January 2021

Volume 99 | Issue 1

Refurbishment:
design opportunities

Timber and carbon

sequestration

Axial shortening

Thinking inside the box

The design of the MultiPly pavilion explores the potential
of timber in modular and reusable construction

COVER_TSE Jan 2021_The Structural Engineer 1 15/12/2020 16:05

 ISOPRO® ISOMAXX ®
INSULATED BALCONY
SUPPORT SYSTEMS
New European Technical Assessment (ETA) Verifies
Fire Resistance and Structural Performance
Trust in the best thermal insulation - with our proven ISOPRO® and ISOMAXX®
concrete balcony connection systems.

European Technical Assessment ETA-17/0466

Environmental contribution detailed in DNGB Environmental Product Certification
and LEED product declaration
Cost-effective, high-performance components provide up to 120 minutes fire protection
Simple installation with no need to tape joints
The insulation layer does not absorb water and so maintains its thermal effectiveness
Very low deflection at the insulated structural joint
Comprehensive engineering support from the J & P team

Need a high-quality and cost-efficient insulation system for your current project?
Contact us today to learn more, or visit us at www.jp-uk.com

J&P Building Systems Limited

TSE.Jan21.002.indd 2 14/12/2020 17:19

 Upfront
5 Editorial
6 News
8 Climate Emergency Task Group: End-of-year report

Climate emergency
10 An introduction to refurbishment. Part 2: Maximising
the opportunities at the design stage

39
16 Structural safety when designing lean in the climate
emergency
18 Timber and carbon sequestration

Professional guidance
22 Business Practice Note No. 37: Checking the work of
another engineer

Technical
24 Technical Guidance Note Level 3,
No. 2: Axial shortening

24
Project focus
29 Design and construction of the MultiPly pavilion
using cross-laminated tulipwood

Opinion
36 Viewpoint: A new approach to fl oor loading
39 Viewpoint: Aligning temporary works with the Digital
Plan of Work
42 Verulam

At the back
45 Diary dates
46 Spotlight on Structures

10
48 The Drawing Board
49 Products & Services
January 2021

50 Services Directory

48
Issue 1
COVER: ED REEVE

18
Volume 99

3
thestructuralengineer.org | January 2021

CONTENTS_TSE Jan 2021_The Structural Engineer 3 16/12/2020 17:20

 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

350
structural engineering vacancies.

jobs
posted on
average
every month

TSE.Jan21.004.indd 4 14/12/2020 17:20

 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: robin.jones@istructe.org

EDITORIAL ASSISTANT
Ian Farmer
t: +44 (0) 20 7201 9121 Robin Jones Managing Editor
e: ian.farmer@istructe.org

