theoretical

probabilistic model continually monitoring building’s reliability

thereby reducing the need for factors of safety in local element design. After all, the uncertainty in modelling assumptions is the other part of the partial safety factor, γ f . On the other hand, with known imposed loads currently so low and associated factors of safety so high, could we convince building control bodies to accept utilisation ratios above 1.0, where imposed loading governs? Alternatively Alternatively,, could we just get rid of safety factors and design structures for plastic failure scenarios instead, like in the seismic design of many regions globally? Methods of alternative approval should exist,

for individual element design, depending on their contribution to the overall stability and robustness, is an alternative design strategy similar to the ‘critical component failure’ analysis used by the aeronautical industry.

or additions be made to current codes of practice, to allow engineers to make free and informed decisions on structural performance.

For too long, the engineering sector has spun a tale of the ‘margin of limited success’ in design. The actual problem is of engineers expending a huge amount of time on extremely detailed analysis models with no understanding of where the loads stem from. Now is the time to explore the other strand of design by tackling the loads, and associated uncertainty, that we design structures for. As Dunham said in 1947, there is a ‘lack of economy in providing strength throughout the structure that will not be used in 99% of the building’10. In the current climate emergency emergency,, it is our duty to tackle the problem of wasting material in structures where it may not be necessary.  Although  Altho ugh the wide-s wide-scale cale use of of postpostmonitoring sensors in structures may be a long way off , we should push for their adoption in early-stage client meetings. In the meantime, we should always challenge the imposed loading requirements of buildings; and if they are deemed essential by clients, we should thoroughly consider whether significant factors of safety are always necessary.

Potential consequences of reducing imposed loads

 Although it is likely the use of  Although of probab probabilist ilistic ic methods will remain an abnormal form of  justification, a further suite of ‘diversi fication’ clauses could be introduced for building regulations approval. approval. This could build on the imposed load reduction factors, like Annex A1 of

Of course, reducing the loading requirements and/or safety factors on buildings is a ripe opportunity for engineers to reduce material usage. However, it will require a re-think of other elements of structural design. For instance, engineers will need to carefully consider the resultant serviceability performance, if actual loads in reality remain unchanged.  Although  Altho ugh most most build buildings ings can accom accommoda modate te some structural movement, engineers will need to fully engage with movement and tolerance reports, rather than just detailing a 25mm deflection head to partitions. It is not clear whether secondary elements like fire stopping details, service ducts and brittle finishes are designed for current movement limits or take advantage of much reduced actual movements. Using monitoring systems and making data-backed decisions will improve performance in this area. Not yet touched upon is our judgement on consequence. Although probabilistic methods remove the subjectivity in decision-making, the concept of reliability requires an understanding of what happens if a structure fails. Historically,, this is how safety factors have Historically been determined, with higher values for higher-consequence higher-co nsequence structural elements. The intended consequence must be considered

BS EN 1990, or thejusti lowering of safety factors through alternative fication.  Testin  T esting g whole whole struc structural tural syst systems ems to to better better understand relative stiff nesses nesses would help reduce the uncertainty in the variation of load paths,

holistically regardsimposed to system robustness, rather thanwith assessing loads or factors of safety alone. Otherwise we are blindly ‘tip-toeing towards the edge’26. Introducing a hierarchy of partial safety factors

Need for alternative justification processes

Conclusions With more data, our predictions become more accurate, allowing us as designers to make better judgements. Engineers should have a basic education in probability and data analysis to understand the everyday decisions they make.

 Acknowl  Ackn owledg edgeme ements nts With special thanks to David Illingworth of London Structures Lab and Ben Smith of Clockwork Consultancy Ltd for their input.

 Arthur  Arth ur Coat Coates es CEng, MIStructE  Arthur is  Arthur is a Sen Senior ior Eng Enginee ineerr at at Lond London on Structures Lab. He is passionate about using new technology to help tackle the climate emergency and previously led the Climate  Action  Acti on Grou Group p at at Price Price & Myer Myers. s.

36  April 2021 | thestructuralengineer thestructuralengineer.org .org    

Probabilistic structural monitoring

Opinion

REFERENCES

1) Bloomberg website (2020)

[Online] Available at: www. bloomberg.com (Accessed: March 2021) 2) Blair A., Bartram C. and Clark E. (2018) ‘Structural design of the

new Exhibition Road Quarter at the  Victoria & Albert Albert Museum, London’ London’ ,  , The Structural Engineer Engineer,, 96 (6), pp. 12–19 3) Fast P. and Jackson R. (2018)  

10) Narver D., Freeman N. and Dunham J. (1947) ‘Design Live

19) Orr J. (2019) Design Uncertainty: Report [Online] Available at: www.

Loads in Buildings-Discussi Buildings-Discussion’, on’,

meicon.net/uncertainty (Accessed: meicon.net/uncertainty March 2021)

Transactions of the American Society of Civil Engineers, 112 (1) 11) Fitzpatrick A., Mathys J., Taylor A. and Johnson R. (1992) An (1992)  An  assessment  assess ment of of the imposed imposed loadin loading g  needs for current current commerc commercial ial of fi ce ce  buildings  buildi ngs in Great Britai Britain n, London:

Stanhope Properties

‘The TallWood TallWood House at Brock Commons, Vancouver’, The Structural Engineer Engineer,, 96 (10), pp. 18–25

12) Alexander S.J. (2002) 

4) Illingworth D. (2020–21)  Conversations with Arthur Coates

13) Winslow P. (2017) ‘ Machines Machines

5) Azo Sensors (2012) The Sensors Used in an iPhone [Online] Available

‘Imposed floor loading for offi ces: a re-appraisal’ re-appraisal’,, The Structural Engineer,  80 (23), pp. 35–45 for living – true performance-based design’, The Structural Engineer, 95 (3), pp. 10–13

at: www.az www.azosensors.com/arti osensors.com/article. cle. aspx?ArticleID=66 aspx?ArticleID=6 6 (Accessed: March 2021)

14) Drewniok M. and Orr J. (s.d.) Demonstrating Floor Loading: Report [Online] Available at: www.

