Flexibility of building structures

R. Blok & F. van Herwijnen

TU/e University of Technology, Eindhoven, The Netherlands

ABSTRACT: Flexibility of Building structures and/or Structural Flexibility is a property of build-

ings which greatly influences the Service Life of existing buildings as well as the expected Service
Lives of new buildings. To specify and quantify Structural Flexibility in more detail and to optimize
decisions in Integrated Life Cycle Design (ILCD), a new definition of Structural Flexibility and
Structural Adaptability is proposed. From this a method to evaluate Structural Flexibility is derived.
Key factors and indicators which influence the Structural Flexibility are given.

1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Redevelopment of urban areas and buildings

Looking back on urban developments at the end of the last century it shows that many cities have
redeveloped areas that were degenerating for various reasons. Former industrial areas with old
warehouses have been transformed to housing and/or office locations. Many buildings have been
demolished, other buildings have been refurbished and given a second functional life.
Apparently some buildings were more suitable for redevelopment and refurbishment than oth-
ers. In many cases of these refurbishment of buildings in the past, the conditions that made these
buildings suitable for a changed functional use, were not foreseen in the design process but were
favourable more or less by chance. These buildings were not designed to serve functional changes. It
is interesting however to look at their inherent qualities because some qualities of the building struc-
ture, for example a large floor to ceiling height of the building, make it possible to accommodate
new functions with new appropriate services.

1.2 Favourable aspects for elongation of a buildings service life

Apparently favourable aspects for a second functional working life are mentioned below:
• The quality of the location of the building
• The architectural quality and/or historical value of the building
• The technical quality of the building and its structure
• The economic aspects: costs of refurbishment against costs of demolishing and rebuilding, and
in the end: the resulting net returns
• The local urban planning rules and building regulations
• The vision of the owner(s) and/or authorities (politics)
• The environmental aspects (air pollution, soil condition, etc.)

1.3 Integrated Life Cycle Design (ILCD)

In a more and more dynamic society organisations tend to change quite fast. At the same time,
because of the rising level of prosperity the demands on the built environment changes. The required
area in m2 as well as the required quality level of buildings change. Due to this it seems that more
and more relatively young buildings, for example buildings of only twenty to twenty-five years
old, become evaded, empty and in fact obsolete (sometimes because of their functional qualities,

73
Copyright © 2005 Taylor & Francis Group plc, London, UK
sometimes because of their location). In terms of investments of money but also in terms of energy,
materials, waste production, or rather: Sustainability, this is not a desirable situation. Elongation
of the service life of buildings, especially buildings with high investment costs such as high rise
buildings, could be achieved if the buildings could easily be adapted to new user-requirements.
Therefore it is obvious we need to look at buildings from a broader perspective than just the first
user-requirements.
Integrated Life Cycle Design aims to optimize the building design by looking at the whole of
the service life of the building from the extraction and production of building materials up to the
demolition and possible re-use of materials and components.

1.4 The meaning of Flexibility in Integrated Life Cycle Design

For a large degree, the lifetime of a building structure no longer depends on its Technical Service
Life (TSL). The structure is usually the longest lasting part of a building (its service life can easily
stretch beyond fifty or seventy-five years). Fast changing user-demands during this period strongly
influence the Functional Working life an therefore greatly influence the resulting life-time of a
building and its structure. The Functional Working Life (FWL) therefore is of major importance.
This means that an important question to answer in Integrated Life Cycle Design of buildings
and in particular of building structures is: “How can we design buildings and building structures,
or adapt existing buildings which will continue to meet the (quite likely) fast changing (future)
user-demands during the life-time of these buildings?”
We can distinguish a number of different approaches to this problem, but one approach is to
design buildings which are more Flexible, buildings which can accommodate future changes in use.