Seeing the wood

ADVERTISING
DISPLAY SALES
t: +44 (0) 20 7880 7632
e: tse@redactive.co.uk

and the trees

RECRUITMENT SALES
t: +44 (0) 20 7880 6235
e: tsejobs@redactive.co.uk

DESIGN
SENIOR DESIGNER
Nicholas Daley

PRODUCTION
PRODUCTION DIRECTOR
Jane Easterman FIRST AND FOREMOST, I’d like to wish all We also publish a new Technical Guidance Note
EDITORIAL ADVISORY GROUP members and readers a Happy New Year! May 2021 on axial shortening in tall buildings (page 24). The
Will Arnold MIStructE bring with it renewed optimism and opportunities note discusses the causes of axial shortening,
Premma Makanji MIStructE
Allan Mann FIStructE after the trials of 2020. With the first Covid-19 how to assess and predict it, as well as potential
Chris O’Regan FIStructE
Angus Palmer MIStructE
vaccines being approved and rolled out around the mitigation measures. While the Business Practice
Simon Pitchers FIStructE world, there is certainly hope that we’ll begin to see a Note series continues with an article offering
Eleana Savvidi MIStructE
gradual return to ‘normality’ as the year progresses. guidance on how to approach an appointment
Price (2021 subscription)
Institutional: £465.00
But in the meantime, the Institution continues to to check a design produced by another engineer
Personal (print only): £130 offer a range of products and services to members (page 22).
Personal (online only): £130
Personal (Student Member): £40 that can be accessed remotely. In addition to another Elsewhere in the issue, we present Viewpoints
Single copies: £25 (incl. p&p)
packed issue of The Structural Engineer, there is a proposing a new approach to fl oor loading in the
wide range of online CPD courses running Eurocodes (page 36) and greater consideration
Printed by
Warners Midlands plc
(page 21) and a bundle discount available on of temporary works throughout a project’s stages
The Maltings, Manor Lane Bourne, purchases of manuals and guides (page 9). Don’t (page 39), another healthy selection of letters
Lincolnshire PE10 9PH
United Kingdom forget that you can also make use of the e-Library (page 42), and our regular Diary dates (page 45),
© The Institution of Structural Engineers. resources at www.istructe.org/library. Spotlight on Structures (page 46) and Drawing
The Structural Engineer (ISSN 1466-5123) is
published by IStructE Ltd, a wholly owned
Returning to this issue, the Climate emergency Board (page 48) features.
subsidiary of The Institution of Structural section continues with the second part of an article As ever, I hope you enjoy the issue.
Engineers. It is available both in print and online.
on refurbishment projects. Stephen Fernandez
Contributions published in The Structural
Engineer are published on the understanding
moves on from his examination of opportunities Correction
that the author/s is/are solely responsible for the at the feasibility stage in November/December In last October’s article on the proposed SCORS
statements made, for the opinions expressed
and/or for the accuracy of the contents. to looking at ways to maximise opportunities at rating scheme, we mistakenly named Lindsay
Publication does not imply that any statement or
opinion expressed by the author/s refl ects the
the design stage (page 10). This is followed by Rasmussen of Architecture 2030 as ‘Laura’ in
views of the Institution of Structural Engineers’ a discussion of safety issues when designing the Acknowledgements section on page 12. We
Board; Council; committees; members
or employees. No liability is accepted by such lean (page 16), and an exploration of the role of apologise to Lindsay for the oversight.
persons or by the Institution for any loss or
damage, whether caused through reliance on
sequestration when accounting for embodied
any statement, opinion or omission (textual carbon in timber designs (page 18). The latter
or otherwise) in The Structural Engineer, or
otherwise. article addresses an issue around which there is
The Institution of Structural Engineers
confusion and inconsistency, and aims to give
International HQ engineers a clearer picture of how sequestration
47–58 Bastwick Street
London EC1V 3PS should be incorporated into calculations, along with
United Kingdom
t: +44 (0)20 7235 4535
recommendations for climate-focused timber design.
e: mail@istructe.org The timber theme runs through into this month’s
The Institution of Structural Engineers Project focus article on the design of the MultiPly
Incorporated by Royal Charter
Charity Registered in England and Wales number
pavilion – a temporary structure exploring timber’s
233392 and in Scotland number SC038263 place in the circular economy and its use in modular
construction (page 29). The project featured the
first cross-laminated timber to be manufactured
at volume in the UK, in this case from American
tulipwood.

5
thestructuralengineer.org | January 2021

EDITORIAL_TSE Jan 2021_The Structural Engineer 5 17/12/2020 12:05

 Upfront News

Institution news
Institution fellow
appointed CHB
The Institution of Structural Engineers is very
pleased to announce that, on behalf of Her
Majesty The Queen, The Governor-General of
Barbados has appointed Tony Gibbs to the
Order of Barbados in the Grade of Companion
of Honour of Barbados (CHB).
The award is made in recognition of Tony’s
‘sterling contribution in the field of engineering
in Barbados and the Caribbean’.
Tony, who will now be known as The Hon
Tony Gibbs CHB, FREng, FIStructE, generously
acknowledges the encouragement and support
he has had during his long associati
association with the
Institution news
Public vote winners
announced in Structural
Engineering Showcase
2020
Thousands of Institution members
and industry professionals have voted
for their favourite Structural Awards
submission as part of the Structural
Engineering Showcase 2020
celebrations.
Projects were grouped into four
categories, with the public vote
winners as follows:
Institution as contributing in no small measure WINNER: Achieving architectural
to him being recognised in this way. vision
The Institution offers Tony its sincerest Beijing Daxing International Airport
congratulations and best wishes. Terminal
Submitted by: Beijing Institute of
Architectural Design