6) Atamate website (2021) [Online]

meicon.net/ floor-l oor-loading oading (Accessed: (Accessed:   March 2021)

 Available at: www.atam www.atamate.com ate.com (Accessed: March 2021)

7) BRE (2016) The Edge, Amsterdam

[Online] Available at: www.breeam. com/case-studies/offi ces/the-edgeamsterdam/ (Accessed: March 2021) 8) Margnelli A., Greco L., Gkoktsi K. et al. (2018)  (2018) ‘   ‘ Wind-induced Wind-induced response

of tall buildings: Case study of a slender tall building in London’, 13th UK Conference on Wind Engineering, Leeds, UK 

15) MEICON (s.d.) Mythbusters 

[Online] Available Available at: www.meicon. www.meicon . net/mythbusters (Accessed: March 2021) 16) British Council for Offi ces (2018) Of fi  fice c   e Occupancy: Density and Utilisation, London: BCO 17) British Standards Institution (2002) BS EN 1990:2002+A1:2005 Eurocode. Basis of structural design,

London: BSI

9) Met Offi ce (s.d.) Site selection 

[Online] Available at: www.metoffi ce. gov.uk/services/business-industry/  energy/site-selection energy/site-select ion (Accessed: March 2021)

18) British Standards Institution (2002) BS EN 1991-1-1:2002 Eurocode 1. Actions on structures. General actions. Densities, selfweight, imposed loads for buildings, 

20) McRobie A. (2004) ‘The

Bayesian View of Extreme Events’,  Henderson  Hende rson Colloqu Colloquium ium, University of

Cambridge, UK, 5 July 21) Calgaro J.-A. and Gulvanessian H. (2001) ‘Management of reliabili reliability ty and risk in the Eurocode system’ ,  , Safety, risk, and reliability – trends  in engineeri engineering ng, International

Conference, Malta, 22–23 March 22) Smith B.S. (2020) A (2020) A quantitativ quantitative e  study of building building SHM SHM data with the the  goal to to improve improve design design ef fi ciency ciency using reliability analysis, Cambridge:

University of Cambridge 23) Farmer M. (2016) The Farmer Review of the UK Construction Labour Model: Modernise or Die [Online] Available at: www.

constructionleadershipcouncil. co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/  Farmer-Review.pdf (Accessed: March 2021) 24) Flock (2020) Drone insurance for  a connected connected world  [Online] Available

at: www.flockcover ockcover.com .com (Accessed: March 2021)

HAVE  YOUR  YOUR SAY  SA Y 

25) Microsoft (2018) 2019 (2018) 2019  Manufacturing Trends Report

[Online] Available at: https://inf https://info. o. microsoft.com/rs/157-GQE-382/  images/EN-US-CNTNT-Report2019-Manufacturing-Trends.pdf (Accessed: March 2021) 26) Beal A.N. (2011)  (2011) ‘A history of the safety factors’ ,  , The Struct Structural ural Engineer , 89 (20), pp. 20–26

[email protected]

@IStructE

#TheStructuralEngineer

London: BSI

Enter a sketch in the next competition – deadline 31 May 2021 2 21  The Drawing Board is The Structural Engineer’s quarterly Engineer’s  quarterly sketching competition,  judged by Ron Slade FIStructE of WSP.

Sketches must be: • hand drawn (no CAD, except for ‘guided freehand’) • from a real project or assignment • at a suitable scale for publication (i.e. not too intricate/detailed). Please also submit a short description (150 words) to put the sketch into context.

To take part, submit your entries to: [email protected] Each published entry will receive a free single e-book from the Institution’ Institution’s s current list of titles. Background sketch by Kevin Lyons (Lyons O’Neill)

37 thestructuralengineer.org thestructuralengineer .org | April 2021

Opinion  Opinion  letters

 

 Ve  V eru rullam

HAVE  YOU  YO UR SAY  SA Y 

Readers’ letters, comments and queries

Taking responsibility for buildability  DAVID THOMAS (Director/  Secretary, Temporary Works Forum)  Tom McGregor (Verulam, February  Tom 2021) notes the disconnect that has opened up between designers and contractors. The Temporary Works Forum similarly notes with concern this disconnect, more strictly between permanent works designers (PWDs) and temporary works designers (TWDs). A structure in its permanent state cannot be ‘wished into place’.  Appropriate consideration must be given to construction methodology so that permanent works can be optimised, temporary works minimised and trade interfaces simpli fied1. Responding to demand, the temporary works supply chain has become increasingly divided. This trend is not new. Changes to procurement methods, the use of equipment and management in relation to falsework were noted by Pallett et al. (2001)2.  There is often some remoteness between the PWD and TWD (exacerbating the diffi culty of dialogue), a lack of understanding by PWDs of constructability (evident from information that is passed on), a lack of instinct to identify appropriate significant risks, a contractual reticence for PWDs to engage (despite CDM 2015) and fee-driven constraints.  The PWD needs to understand how their structure can be constructed, cleaned, maintained and used safely, and make clear the principles of the design. They should identify at least one safe way of constructing what they have designed. It is suggested that a formal submission a proposed constructionofsequence be approved by the PWD as part of an ‘approval to construct’ process.  These are but some of the issues that the industry needs to address in

order to ensure that there aren’t ‘accidents waiting to happen’.   David and Tom are both correct. Let us all recognise as an industry that the disconnect may not just be an avoidance of responsibility, but at least in part a lack of capability on the part of PWDs to know how to respond to the tasks David describes. The skills of buildability and construction as a whole are considerable and have to be acquired. Perhaps this is something The Structural Engineer  can  can promote? Contributions would be welcome.  

REFERENCES 1) McBride D. (2017) ‘Temporary

Works Toolkit. Part 13: The importance of understanding construction methodology’, The Structural Engineer , 95 (7), pp. 32–36 2) Pallett P.F., Burrow M.P.N., Clark L.A. and Ward R.T. (2001) Investigation (2001)  Investigation into  aspects of falsework  [Online]   [Online] Available at:

www.hse.gov.uk/research/crr_pdf/2001/  crr01394.pdf (Accessed: March 2021)

 

Embodied carbon of steel JACK HASTINGS I have noticed in recent features and articles such as: ‘Industry CPD: Steel and embodied carbon’ (November/  December 2020)’ and ‘Making low-carbon material choices’ (February 2021) that the A1–A3 embodied carbon factor for structural steel sections has been cited as the European average of 1.13kg/CO2e/kg. In the case of the latter article, this was used to suggest that the cradle-to-gate embodied carbon for equivalent glulam, concrete and steel beams for a 9m span is approximately the same. Writing as a UK practiti oner oner,, I have been using the UK steel value of 2.5kg/  2 CO e/kgguide recommended within the IStructE How to calculate embodied carbon, based on EPDs provided by TATA TATA Steel, in my early-stage assessments. This has generally led to steel becoming an

Send letters to…  All contributions to Verulam Verulam should be submitted via email to:  to:   [email protected] Contributions may be edited on the grounds of style and/or length by the Institution's publishing department.

unfavourable option in terms of embodied carbon in many instances. It is my understanding that the lower European average is primarily a result of the manufacturing process utilising electric arc furnaces (EAF) over blast furnace basic oxygen steelmaking (BOS), which is common in the UK. Are we to assume that the aforementioned articles suggest that, for a UK project, steel sections are to be imported from Europe, hence increasing the embodied carbon associated with transport module A4? If so, what does this mean for the UK steel industry in the immediate future? I am concerned that the choice of these figures at an early project stage may be misused or misunderstood to suit diff ering ering agendas, all detracting from the goal of reducing greenhouse gas emissions from the industry.   The articles Jack refers to were contributed by the steel industry and the Institution’ Institution’s s Climate Emergency Task Group. Verulam has sought clarification from both.  

