16/11/2020

REQUIREMENTS FOR ROBUSTNESS

AND
RISK ASSESSMENT

Er. Lung Hian Hao

Building and Construction Authority
17 Nov 2020

OUTLINE
1. Introduction
2. Requirements for Robustness
3. Systematic Risk Assessment
4. Enforcement Case
5. Conclusion

1
 16/11/2020

INTRODUCTION

• ‘Robustness’ –

• Defined in SS EN 1991-1-7.

• “the ability of a structure to withstand events like fire,

explosions, impact of the consequence of human error
without being damaged to an extend disproportionate to
the original cause”

• ‘Disproportionate collapse’ –

• Collapse which is judged to be disproportionate to the initial

cause.

2
 16/11/2020

• Structures should be safe.

• Modern buildings have become more complex; so robustness –

• ceased to be an attribute taken for granted;
• need to consider it explicitly.
• specialist design fragments the responsibility & the design
process; and which needs consideration.

• Robustness has to be looked as a whole.

• One engineer in overall charge of both stability and robustness;

even when multiple structural discipline are involved e.g. in
hybrid structure.

• The old British Standard was explicit on this requirement.

• The Eurocodes are not specific; but a single engineer taking

responsibility should be practised.

3
 16/11/2020

REQUIREMENTS FOR ROBUSTNESS

• As a starting point –
• Good structural form and must have no obvious weaknesses.
• Load paths should be clearly defined.

• Gravity and horizontal loads are to be carry safely to the ground.

• Annex A, SS EN 1991-1-7 gives rules and methods –

• for designing buildings against disproportionate collapse;
• to ensure sufficient robustness in sustaining limited damage
without collapse.

4
 16/11/2020

Annex A, SS EN 1991-1-7
• Guidance of buildings for the different Consequences Classes.
• Accidental design situations is based on the different
consequence classes – low, medium & high consequences of
failure.
• Refer to Table A.1, SS EN 1991-1-7

Simplified version of Table A.1, SS EN 1991-1-7

Consequence Building type & occupancy
Class
1 • Single occupancy houses not exceeding 4 storeys,
• agricultural buildings,
• buildings rarely occupied by people
• etc.
2a • 5 storey single occupancy houses,
(lower risk • hotels, flats, apartments, other residential buildings, offices not exceeding 4
group) storeys
• etc.
2b • Hotels, flats, apartments and other residential buildings greater than 4 but
(upper risk less than 15 storeys
group)
3 • All buildings defined for classes CC2a and CC2b that exceed the limits on area
or number of storeys,
• All bldgs occupied by people in significant numbers,
• Stadia for > 5000 spectators,
• Bldg containing dangerous substances/processes,
• etc

10

5
 16/11/2020

DESIGN REQUIREMENTS

Consequence Class 1
• Stability for normal used satisfied, if designed & constructed to
EN 1990 to EN 1999.
• No further consideration necessary for accidental actions from
unidentified causes.

Consequence Class 2a
• Meet requirements of CC1.
• Provide effective horizontal ties, or effective anchorage of
suspended floors to walls – for framed and load-bearing
brickwall construction.

11

Consequence Class 2b
• Meet requirements of CC1.
• Provide horizontal ties wrt framed and load-bearing wall
construction, together with vertical ties in all columns & walls.

Or,
• Notional removal of columns, nominal section of loadbearing
wall (one at a time at each storey) - the bldg is to remain stable;
and local damage does not a certain limit.

If damage exceeds the limit,

• Design element as “Key Element”.

12

6
 16/11/2020

• Admissible damage
• 15% of the floor area or 100m2, whichever is smaller in
each adjacent 2 storeys.

13

Consequence Class 3
• Should minimally meet the requirements of CC2b.

• Carry out systematic risk assessment – to account for

foreseesable and unforeseeable hazards.

14

7
 16/11/2020

Simplified version of Table A.1, SS EN 1991-1-7

Consequence Building type & occupancy Summary of tying
Class requirements
1 • Single occupancy houses not exceeding 4 storeys, • Stability in normal use
• agricultural buildings, satisfied by designing to
• buildings rarely occupied by people EN 1990 to EN 1999.
• etc.
2a • 5 storey single occupancy houses, • Effective horizontal ties,
(lower risk • hotels, flats, apartments, other residential buildings, or
group) offices not exceeding 4 storeys • effective anchorage of
• etc. suspended floors to
walls.
2b • Hotels, flats, apartments and other residential • Horizontal & vertical ties;
(upper risk buildings greater than 4 but less than 15 storeys or
group) • notional removal of
column & wall; or
• design as ‘key element’.
3 • All buildings defined for classes CC2a and CC2b that • Systematic risk
exceed the limits on area or number of storeys, assessment.
• All bldgs occupied by people in significant numbers,
• Stadia for > 5000 spectators,
• Bldg containing dangerous substances/processes,
• etc

15

16

8
 16/11/2020

Horizontal ties

• Continuous to resist tie forces.

• Around perimeter of each floor

& roof.

• 2 right angles to tie columns and

wall.

• To be as closely as practicable to
the edges of floor, and lines of
columns & walls.

17

• At least 30% in close vicinity of

columns & walls grid lines.

• Can be a combination of –
• rolled steel section,
• steel bar & fabric mesh,
• profiled steel sheeting
(connected to steel beam
with shear connectors).