Industry news
Climate Change Committee
releases Sixth Carbon Budget
The UK’s Climate Change Committee has WINNER: Challenging
published its Sixth Carbon Budget to provide
construction
government ministers with advice on the volume
of greenhouse gases the UK can emit during the Skiing Platform
period 2033–37. Submitted by: Helium Engineering
The report presents a blueprint for a fully
decarbonised UK. It describes the path to
Industry news net-zero emissions and detail the steps the
Structural-Safety issues new country must take to achieve this goal by 2050.
The recommended pathway requires a 78%
Alert on 2018 Florida bridge reduction in UK territorial emissions between
collapse 1990 and 2035. In effect, it brings forward the
UK’s previous 80% target get
Structural-Safety has published a SCOSS by nearly 15 years.
Alert, Lessons Learned from the 2018 Florida The challenging path th WINNER: Creative design
Bridge Collapse During Construction, to set out in the report DONUT
share the key findings of the investigation creates new industrial
Submitted by: XinY Structural
with bridge owners, designers, contractors, opportunities and
ensures wider gains for or Consultants
checkers and supervisors.
the nation’s health and d
This was a bridge of an unusual design
for nature. It envisagess
and was being constructed in an unusual low-carbon investment nt
manner. The main 53m prestressed precast scaling up to £50bn
concrete span truss was in position when each year over the
cracks appeared at a node and, over next decade, but with
a period of almost three weeks, visibly substantial fossil fuel
worsened until collapse occurred. savings eventually
cancelling out the WINNER: Sustainable leadership
All parties apparently failed to recognise
the bridge was in danger when inspected investment costs Hobhouse
entirely.
hours before the collapse. In hindsight, the Submitted by: Thornton Tomasetti
The Sixth Carbon Budget report is
magnitude of the cracks warranted that supported by:
the road be immediately closed, and the Ò| a Methodology Report
truss supported to reduce loads, pending Ò| a Policy Report
evaluation. Ò| all the charts and data behind the report
The National Transportation Safety Board Ò| a public Call for Evidence, several new
investigations focused on the design, peer research projects, three expert advisory
review checking, site supervision and groups and deep dives into the roles of local
independent checking of the works. authorities and businesses.
To find out more, visit www.
istructe.org/resources/news/
Download the Alert at www. Download the report at www.theccc. structural-engineering-
structural-safety.org/publications/ org.uk/publication/sixth-carbon- showcase-2020-public-vote/.
scoss-alerts/. budget/.

6
January 2021 | thestructuralengineer.org

NEWS_TSE Jan 2021_The Structural Engineer 6 16/12/2020 17:21

 PROFESSIONAL INDEMNITY
INSURANCE SOLUTIONS
Always Happy to Talk
Structural Engineers and Associated Property Professionals
Great Rates for Established Firms and New Start Up Practices
Exclusive In-House Scheme with a Major UK Insurer
Wide Choice of other Insurers available to quote
Run-Off Cover available when you cease trading
Fast Quote Turnaround with Efficient Expert Service
Pro-active Claims Service
Interest Free Instalments Available
Complimentary Legal Review Service Available
Surveying Equipment And Office Insurance
Public Liability and Employers Liability Insurance

When the Insurance Market changes, find your port in a storm.

Anchorman Insurance at your service.
Specialist Professional Indemnity Insurance Brokers focussed on Sole Trader,
Small to Medium Sized Enterprises and New Start Up Practices since 1998.

Call us on 01837 55777

info@anchormaninsurance.co.uk
www.anchormaninsurance.co.uk

Proud members of Purple Partnership:

A leading Independent Insurance Broker Network

Authorised and Regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority.