DAVID MOORE (CEO, BCSA)  The UK steel value of 2.5k g/CO 2e/kg that Jack mentions as quoted within the IStructE How to calculate embodied carbon guide for modules  A1–A3 is a UK aver age prod uction value and is not re flective of the UK average consumption mix. It assumes that all steel sections used i n UK construction are produced in the UK, which is far from the truth. Steel is a globally traded commodity and, as such, there is a signi ficant level of imports of steel construction products into the UK. In an ideal world, a published average for steel construction products consumed in the UK would be available and could be used by structural engineers in any comparative assessments. Sadly though, such data does not exist currently as it is commercially in real time and is at sensitive, the mercyvaries of global market forces. However, the BCSA is looking at this closely to try and establish a reliable and accurate consumption value.

38  April 2021 | thestructuralengineer thestructuralengineer.org .org  

Letters

 

What is available now is the bauforumstahl EPD for structural sections and plates produced in the European market, which represents the best available published ‘consumption’ average for sections and plates consumed in Europe, of which the UK is still geographically part (even postBrexit).  Although this EPD does not include data from UK plants, it does include data collected from major hot-rolled steel sections and plates manufacturers in Europe, both BOS and EAF producers. Intuition may tell us that this 1.13kgCO2e/kg EPD value could have been higher if it had included the BOS data from UK plants, but similarly, it could have been lower if it had also included other European EAF producers which did not contribute data.  The Industry CPD article from Steel for Life is not saying that steel construction products for UK projects should be sourced from Europe. It is merely saying that if you do not know where steel construction products are being sourced from, which is usually the case at the early design stage, then an average figure for UK consumption should be used, and the best available published average is the 1.13kgCO 2e/kg figure for modules A1–A3 from the bauforumstahl EPD.  

WILL ARNOLD (Head of Climate Action, Institution of Structural Engineers)  The ‘Making low-carbon material choices’ article was not written to give guidance on which carbon factors to use or where to source your material from. Rather, it was written to highlight the fact that there is no material that is ‘always lowest carbon’, meaning that carbon must be calculated individually for each project. For guidance on carbon factors, please refer to How to How to calculate embodied carbon, carbon, which tells the engineer to ‘choose a factor that best reflects their understanding at the time of calculation’. We support the work the BCSA is doing in determining an appropriate UK consumption value, but until then we suggest starting with the UK production values of 2.5 for hollow sections and 2.45 for open sections and 2 plates (kgCO e/kg),article as per Walter Swann’s in the thisguide. month’s issue (page 18) highlights 18) highlights the full range of possible factors, from 0.5 to 2.5 depending on scrap content and production method. The bauforumstahl

group’s EPD is low, as 74% of the group’s group’s group’ s steel is produced by EAF.  Across Europe, about 40% of all steel is made by EAF, and the Tata and British Steel figures are 0% EAF.  The UK consumption average will be somewhere in the middle, but even an average figure will have its limitations, given the wide range. This is why the guide also says, ‘Flag your uncertainty,  be transparent about any assumptions  made and revisit your choice of A1–A3 carbon factors at later design stages’. stages’ . Regarding uncertainty, it’s it’s useful to consider the potential variation that could occur once your steel supplier is on board. With a value of 2.5, you know that your supplied steel is unlikely to be any worse than this – useful if you’ve set yourself a carbon target (which you should have done).  At the same time, this upper-bound gure may not be representative of your fi final

steel supply, so for calculations comparing steel with other materials, you might also want to estimate how much lower the project emissions could be, and make a decision based on this bounding. The Structural Carbon Tool (www.istructe.org/the-structural-carbontool) allows tool)  allows you to switch materials for any given design to enable this process. Once an average consumption figure has been determined, we will update both the guide and the tool.  

Low-carbon material choices DAVE RAYMENT I’m writing to express my disappointment with the article on low-carbon material choices in the February issue of The Structural Engineer .  The IStructE and magazine have generally been doing excellent work to educate and broaden our profession’ profession’s s understanding of the climate crisis and the impact that our work can have. The recent article on low-carbon material choices, while containing lots of useful information, was hugely misleading, in particular with its comparison of embodied carbon in diff erent erent beams of similar Table 1.  This strengths table is atinbest meaningless, at worst hugely misleading. The quick takeaway from this table (and the one that many will take if my quick poll is correct) is that the choice of material

Opinion

makes no diff erence erence to the embodied carbon, which is simply not true. The comparison is supposedly of elements with similar strengths; however, a timber beam clearly would not need the same strength as a concrete beam to support a timber floor. In addition, the reduced self-weight of a timber structure would result in carbon savings for the substructure.  A cynic might wonder whether the suspiciously identical embodied carbon figures for the diff erent erent beams were a result of the article being co-written by members of each of the primary material support organisations.

FOR MANY BUILDING TYPES THE LOWESTCARBON SOLUTION WILL BE TIMBER

Or was this because the Institution felt the need to appear neutral? While every situation needs to be assessed individually, for many building types and situations the lowest-carbon solution will be timber, and we shouldn’t be afraid to say this. Instinctively, as engineers, we pride ourselves on appraising every building individually, and don’t like to appear to favour one material over another. Be we also have to be honest about the carbon footprint of the structural materials we use.  To  T o make the carbon savings that society needs, we need to change the way we as engineers do things. We can’t look to clients, contractors or governments to do this for us – we specify the structures, we need to make the changes. And we won’t achieve the widespread changes that are needed if we perpetuate the idea that our material choices have limited impact.   There is no doubt that anything to do with carbon content is going to invite some controversy controversy.. Our general aspiration is to save the planet, but how we do that is immensely complicated. Assessing embodied carbon and trying to minimise quantity is now a key aspect of the design process,for but not all materials are suitable all applications. Verulam has invited feedback from the Climate Emergency Task Group and this is given below.

39 thestructuralengineer.org thestructuralengineer thestructuralengineer.org thestructuralengineer .org .org| | October April 2021 2019

 

Opinion   Letters Opinion

 

WILL ARNOLD (Head of Climate Action, Institution of Structural Engineers)  This article was written in response to a number of leading engineers making the point in recent years that they have come across scenarios that went against their intuition in terms of material choices and carbon. Table 1 is a simplistic example of one such scenario, but we hope that readers generally took the time to read the article fully. The article does state explicitly that timber may often be the better option for small/medium-scale or cellular buildings, as well as roofs.  The message message within the the article article was that we must calculate emissions for each individual project, during the early stages of design, to identify the best solution to the brief (or propose a change to the brief to create a better solution).  The engineer’ engineer’s choice choice of material material has a massive impact – the point of the article is that you need to quantify this, in order to ensure that the impact is positive.  