18

9
 16/11/2020

Vertical ties

• Columns & walls - to be tied continuously from foundation to

roof.

• Design tensile force = largest design vertical permanent &

variable load reaction from any one storey.

19

Key elements

• Capable to sustain accidental

design action Ad.

• Applied in horizontal &

vertical directions to the
element & attached
component.

• Ad = 34 kPa (?)
• Collapse of Ronan Point
(1968) due to localised gas
explosion.
Ref: NISTIR 7396
20

10
 16/11/2020

Is 34 kPa appropriate?

• Not a particularly challenging requirement.

• Structural sense should always be used and possibility of other

hazard scenarios should always be borne in mind.

• 34kPa should be the method of last resort in preference to

other methods (e.g. alternative load path).

21

Comparison of robustness requirements

Country Code Tying Alternative Load Key Systematic Risk
Path Element Assessment
UK Building Regulation 2010 √ √ √ √
Europe EN 1991-1-7 √ √ √ √
New York City NYC BC 2014 X √ √ Implicit
Australia NCC 2016 √ √ Implicit √

• Australia NCC 2016 requires Alternative Load Path while having no explicit
provision for Key Element design.

Alternative Load Path (or nominal removal) should be the default

robustness check for critical structural elements.

22

11
 16/11/2020

Alternative load path

Example of alternative load paths

provided for transfer structure

Column Removed

23

SYSTEMATIC RISK ASSESSMENT

24

12
 16/11/2020

Systematic Risk Assessment

• Required for CC3 buildings.

• No substitute for a robust, safe structural form.

• A tool to test design against hazards, if there risks which are

too great to bear.

• To have a single author -

• with overall responsibility for robustness of the building;
• require input/contribution from design team & other
stakeholders;
• to ensure all reasonable foreseeable hazards are identified.

25

Systematic Risk Assessment

• Annex B, SS EN 1991-1-7 Accidental Action - provides

information on risk assessment.

• IStructE - “Manual for the systematic assessment of high-risk

structures against disproportionate collapse”.

26

13
 16/11/2020

Framework for systematic risk assessment

• Step 1 – Identify hazards
• Step 2 – Eliminate hazards where feasible
• Step 3 – Determine level of tolerable risk
• Step 4 – Evaluate the risks
• Step 5 – Identify risk reduction measures
• Step 6 – Cost-benefit assessment for each risk reduction measure
• Step 7 – Implement risk reduction measures
• Step 8 – Review residual risk
• Step 9 – Check sensitivity of risk assessment
• Step 10 – Review overall level of risk
• Step 11- Communicate information of residual risk

27

Key points
• Step 1 – Identify hazards

• This is an essential
task [refer to Manual;
not an exhaustive list].

• To involve all
stakeholders.

• The identification of
hazards is a team
effort; coordinated by
the structural
engineer.

28

14
 16/11/2020

Key points
• Step 2 – Eliminate hazards where feasible

• Step 3 – Determine level of

tolerable risk
• “how decisions would be judged if
the event were actually to occur”

• Step 4 – Evaluate the risks

• Evaluate risk for each hazard
• Presented in a ‘raw’ risk matrix

Risk arising from a

particular hazard

Tolerable risk
threshold

29

Key points
• Step 5 – Identify risk reduction
measures
• Must at least reduce risk below
the tolerable level
• All risk - reduce to As Low As
Reasonably Practicable (ALARP)

• Step 6 – Cost-benefit assessment for each risk

reduction measure
• Step 7 – Implement risk reduction measures

‘Raw’ or
unmitigated risk

Mitigated risk

30

15
 16/11/2020

Key points
• Step 8 – Review residual risk
• Step 9 – Check sensitivity of risk assessment
• Step 10 – Review overall level of risk

• Step 11- Communicate information

of residual risk
• risks that remain - to
communicated to parties affected
by these risks.
• Normally includes the client, who
need to institute in-service
inspection and maintenance in
ensuring safety of the structure.

Residual risks which were subsequently

mitigated to below the tolerable level.

31

ENFORCEMENT CASE

32

16
 16/11/2020

Contravention & Enforcement Cases

For Year 2017 to 2020

• Trend - contravention &
enforcement cases have
increased over the years. 90

80

70

• Stepped up in enforcement, 60
particularly on submission of 50
as-built piling plans. 40

30

• To be submitted within 28 20

days upon completion of 10

piling works. 0
2017 2018 2019 2020

QP AC Builder RE/RTO

33

Contravention & Enforcement Cases

• Breakdown - most contravention For Year 2017 to 2020

cases relate to -
Bldg Wks w/o
Others approved plan or
• carrying out works without 22% permit; deviation
approved plans or permit; 33%
and deviation from approved
plans.
Instrumentation
• late submission of as-built & Monitoring
piling plans 16%

Late Pile Asbuilt

Submmission
29%

34

17
 16/11/2020

CONCLUSION

35

Conclusion
Robust Design
• Robustness has to be looked as a whole.
• One engineer in overall charge of stability and robustness.

Systematic assessment
• Needed for CC3 buildings; but need to start off with a good &
robust structural form in the first instance.

Vigilance
• Be vigilant with respect to signs of distress in structures.
• Corbel – design for all loads: construction & permanent stage.

36

18
 16/11/2020

END

37

19