TSE.Jan21.007.indd 7 14/12/2020 17:21

 Opinion
Upfront Climate
PlanningEmergency
applicationTask
procedures
Group
Climate Emergency
Task Group:
End-of-year report
The Institution’s Climate Emergency Task Group looks back at a historic
year in which climate action has been front and centre for the profession.
The Climate Emergency Task Group
(CETG) has published an end-of-year
report reviewing the group’s activities
through the year as it endeavoured to
help the profession tackle the climate
emergency.
This article summarises the key points
from the report, which also acts as a
guidance wayfinding tool, containing
links to the written and recorded
content that was produced by CETG
contributors through the year
(Figure 1). Please do read and discuss
the report, as well as sharing it with
clients and collaborators, to highlight
our role in getting to net zero, and to
share the progress that our profession
is making.
Progress in 2020
The CETG started 2020 by formalising
its mandate for change across four
workstreams:
Ò| Collaborate and infl uence: across the
industry in the UK and abroad.
Ò| Support the profession: by bringing
firms together to share knowledge
and progress.
Ò| Raise standards: through guidance,
training, webinars and conferences.
Ò| Set standards: from education
and chartership through CPD and d
awards.
We refreshed the Institution’s Climate
ate
emergency webpage (www.istructe.org/ org/
climate-emergency), putting all relevant
ant
guidance in one accessible location for
members. This grew to include the 26 6 Summary
articles that we published through the e
gh
year, as it will continue to grow through
2021.
In July, the Institution published
How to calculate embodied carbon,
providing a common set of calculation n coll
hen
principles for the industry to follow when
quantifying the impact of our work. Thishis
was accompanied by several other
NEWS Climate sum_TSE Jan 2021_The Structural Engineer 8
carbon articles, including an introduction
to the SCORS rating system.
The calculation of embodied carbon
continues to be a key part of the design
process – informing material choices,
DOWNLOAD
THE REPORT
design decisions, and circular economy
and reuse strategies – and the CETG
You can will continue to develop this important
download the
CETG’s end-of-
area in 2021, with the Institution due
year report at to release an Excel-based Structural
www.istructe. Carbon Tool early in the year.
org/resources/ Finally, we worked to implement
report/climate- changes across the different stages of
emergency- a structural engineer’s career. The Joint
task-group- Board of Moderators (JBM) guidelines
end-of-year- were updated, bringing accredited
report/. university education in the UK in line
with climate emergency response
principles, and two new Structural
Awards categories were introduced – for
Zero Carbon and Minimal Structural
Intervention.
Feedback
Throughout the year, feedback was
sought from the membership to
ascertain the needs of practising
îFIGURE 1: The report
acts as a wayfinding
engineers with respect to guidance
tool to guidance being published. As well as asking
produced by the CETG the question, ‘What can we do more
8
January 2021 | thestructuralengineer.org
of?’, at committee meetings, regional
events, and the Climate Emergency
Conference, we also ran two parallel
online member surveys. The end-
of-year report outlines the resulting
priorities for 2021, including material-
specific guidance and reuse articles.
Year ahead
Looking forward to the coming year,
the report highlights some of the task
group’s key goals for 2021:
Ò| Collaborate and infl uence: including
continuing to strengthen links
around the world; and advising and
advocating for climate emergency
response throughout governments
and other institutions that we work
with.
Ò| Support the profession: hosting
Institution conferences, helping firms
to keep sharing with one another,
and supporting the development
of a multidisciplinary open-source
sharing website.
Ò| Raise standards: including the
release of a free Excel-based
Structural Carbon Tool, continued
publication of guidance, and the
creation of a Net-Zero Structural
Design certificate.
Ò| Set standards: completing our
work reviewing the Professional
w
Review Interview and Membership
Exams, and assisting universities
in implementing the updated JBM
guidelines.
g
Su
We would like to thank all of the CETG
con
contributors who found time in 2020 to
crea
create guidance articles, presentations
and webinars for the rest of the
mem
membership. We are proud of what we
collectively achieved in 2020, and are
exc
excited at the potential to achieve even
mo
more this year. We hope that you’ll join
us iin making 2021 a year to remember!
17/12/2020 10:18
 IStructE book bundle
sale extended
Don’t miss your chance to refresh your library with the
latest industry guidance. Buy more than one publication
to get big discounts. Ends 8 January 2021.