Embodied carbon of concrete HENRY DALTON I refer to Paul Astle’s letter in the February issue and I believe that discussions about embodied carbon in concrete need to be taken further. Having worked on many concrete repair projects, I have seen many structures built since WWII su ff ering ering from rebar corrosion, requiring expensive repairs and/or demolition.  The reaction from industry indus try has generally been to increase concrete covers and cement content. While these measures do improve durability, they also mean heavier structures and more embodied carbon.  The IStructE held an interesting seminar last year on the subject of glass fibre-reinforced concrete. Glass fibre rods are used extensively as reinforcement in the USA, with their main advantages being that, because they don’t corrode: Ò|  less concrete cover is required – hence, concrete sections can be thinner Ò

 

| less cement is required in the mix

since carbonation is not a problem Ò|  the structure has a longer life.   Stainless steel reinforcement has similar benefits.

 The disadvantages of using glass fibre reinforcing rods are they have a higher modulus and inferior fire resistance. I would like to be able to design reinforced concrete with glass fibre reinforcement but: Ò| I don’t know how to do this to Eurocode 2 Ò| I don’t know who supplies such bars in the UK or if they are readily available.    Any comments and advice from readers on this subject would be welcome.  

Climate change and population growth  ANNABELLE YORK  I write as an engineering student in response to feeling quite unsettled by the issue of global population being brought up in relation to the climate emergency, both in January’s Verulam pages as well as at an Institution event I recently attended. The general argument is that our eff orts orts as engineers are useless because our population is growing exponentially, exponentially, and soon there simply will not be enough resources to go around. Not only is this factually incorrect, as Max Clayton (Verulam, March 2021) points out, but fretting about population growth raises real ethical concerns. First, if you ignore recent data and assume that some groups of people have too many children for sel fish reasons, then surely the only solutions are to forcibly control either the number of births or the number of deaths. We’re overcrowded: so who should stay and who should go? I dare anyone to propose an ethical solution. We spend our whole careers ensuring people are safe, as is our job, but then some of us go home and wish for a world in which

WHEN IT COMES TO THE CLIMATE EMERGENCY, STOP POINTING THE FINGER AT THE WORLD’S MOST  VULNERABLE  VULNERABL E PEOPLE AND WORK WITH THEM TO DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT

there are fewer people. To me, this seems completely at odds with the level of public trust we hold and the reasons many of us have become engineers in the first place. Did you know that the best predictor of family size is not continent, nation, race, nor religion? It’s poverty (Rosling H. (2019) Factfulness). The people having the most children are consuming the fewest resources and often su ff er er the most from the eff ects ects of climate change, and yet so many blame them for the climate emergency. These people, the poorest 10%, do not deserve our contempt: they deserve compassion, expertise, and resources.  The good news is that, according to the doughnut model of economics, poverty is an entirely fixable problem. We can sustain our population’ population’s s socioeconomic needs while meeting our environmental targets.  The real issue i s that resources are being distributed unfairly, both in space and time, and then wasted. While Peter Wright (Verulam, January 2021) is correct that Britain is ‘only’ responsible for 1% of global emissions, we are not far behind the likes of China when it comes to emissions per capita, and as engineers that is very much our problem. We need to pull our socks up and decarbonise quickly. That is the price we pay for decades of inaction and its associated economic growth. We are not absolved of our responsibility because there are going to be 11bn people in the world. If anything, our job becomes all the more important because we owe it to them to get this right. I’d like to think that my peers and I are preparing ourselves to step up to this challenge. I just hope that the industry will be ready for us when we graduate.  The Institution’s Climate Emergency  Task  T ask Group rightfully points out that we can save three orders of magnitude more CO2 as professionals than we ever could in our personal lives. So, when it comes to the climate emergency, stop pointing the finger at the world’s most vulnerable people and work with them to do something about it. This young engineer implores you.   This is a nicely written letter by  Annabelle. We need young in our engineers with her passion profession. To stir the pot, Verulam might point out that in many ‘highincome countries’ the fear is not of overpopulation but of a rapidly

40  April 2021 | thestructuralengineer thestructuralengineer.org .org  

Letters

 

declining population and a predicted inability to maintain the economy. So, we engineers have to apply our skills to keeping infrastructure going with a declining workforce.

Understanding computer output HENRY DALTON Regarding Colin Jackson’ Jackson’s s comments about building control submissions (Verulam, February 2021), I also had the privilege of learning under Mr David Bennett and Professor Hugh Tottenham.  The Institution used to define structural engineering as follows: ‘Structural engineering is the science and art of designing and making, with economy and elegance, buildings, bridges, frameworks and other similar structures so that they can safely resist the forces to which they may be subjected.’  The design work of Professor  Tottenham  T ottenham and J.D. Bennett was characterised by both economy and elegance – it is hard to believe now that they could design such thin concrete and timber shell roof structures with so little computing power in the 1960s! I agree with Colin that many structural computer programs seem to give excessive output and it is often better to use more generic software, such as Mathcad, which allows the preparation of calculations which can be easily checked and also allows the designer to insert text to explain the overall design concepts.

Every analytical technique we have has its uses, but whatever technique is used, it should be understandable to the users and not convey a sense of false precision. There are plenty of roles for software in a commercial environment with the output geared towards making ‘design production’ fast and effi cient, and the output format should bear that need in mind.

Checking what is built J.B. PYLE  The numerous letters on stability in  Verulam over several months all have the same theme. There is concern regarding structural failure because what

is built on site might not be the same as what has been designed. I was published in Verulam a couple of years ago regarding changes made on a site aff ecting ecting lateral stabilit y. Since then, I have become aware of several more incidences of changes being made by the builder without any reference back. Fortunately, they were spotted by building control, but how many more have not been noticed? I am now finding that the majority of my clients do not use the architectural designer to administer the contract.  There is therefore no direct contact between what has been designed and what has been built on site. A change is not known about unless it has been identified by the building inspector. I am sure that it is agreed that the building inspector should not be acting as a clerk of works.  The point I wish to make is that we all know about this problem and many have written about it. However, over many years nothing has been done to resolve it. If it is not already being dealt with, should not the Institution be pressing for action to ensure that the built structure complies with the requirements of the