2 DEFINING FLEXIBILITY

2.1 A building model with different building layers

To improve on Performance Based Design and to improve on Integrated Life Cycle Design (com-
pare, balance and optimise the decisions at the design stage) it is necessary to define and quantify
“Flexibility” more accurate. Another reason to define “Flexibility” more accurate is that it gives
us a tool to evaluate the building structures of our existing building stock in more detail and look
at the possibilities of future refurbishment of these existing buildings.
To get a grip on how buildings can be changed or adapted, we need a building model. We can
look at what can be changed but also we can try to distinguish what is fixed. Steward Brand [2]
distinguished seven building layers: Furniture, Space, Services, Access, Structure, Façade and
Location. Bernard Leupen [3] looked at dwellings in a similar way: he defined a house as a space,
defined by five different, more or less integrated layers, each with their own level of flexibility:
Scenery, Access, Servant elements, Structure and Skin. From this a slightly adapted list of building
layers is proposed:
• Scenery (furniture, interior finishes, ceilings)
• Space plan (partition walls)
• Access (stairs, corridors, lifts)
• Servant elements (building services, pipes, cables and involved spaces)
• Envelope (façades, base, roof)
• Compartments (firewalls)
• Structure (floors, columns, beams, load-bearing walls)
• Location (building environment)

2.2 A Flexible Building

In general, a Flexible Building can be defined as a building with the capacity to accommodate,
in a relatively easy way, (future) changes in use. This can be achieved by allowing for “relatively

74
Copyright © 2005 Taylor & Francis Group plc, London, UK
Figure 1. Definition of building layers.

easy” changes to one or more of the following building layers: Scenery/Servant elements/Envelope
(Skin)/Access/Structure/(Location). This definition poses the problem of what to regard as, or how
to define “relatively easy”. Relatively easy could be defined by the extend of the work necessary
for a certain change, for example “two men with a screwdriver and … can do the job”.
Another way of defining could be: A change to a certain building layer is “relatively easy”
if it can be achieved without the necessity to affect or change other building layers as well. For
example: A building with a load-bearing elevation wall, combines the layers of Structure and
Envelope. It is not possible to change the Envelope layer without also changing the Structure.
Regarding this aspect the building is not flexible. It is possible however, that the same building is
Flexible with regard to another building layer, for example the Servant elements or the Scenery
(partition walls).
In case only one (or may be a very limited number) of building layers is involved in the change,
a large part of the building’s functions and activities can stay in place, while the changes are being
carried out. Therefore it is not always necessary to close the building while these changes take
place.
Because Flexibility can involve different building layers it means that the term “Flexible Build-
ing” should be looked at in more detail and specified further: For a “Flexible Building” flexibility
is probably needed for many building layers. The question becomes: “Which of the building layers
can be changed without affecting the others. Which aspects of the building are Flexible, how and
where and to which degree are the different layers separated?”

2.3 Definition of Structural Flexibility

Structural Flexibility and Structural Adaptability are each defined as qualities, or properties of the
building structure. (Note: In IFD building, flexibility is sometimes used as referring to the design
stage in which building components can be arranged in different possible compositions.)
Looking at the building structure with regard to other building layers, Structural Adaptability
can be defined as: The capacity of the building structure to accommodate changes to the structure
itself without or with minor consequence to other building layers. (This implies that other building
layers can obstruct the structures Adaptability.)
From this Structural Flexibility can be defined likewise: Structural Flexibility means: The prop-
erty of the building structure to accommodate changes in use by providing sufficient space and
load-bearing capacity and allowing for changes in one or more other building layers (for example
scenery, space plan, servant elements) without the necessity to change the structure itself. This
way Adaptability is defined in terms of accommodating changes to the specific layer (structure)
itself. Flexibility is defined in terms of accommodating changes to other layers. This implies that
in case of sufficient Structural Flexibility the building structure need not to be changed in case of
a required change in use.
Flexibility should be specified in more detail: With regard to which aspects is the structure
flexible? Does the Flexible Structure allow for easy changes to the Space plan (partition walls), the
Services, to the Envelope (Façade) …, to one or all of these layers?