Jon Svikis Projects Director at Mott MacDonald  A REAL REALL LY INTE INTERES RESTIN TING G AND AND INS INSPIR PIRING ING AR ARTIC TICLE. LE. A LOT LOT OF THI THINGS NGS FELL INTO PLACE TO MAKE THIS POSSIBLE, MOST NOTABLY DETAILED DETA ILED CONSTRUCTION RECORDS OF THE EXISTING STRUCTURE  AND PIL PILED ED FOU FOUNDA NDATIO TIONS. NS. THI THIS S DEMO DEMONST NSTRA RATES HOW IMP IMPOR ORT TANT IT IS FOR THE DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION TEAM TO PROVIDE A DETAILED AND ACCURATE SET OF RECORD DRAWINGS FOR THE BUILDING FILE AND FOR THE BUILDING OPERA OPERATOR TOR TO MAINT MAINTAIN AIN  AND KEE KEEP P THIS THIS INF INFORM ORMA ATIO TION N WHER WHERE E IT IT CAN CAN EAS EASIL ILY BE BE FOUN FOUND. D. THE PROBLEM IS THAT THE MAJORITY OF BUILDINGS FROM THIS ERA RARELY HAVE THIS INFORMATION AVAILABLE MAKING IT EXTREMELY DIFFICULT TO ASCERTAIN THE CAPACITY OF EXISTING ELEMENTS, PARTICULARLY PILED FOUNDATIONS. GREAT ARTICLE AND DESIGN!

Manji Chhabhadia Engineering Manager – Structures (Civil) at John Holland GREAT GREA T TO HEAR OF SUCH EFFORTS IN OTHER PARTS OF THE WORLD. IN AUSTRALIA, ARE WE MORE LIKELY LIKELY TO KNOCK DOWN  AND REB REBUIL UILD D PERF PERFECT ECTL LY SER SERVIC VICEAB EABLE LE ASS ASSETS ETS BEF BEFORE ORE THE END OF THEIR USEFUL LIFE? WHAT COULD BE THE REASONS? IS IT COMPLACENCY, UNAWARENESS, IGNORANCE, READILY AVAILABLE FUNDS, CAREFREE TAXPAYERS, WILLING INDUSTRY TO SPEND MONEY, LACK OF TECHNICAL SKILLS?

Opinion

design? Surely there has to be legislation to ensure that what is built is what the designer requires. A qualified professional should inspect the built structure to verify that it complies with the design. It goes without saying that the inspection or inspections must be before the structure is hidden by finishes.

 Verulam agrees agrees this is a diffi cult area. Those who read CROSS reports regularly will observe the recurring theme. It is not of much comfort to be able to offset liability for failure to those who make unauthorised changes, since the damage is done and public safety may have been compromised. Apart from being potentially dangerous, it is commercially unwise to make changes to design intent without designer sanction.

Pioneering women JOHN BUNTING I read with interest the letter from David Brett about early female engineers in the March issue. When I joined Ove Arup’s Sheffi eld offi ce in 1965, there was already a qualified female engineer there, Alison Moore, who was the first female engineer to graduate from Sheffi eld University. She commenced her degree in 1961 and she certainly was not Eastern European. However, I do agree with David that  Arup was fun and a stimulating environment at that time. Arup was way in front of other companies, with flexi-time and many holiday and social benefits. For example, you could overdraw on your precious holidays or save them up for later years.

Nostalgia is a wonderful thing! However,, there is a serious point However embodied in here. When Verulam started work, we actually believed a contract that said a working week was 37.5 hours and we got paid for overtime. There will be many our colleagues who used have, in the of last decades, become to a culture of excessive (unpaid) hours. The strain eventually shows. What can we do to reverse the trend?

41 thestructuralengineer.org thestructuralengineer thestructuralengineer.org thestructuralengineer .org .org| | October April 2021 2019

 

Opinion  Opinion  Letters

 

 A well-travelled career DONALD HOLLIDA HOLLI DAY  Y  I would like to add my congratulations to Dame Jo da Silva as profiled in the March issue of  The  The Structural Engineer . Born in a polluted Newcastle just after WWII, I was lucky enough to have a fully paid scholarship to Cambridge University. After failing in Natural Sciences, I switched to Engineering and have been a civil and structural engineer ever since. My first job was with Arup at 13 Fitzroy Street in London and I was lucky enough to meet Ove Arup himself, still very active in those days. Working in highways and bridges, I

MANY OF THE FATHERS FATHERS OF OUR PROFESSION WERE BRILLIANT SHOWMEN AND KNEW HOW TO PROMOTE THEMSELVES THEMSEL VES AND THEIR PROJECTS

was the Channel Tunnel Rail Link, then a joint venture with Arup and several other firms and being run from an offi ce in Tottenham Court Road, not far from Fitzroy Street. Halcrow was losing money, partly because it was no longer managed by engineers but by ‘money men’ in suits.

 Almost every president in recent history has mentioned the need to champion our profession, but I’ve yet to see an ‘action plan’ on how this is to be done. Marketing and public relations are as important as the technical skills required to become a successful structural engineer. Most successful authors spend as much time promoting their books as writing them. Many of the fathers of our profession were brilliant showmen and knew how to promote themselves and their projects. There is no reason why we can’t do this again now. It just requires time and e ff ort. ort. The ‘backroom boy’ or ‘bo ffi n’ image created by the media is not relevant today, where we are a vital member of the team that creates wonderful buildings and structures. We’ve got to get good at promoting

was also lucky enough to work under Robert Benaim, recently arrived from Freyssinet in France. His knowledge of prestressed concrete bridges was second to none. With very few jobs in the Northeast, my aim was to go abroad as soon as possible. Arup off ered ered me a post in newly independent Bangladesh, completing the half-finished Chittagong cement factory jetty. My contract included return flights from the UK to Bangladesh, so I decided to cash in my flight home for a flight the other way, all stops to New Zealand, intending to stay one year and then find my way home.  Arup’s  Arup’ s Sydney offi ce was very friendly and helpful, but they had no offi ce in New Zealand, so I was on my own. After a brief job search, I was off ered ered a post with Fletcher Construction on part of the Waipori hydro scheme near Dunedin.  After one year, I did not come home but was off ered ered a post in Malaysia on the East–West Highway bridges, still under heavy security after recent communist terrorist attacks.  After several tours in New Zealand, I wanted to return to UK and found it diffi cult getting recruited at such a long distance. Halcrow off ered ered me a job, partly because it was bidding for future work in Malaysia. In those days, it was

Shortly before I retired, it was taken over by a US firm, which completely changed the very friendly pension scheme! It is now being managed by Jacobs and seems to be doing much better. Sorry to finish on a sour note, but I have had a wonderful career career,, working all over the world on interesting and exciting schemes. Best wishes to all young recruits.  

I’m delighted to see that the IStructE is asking our members and readers of The Structural Engineer  for  for their views on our flagship publication.

It is a terribly irony that US engineers managed to place a machine on Mars last month and were applauded. Yet in the same month, in the same country country,, the infrastructure in Texas collapsed.

managed by a very well-known bridge engineer engineer.. I did go to Malaysi a with Halcrow, for many more years, but wanting to return to the UK again, I also had diffi culty finding a good job. That job

 The letters published often comment on recent articles, so they’re obviously stimulating interest and debate. As a frequent letter writer myself, I find The Structural Engineer  fascinating  fascinating – particularly the newsy items.

Do we need engineers? Yes, and what for? To protect society against all that nature throws at us. Perhaps we need to extol our role in providing the basics of human civilised protection?

Donald’s comments on his career Donald’s should give younger members a grasp of what international opportunities offer for our profession: seize them! On a lighter note, if the money men can be distinguished by their suits, how (at a site meeting) can the various professionals be caricatured by their dress sense?  

Promoting engineers to the public DAVID BRETT

ourselves, as nobody will do it for us. We’ve let the media create their own image of engineers by our inaction, so it’s time to put it right. Most of the other professional engineering institutions have the same problem, so we could all work together to put it right. Somebody needs to take the lead, and the IStructE is well placed to do this. Perhaps we could pioneer a programme for ‘Promoting the Engineering Professions’, which would fit in well with the UK government’s plans for a high-tech economy with the best brains available.  There are no prizes for ‘hiding our light beneath a bushel’ when we need to tell the world what we do and how we do it. Hopefully this will help to inspire young students to become the engineers of tomorrow. The Structural Engineer  could  could become the clarion calling card for the engineering professions to take their rightful place among the giants of our society and get the recognition we deserve.  

42  April 2021 | thestructuralengineer thestructuralengineer.org .org

 

Now available

Expand your design horizons with Computational engineering Peter Debney takes the reader on a practical, theoretical, and philosophical  journey through through computational computational engineering engineering with a fresh, engaging, and often humorous style. Forewords from Chris Wise, Tristram Carfrae, and John Leech.

Buy now: www.istructe.info/computational

“Times   have been tough… but Find an Engineer has been invaluable” Prepare your business for post-lockdown success with FindanEngineer. FindanEng ineer.com. com. The UK’s only directory dedicated to structural engineers consulted by thousands of potential customers.

“Times have been tough... but Find an Engineer has been invaluable and provided a work stream that has continued to      exponential growth of domestic private      Chris Davis, Principal, BRT consulting structural, civil and building engineers

only £120Subscribe + VAT per for year at:

FindanEngineer.com

20970_TSE_FindanEngineer_HP indd 1

16/03/2021 4:35 pm

 At the back  Diary dates  

Unless otherwise stated, evening technical meetings start at 18:00 and are free of charge to attend. History Study Group meetings start at 18:00 and are free of charge to attend. Registration is not required except for the  Annual  Annu al Busines Business s Meeting Meeting held held in January.   Industry workshops and CPD courses are held at HQ unless otherwise stated.

ONLINE CONFERENCES Tuesday 27−Thursday 29 April

Stadia and long span structures conference Presenters: Knut Göppert and Mark Sheldon 14:00−16:30 Price: Members: £155.00 + VAT; Standard: £245.00 + VAT; Students: £45.00 + VAT Booking:  www.istructe.org/events/hq/stadiaand-long-span-structures-conference   Wednesday 12−Thursday 13 May 

Digital design and computation e-conference

Keynote speaker: Professor Caitlin Mueller  13:00−17:00 Price: From £155 + VAT Booking:  www.istructe.org/events/hq/digitaldesign-computation-conference   Wednesday 7−Thursday 8 July 

Reuse and life extension of existing structures e-conferenc e-conference e Keynote speaker: Steve Fernandez Presenter: Fiona Cobb 13:00−17:00 Price: Members: £155 + VAT (until 7 June); Standard: £245 + VAT (until 7 June) Booking:  www.istructe.org/events/hq/  reusing-existing-structures-e-conference ng-structures-e-conference  

WEBINARS Wednesdays (21 Apr, 18 May, 1 Jul, 9 Sep, 20 Oct and 2 Dec)

Novel materials series − How to get novel materials adopted on projects: R&D to construction Presenters: James Norman, James Tolly and Pete Winslow 13:15−14:30 Price: Members: £45.50 + VAT; Standard: £70.00 + VAT (each webinar; discount for booking all six; Student member discount available) Booking: www.istructe.org/events/hq/novelmaterials-webinar-series-1 Contact: events@istructe [email protected] .org  

Diary dates Note that more current information may be available from the Institution website:  website: www.istructe.org/events Presenter: Trevor Flynn 18:00−19:30 Price: Free Booking:  www.istructe.org/events/hq/2021/  sketching_2021   Wednesday 5 May 

Booking:  www.istructe.org/events/australia/mentorcse  

Effective marketing for SMEs − business development seminar

Presenters: Keith Williams and Dr Dave Gent 18:00−19:30 Price: Free  

Presenter: Parag Prasad 14:00−18:00 Price: Standard: from £195 + VAT; Members: from £145 + VAT Booking: www.istructe.org/events/hq/2021/  marketing-for-smes   Wednesday 19 May 

Sustainable bamboo housing Presenter: Seb Kaminski 18:00−19:15 Price: Free Booking:  www.istructe.org/events/hq/  sustainable-bamboo-housing-(online)   Tuesday 8 June

Designing for blast resilience and resistance Presenters: Piroozan Aminossehe and Bob Sheldon 10:00−17:30 Price: Members: £295 + VAT (Early Booking £255 + VAT); Standard: £395 + VAT (Early Booking £335 + VAT) Booking: www.istructe.org/events/hq/2021/  blast-2021  

EXAM PREPARA PREPARATION TION Monday 24–Wednesday 26 May 

Exam preparation course Presenters: Paul Toplis, Chris Smaller, Victoria Edmondson and Matt Goswell 10:00–17:30 Price: Members: £635 + VAT (Early Booking £555 + VAT)  

REGIONAL GROUPS For booking and contact details, visit www. istructe.org/get-involved/regional-groups  

 Aust  Au stra rali lia a Tuesdays, 6 April−11 May 

Mentor-CSE Presenter: Charles Rickard −

18:00 19:00 AEST Price: $600

Chester and North Wales Thursday 1 April

Surveying and recording historic ironwork

North Thames Thursday 8 April

Innovation structures Presenter: Kamran Moazami 18:00−19:15 Price: Free Tuesday 20 2 0−Friday 23 April

GRCA Congress (sponsored content) 09:00 to afternoon every day Congress Centre, 28 Great Russell Street, London WC1B 3LS Price: From £220 Booking: www www.istructe.org/e .istructe.org/events/north-thame vents/north-thames/  s/  grca-congress  

Northern Ireland Tuesday 13 April

OM Dark Sky Park and Observatory, Davagh, Davagh, Sperrin Mountains Presenters: Mary McKeown and Charmain Bell 18:15−19:45 Price: Free  

Surrey  Monday 19 April

The Louvre Abu Dhabi − engineering an icon Presenter: Brian Cole 18:00−19:30 Price: Free  

Western Counties Wednesdays, 21 April−26 May 

Eurocode courses: steel design − Eurocode 3 Presenter: Bob Benton 15:30 to 19:30 (all dates) Price: Members: £200; Standard: £275

ONLINE CPD COURSES Wednesday 14 April

Sketching − can engineering afford to lose it?