75
Copyright © 2005 Taylor & Francis Group plc, London, UK
3 INDICATORS FOR STRUCTURAL FLEXIBILITY

3.1 General approach

From the definition of Structural Flexibility it is now possible to look for the main qualities and
indicators which influence Structural Flexibility. We can look at the building structure and evaluate
its relation with each of the other building layers, basically in three steps:
• First the aspect of the relation of the structure with other building layers is examined. Is the
structure entwined with other building layers and how are the connections with the other building
layers (Step A).
• Secondly the structure’s quality of “Providing Sufficient Space” to each of the other building
layers is looked at (Step B).
• Thirdly the aspect of “Providing Sufficient Load-bearing Capacity” is examined (Step C).
A large provided space and bearing capacity together with a high degree of separation from other
building layers, will result in a high score on Structural Flexibility. In order to achieve Structural
Flexibility the other building layers should not physically be entwined with the building layer
Structure. At the same time the structure should accommodate the other building layers as much as
possible. A very clear example of this separation (independence) and integration at the same time
can be seen with the design of new IFD floor systems [4].

3.2 Elaboration of the proposed method

The proposed steps in paragraph 3.1, General approach are carried out in the research undertaken
at the University of Eindhoven. For each of the building layers the relation with the Building Layer
Structure is be evaluated and indicators representing the qualities are being sought. The following
paragraphs gives an example of these examinations. Further research will result in fine-tuning the
various indicators and Flexibility factors.

3.2.1 Example approach Indicators Structural Flexibility with regard to

building layers Scenery and Space plan
Applying Step A: We need to answer the question “Is the building layer Structure entwined or
interwoven with Scenery and Space plan or is the Structure independent of these building layers,
and how are the layers connected?”
Indicator A1: The degree of contribution of Scenery and Space plan elements to the load bearing
function.
(Rem. For example in case of sloped floors in theatres to accommodate the spectators, the
building layers structure and scenery can be seen as entwined, en therefore less flexible.)
Step B. Evaluating whether the structure provides sufficient space to allow for changes to Scenery
and Space plan:
Indicator B1: The functional free floor to ceiling height (The functional free floor to ceiling
height is the part of the structural storey height which is allocated to functional use. The part
allocated to services is the free service height, the part allocated to the structure: structural height.
(In case of integrated solutions these dimensions can overlap.)
Indicator B2: The floor span: Minimum functional column-free widths and areas.
(Rem: The Dutch building regulations provide minimum widths, minimum areas and minimum
floor to ceiling heights depending on the function of the building. Generally it is clear that the
larger the column free space and floor to ceiling heights the larger the Flexibility will be. It is more
easy to accommodate changes in use in an oversized building.)
Step C. Providing sufficient bearing capacity to allow for changes to Scenery and Space plan:
Indicator C1: Allowable life floor loads.
(Rem. Building regulations give minimum values for life floor loads depending on the buildings
function.)

76
Copyright © 2005 Taylor & Francis Group plc, London, UK
 Indicator C2: The amount of allowance in the permanent floor loads allocated to the support of
(freely arrangeable) partition walls. (The total bearing capacity of existing structures can be partly
allocated to life loads and partly to permanent loads for partitioning and services.)

3.3 Indicators Structural Flexibility with regard to Access, Servant elements and Envelope
The process similar to paragraph 3.2 (step A, B and C) has been repeated for the other building
layers. This has resulted in indicators which describe the relation of the building structure with
each of the other building layers.

4 EVALUATING AND SCORING STRUCTURAL FLEXIBILITY

4.1 Evaluation of different building structures

With the identified indicators involved in the Flexibility of building structures it becomes possible
to compare and evaluate different building structures. Both existing building structures as well as
new designs for building structures can be subject to an investigation.
For new buildings the design stage is crucial in incorporating possibilities and preventing obstruc-
tions for future changes. The design stage will play the most important role in the determination
of the Functional Working Life of the building.