Regional Group Committee members should submit details of forthcoming events to: [email protected]

44  April 2021 | thestructuralengineer thestructuralengineer.org .org    

Spotlight on Structures  At the back

 Access to Structures is free to paying-grade Institution members as one of their membership benefits, via the ‘My account’ section of the Institution website. The journal is available online at: www. structuresjournal.org

Read the latest issue Don’t forget that the February issue of Structures (Volume 29) is is available at www.s www.sciencedire ciencedirect.com/journal/structur ct.com/journal/structures/vol/29 es/vol/29.. Editor-in-Chief, Leroy Gardner, has selected a paper on ‘Robustness of steel truss bridges: Laboratory testing of a fullscale 21-metre bridge span’ as his ‘Featured Article’ from this issue. The article will be available free of charge for six months.

Editor-in-Chief’s Featured Article Robustness of steel truss bridges:

progressive structural tr truc uctu tura ra collapse. co ap apse se.. Although t ou oug g

causes not included in the experiment. ent. en t. The e

Laboratory testing of a full-scale f ull-scale 21-metre bridge span Manuel Buitrago, Elisa Bertolesi, Pedro A. Calderón, José M. Adam ICITECH, Universitat Politècnica de València,  Valencia, Spain Spain

there are many ny experimental studies on robustness and progressive collapse on buildings, those on bridges are either theoretical or deal with actual collapses.  This paper describes a unique unique case of a 21m full-scale bridge span tested under laboratory conditions with an extensive monitoring system, together with an experimental study to evaluate structural behaviour and robustness as damage or failure progressed in its elements. A linear-static finite-element analysis was also included to examine other possible

results results result s proved v the structural redundancy redun red un ancy of this type of truss structure based on the  joints’ resistance to bending bending moments and gave rise to a series of practical structural health recommendations to identify early failures and avoid progressive or sudden bridge collapse. The study carried out and the recommendations it produced are now being applied in three similar bridge case studies.

 Abstract  This study aimed to experimentally experimentally analyse the robustness of riveted steel bridges based on truss-type structures and to define practical recommendations for early detection of local failures before they cause

Read the full paper at https://doi. at  https://doi. org/10.1016/j.istruc.2020.12.005 Ò|

Register for alerts If you’d like to receive regular updates about new content in Structures, register for email alerts at www.sciencedirect.com .

45 thestructuralengineer.org | April 2021

 T  Telephone: elephone: +44 (0)20 7880 6245 Email: [email protected]

 

Products & Services

New look for StructureCare StructureCare StructureCa re has launched a new website full of information, which is simple and quick to explore, and designed to aid the architect, surveyor, contractor and asset manager. The StructureCare website (www.structurecare.com) is divided into six business area links – Roofing, Structural Waterproofing, Car Parks, Movement Joints, Concrete Repair and Corrosion Management, and  Asset Management. Management. Part of the CPG (Construction Products Group) Europe, StructureCare StructureCare is a structural maintenance and repair company, providing a range of product and service portfolios covering the infrastructure, industrial, retail, commercial and residential industry sectors in the UK. Further information: StructureCare (web: www.structurecare.com/)

STRUCTURAL DESIGN & CAD DRAWING

REINFORCED CONCRETE DETAI DETAILING LING

TONY DOYLE ASSOCIATES LTD  COMPUTER AIDED DESIGN & DRAWING

A u t o CA D D r a ug h t i n g S e r v i c e s  Established in 1988, we are a team of ces   es in professional technicians with of   c Weston super Mare, providing an ef    cient cient on-demand service for our clients 

- RC Detailing Specialists - Structural Drawing GA s & Details 

- Bespoke Drawings for all Applications -

Tel: 01934 808468 www.tonydoyleassociates.co.uk

R.C. Detailing Specialists Established 1980 Extensive experience Proven reliability Large capacity Paul Benham Ltd

Civil & Structural Engineering Draughting Service

[email protected] www.paulbenhams.co.uk 01273 730956

47 thestructuralengineer.org thestructuralengineer .org | April 2021

 Telephone: elephone: +44 (0)20 7880 6245 Email: [email protected]  Services Directory  T      

SOFTWARE

ANALYSIS & DESIGN

QUIKFRAME

THE FASTEST, EASIEST 2D ANALYSIS PROGRAM

STRAP software for analysis and design of cold formed, concrete, steel and pre & post-tensioned structures.

Fine GEO5 geotechincal software for soil structure interaction, slope stability stability,, earth pressure, sheeting & pile design.

Trial downloads at www.sigmawww.sigma-x.net x.net UK: +44 (0) 203 603 1442 Ireland: +353 (0) 86 85 45 425 www.sigma-x.net

1st and 2nd order, elastic critical load. Built in optional powerful design modules EC3, EC5, BS5950, BS5268

GET THE JOB DONE!

 ANALYSIS & DESIGN DESIGN

VISIT

 www.quiksoft.co.uk   www .quiksoft.co.uk  and download your free trial Email: [email protected] or call 08 45 6 25 0 28 0  ANALYSIS & DESIGN DESIGN

SCALE Structural Calculations Introducing SCALE 5 for iPad, including: ●

 Over 600 SCALE proformas, for neatly composed pages of  structural engineers' calculations, showing full calculations for both Eurocodes & British Standards, pdf & Word output.

●

●

●

  LUCID for reinforced concrete detailing, and SPADE for steelwork, masonry and timber component detailing.   NL-STRESS for 2D/3D, elastic, plastic, and stability  analysis, with linking between analysis and design, and 3D visualisation of results.

 ANT TO  W   AN  AD  A DVERTISE  YO  Y OUR PRODUCTS & PRODUCTS  SERVICES HERE?

 Free trial available, with choice of monthly or annual subscriptions. Go to www.fitzroy.com, or search the App Store for “SCALE Structural Calculations”.

SCALE 5 for Windows is also available for PC/laptop users. See www.fitzroy.com for details.

Fitzroy Systems Software for Structural Engineers

Contact 020 7880 6245 or 6245 or email [email protected]

TheeStructuralEngineer Th The e flagship  publicationn of The Institution of Structural Engineers

48  April 2021 | thestructuralengineer thestructuralengineer.org .org

 

 Telephone: +44 (0)20 7324 2755 Email: [email protected]  Telephone:

Recruitment

350  bs  job  jo posted on average every month

thestructuralengineer.org/jobs The Structural Engineer Jobs is the official jobs board for The Institution of Structural Engineers. The perfect place to find the latest structural engineering vacancies.