4.2 Flexibility classes

The Indicators that have been identified in Structural Flexibility have been looked at in more detail.
Different classes of Structural Flexibility from “not flexible” to “extreme flexible”, have been
defined. By scoring the indicators and attributing weighing factors the level of Structural Flexibility
of a building becomes more comparable and may even be expressed in a single score Flexibility
Index. multi criteria charts can visualise the extend of Flexibility of a given building structure. For
a general idea some examples of indicators with preliminary values are given (see Table 1).
An example of a resulting multi criteria chart is given in Figure 2. The chart shows that the
evaluated structure shows Limited Flexibility on Envelope, Not flexible on Servant elements,
Average Flexibility on Access and Very Flexible with regard to Scenery/Space plan.
Rather than a single score Flexibility Index the multi criteria charts visualizes the structures
strong and weak points very clear. Furthermore a single score Flexibility Index will require a
thorough search for the implementation of values and weighing factors (perhaps based on expert
opinions).

Figure 2. Example of Structural Flexibility chart for four building layers (from centre outward: 0, Not flexible,
Limited flexibility, Average flexibility, Very flexible, Extreme flexible).

77
Copyright © 2005 Taylor & Francis Group plc, London, UK
4.3 Example of Flexibility Indicators

Table 1. Indicator B1 functional free height.

(The functional free height is

influenced by the other assumed
heights for example height for
servant elements)
Flexibility class Functional free floor Values are base on Dutch
Free height to ceiling height Hf (m) building regulations Flexibility factor FB1

I Not flexible Hf < 2,4 0,2

II Limited flexibility 2,4 <= Hf < 2,6 Offices 0,4
III Average flexibility 2,6 <= Hf < 2,8 Housing 0,8
IV Very flexible 2,8 <= Hf < 3,5 Schools, classrooms 1,0
V Extreme flexible Hf >= 3,5 Sport facilities: Hf = 5,0 m Hf 1,0–2,0 (Depending on
For Hf >= 5,2 m Mezzanine value of Hf )
floors become possible

5 CONCLUSIONS

With the proposed definition of Structural Flexibility (and Structural Adaptability) together with
the proposed evaluation method it becomes possible to evaluate and compare both existing as well
as newly designed building structures with regard to their Flexibility.
The proposed multi criteria charts give a clear visualisation of the Structural Flexibility of
a given structure showing its strong and weak points. A Structural Flexibility Index will need a
closer examination and further search for weighing factors and Flexibility factors.
Evaluation of Structural Flexibility is important because a high Structural Flexibility will increase
the structures functional qualities. Future adaptations to changing user requirements will be easier.
This will result in a higher probability of a longer Functional Working Life of the structure, a better
match between Technical Service Life and Functional Working Life. It will increase the possibilities
for future adaptations and refurbishment, thus resulting in a lower waste production and a lower
environmental impact of the building structure in general. It will increase the possibility of bal-
ancing investments at the design stage against returns over the buildings service life. The proposed
evaluation method of Structural Flexibility can be developed into a useful tool in Integrated Life
Cycle Design and Engineering. Further research to specify and quantify the necessary indicators
is needed.

REFERENCES

[1] Herwijnen, F. van, Blok R. LCA comparison of two different building structures etc. ILCDES 2003. Integrated
Life Cycle Design and Engineering of Structures, conference proceedings, Kuopio Finland.
[2] Brand, S. How buildings learn: what happens after they’re built. 1994, New York, Viking.
[3] Leupen, B. Frame and generic space, A research on adaptable housing. (In Dutch, summary in English) Rotterdam
2002, 010 Publishers.
[4] Herwijnen, F. van. Integrated floor design, based in the IFD design approach. Proceedings of the conference on
Advances in Structural Engineering and Mechanics, ASEM 2004, Seoul.

78
Copyright © 2005 Taylor & Francis Group plc, London, UK