Build your future and become a part of our success... We are a wellconsultancy established, looking award winning, expanding civil andpeople structural engineering for talented and ambitious to join our team. Our mission is to continue to build on our fantastic reputation for delivering deliverin g high quality, complex and specialist projects.

Regional Director/ Equity Partner - London Competitive salary based on experience plus benefits

For a full job description scan QR code or visit:

www.adeptcsce.com/careers

49 thestructuralengineer.org thestructuralengineer .org | April 2021

Recruitment

 Telephone:  T elephone: +44 (0)20 7324 2755 Email: [email protected] 

 

DIRECTOR SHAREHOLDING OPPORTUNITY  

Faculty Position in Structural Design and Engineering at the Ecole polytechnique fédérale de Lausanne (EPFL) The civil engineering industry is the largest user of raw materials and constructed assets account for approximately one-third of the world’s total carbon emissions. While this situation is unsustainable, society expects civil engineers to continue to provide the necessary conditions for a good quality of life. In the next decades, engineers must find new and innovative ways to design, manage, rehabilitate and strengthen civil infrastructure and buildings to meet societal needs in a changing world. The key driver of this transition should be sustainability and its reflection into innovative structural design. We seek candidates who develop innovative methods and concepts to design, assess, maintain and rehabilitate civil infrastructure with emphasis on structural concrete as well as other cementitious-based and recyclable materials by leveraging a combination of approaches including, but not limited to, computational techniques and modelling of complex physical damage phenomena, advanced experimental techniques, as well as infrastructure monitoring. In this context, we invite applications for a Faculty position at the Tenure Track Track Assistant Professor Pro fessor level. The successful candidate will be involved in existing core undergraduate and graduate courses as well as new innovative courses, supervise doctoral students and contribute significantly to knowledge transfer in the broad field of structural engineering. A good knowledge of engineering practice is also appreciated, suitably identifying current and future needs of the structural engineering community. With its main campus located in Lausanne and its developing antennae in neighbouring cantons in Switzerland, EPFL is a growing and well-funded institution fostering excellence and diversity. It is well equipped with experimental and computational infrastructure, and offers a fertile environment for research collaboration between different disciplines. The EPFL environment is multilingual and multicultural, with English serving ser ving as a common interface. The EPFL offers internationally competitive start-up resources, salaries, and benefits. The following documents are requested in PDF format: cover letter including a statement of motivation, curriculum vitae, publications list, statements of teaching interests and research plans, as well as the names and addresses, including emails, of at least three references (contacted for shortlisted cancan didates). Applications should be uploaded to the EPFL recruitment web site: https://facultyrecruiting.epfl.ch/position/28737542 Formal evaluation of the applications will begin on May 1, 2021  2021  and the search will continue until the position is filled. Further enquiries should be made to: Prof. Dimitrios Lignos Chair of the Search Committee E-mail: [email protected] For additional information on EPFL, please consult: www.epfl.ch or enac.epfl.ch

EPFL is an equal opportunity employer and a family friendly university, committed to increasing the diversity of its faculty, and strongly encourages women to apply.

As part of our National growth plan, we have a rare and exciting opportunity whereby we are looking for candidates to run their own consultancy as part of The Home Engineers group throughout the UK. We are looking to recruit a number of Directors / Structural Engineers across the nation to enable expansion of The Home Engineers group. Applicants throughout throughout all areas of the UK are welcome. To get started we will offer you an initial business startup pack as well as providing you with financial backing and the confidence to get you up and running. •

Start up capital provided.

•

Support of wider team for technical admin.

•

Logistics taken care of.

•

Removes the stress from setting up alone.

•

Gain the freedom and advantages of running your own practice.

For further information regarding the opportunity please apply directly to Shaun Todhunter: eengineers.co.uk. email: [email protected]. shaun@thehom telephone: 0191 477 6677 THE NATION’S LOCAL ENGINEER

 WANT  W ANT TO TO  ADVERTISE  ADVERTI SE HERE? The Structural Engineer is the official publication public ation of IStructE IStru ctE and is the Institution’s principal means of communicating with its members. It combines news, opinion and the latest technical knowledge in structural 17,000 readers. engineering reaching 17,000  readers. To advertise here contact recruitment on 020 7324 2755 or email tsejobs@ redactive.co.uk

50  April 2021 | thestructuralengineer thestructuralengineer.org .org

 

 Telephone:  Telephone: +44 (0)20 7324 2755 Email: [email protected]

Recruitment

 

     

TECHNICAL VACANCI ACANCIES ES              most vital infrastructure and buildings projects? Then read on.      engineers, temporary works engineers, precast concrete design/technical leaders and reinforcement engineers (including research engineers, structural CAD technicians/ RC detailers or BIM technicians with transferable skills) to work on our portfolio of projects nationwide. This is an excellent opportunity for people with the ideas, passion and the ambition to contribute to projects that improve the built environment, enhance         

As a member of one of our Design Centre teams, in the London region and North of England, you will work collaboratively to apply your knowledge to help us transform how we go to work, accelerate our progress on decarbonisation and creating net zero buildings, and to deliver certainty for our clients. Our Design Centres focus on supporting       Centre of Excellence for Modern Construction in Nottinghamshire – the most advanced facility of its kind in Europe – and  our project  teams who are     and transport and energy infrastructure.

We offer flexible, dynamic and part-time working options and a recruitment process that is accessible to all. If this sounds interesting, please get in touch to find out more.

LAINGOROURKE.COM

Scan the QR code or visit: https://career.laingorourke.com/jobs/register/

51 thestructuralengineer.org thestructuralengineer .org | April 2021

 

Digital Design & Computation Computation e-conference Keynote: Professor Caitlin Mueller, Massachusetts Institute of Technology  Conference theme: Digital futures

Held on two consecutive afternoons, the 2021 programme includes: includes: • • • • •

Industry experts and academics present their own digital journeys and case studies Ask questions live to digital design specialists from Mott MacDonald, MacDonald,  Arup, Block Research Group Group and more more An introduction to SWARM, the app store for the AEC design community Virtual exhibition stands including sponsor demonstration demonstrations, s, videos and face to face Q&A  Dedicated networking sessions

 All content content is recorded and made available available on-demand. on-demand. The conference conference platform is integrated with Zoom to enable face to face networking.

Date: 12-13 1213 May 2021 2 021

13:00 - 17:00 BST Prices: Member: £155 + VAT  Standard: £245 + VAT  Student: £45 + VAT 

Book by 14 April for a discount

Book your place

istructe.info/digital Sponsors