ƒ Buy 2 get VɈ cheapest publication

ƒ Buy 3 get VɈ cheapest publication
ƒ Buy 4 get VɈcheapest publication
ƒ Buy 5 get VɈ cheapest publication

Popular bundles include

Pop
ƒ Computational
C engineering
ƒ Conceptual
C design of buildings
St
ƒ Standard method of detailing
structural
st concrete (4th edition)
(P
(Pre-order)

Sav
Save £22.43 at member price

Build your bundle at

istructe.org/shop/build-your-bundle
Save up to £31

Limited time 10% discount:

Eurocode manual package (7 volumes)

TSE.Jan21.009.indd 9 14/12/2020 17:22

 Opinion Planning application
Climate emergency Making procedures
the most of refurbishment opportunities
4.Zero waste
An introduction to
refurbishment.
Part 2: Maximising the
opportunities at the design stage
Stephen Fernandez guides readers through the key design areas that offer refurbishment
opportunities when working on an existing building.
Introduction
Part one of this article considered how to
explore opportunities for refurbishment
over new-build before any design
work begins. The second part now
describes how to maximise the potential
opportunities for refurbishment during
the design stage.
There are many structural
considerations which will be specific to
each existing building, and the engineer
needs to be familiar with a number of
topics. Although this article gives a brief
introduction, the reader should familiarise
themselves further with each area before
starting the design (see ‘References’ and
‘Further reading’).
Structural considerations
Loading
If there is no proposed change of use,
a building is often initially assumed to
have been designed adequately to the
relevant codes of practice at the time,
but this must be validated through
structural inspections and surveys. If
no visible signs of distress or decay
are observed, it may be possible to
conclude that the structure is adequately
carrying the loads and that strengthening
works are not necessary.
Change of use can give a building
a new lease of life, and ensuring it
is occupied often helps guarantee
that it will be maintained, although
this can result in a load increase,
possibly through new services or
additional imposed loading. Unlike for
interventions, the implications of change
of use can be quickly determined.
A challenge for change of use of
historic buildings is justifying fl oor
loadings to current codes of practice,
often due to the low values of material
CLIMATE Refurbis_TSE Jan 2021_The Structural Engineer 10
strength and stiffness, as older
structures can still work to higher
capacities.
Many historic buildings were
constructed based on experience,
sometimes known as ‘empirical design’
without any structural design. This is
still a reasonable structural approach
and could be called ‘full-scale prototype
testing’ today.
It is worth highlighting that structures
often have multiple load paths, so the
challenge is simply to find one plausible
route, although this is highly unlikely to
be the actual load path.
Taking a blanket approach towards
fl oor loading often results in the
conclusion that strengthening is
necessary1, but by carrying out rigorous
engineering, considering possible
load paths and understanding the
actual loading, it is possible to avoid
strengthening in the majority of cases.
The 1960s Newton Building at
Nottingham Trent University was
originally designed as a technical school
and was to be adapted without change
of use. Floor live loading from the original
codes of practice was compared against
current codes of practice. The finishes,
services, ceilings and non-loadbearing
walls were all to be removed. Prior
to removal, detailed surveys helped
determine the weight of each element
and estimate the allowable new
superimposed dead loading. Comparing
total existing loading with total new
avoided strengthening, as there was no
net increase and it was not necessary
to carry out extensive ‘back-justification’
calculations to try to establish theoretical
capacities.
Office fl oor loading in historic
buildings2 describes the problems
10
January 2021 | thestructuralengineer.org
associated with accommodating
office fl oor loadings in older buildings
and suggests that actual loading is
usually significantly lower. A practical
approach could be to develop a better
understanding of the original design
loads and ensure that the new use
respects these, which may require
limiting occupancy levels or setting
specific uses for certain areas.
When considering loading, it is
important to assess realistic loadings
and ask: are higher fl oor loadings (to
give fl exibility of use) actually necessary?
Or can a lower value be used without
compromising the fl exibility or structural
safety?
The use of the building should not
overly restrict the loading on the fl oors,
but equally they should not be upgraded
to support loads they will never
experience. Perhaps now is the time to
challenge the loading stipulated in codes
of practice generally?
Calculations and analysis
As a starting point, structural validation
checks can typically be assessed using
current codes of practice. It is possible
to use material strengths obtained from
historic codes of practice and other
referenced sources or obtained from
off-site testing of materials obtained from
site.
However, it is important to understand
how buildings were designed. Many
ARE HIGHER FLOOR
LOADINGS (TO GIVE
FLEXIBILITY OF USE)
ACTUALLY NECESSARY?
15/12/2020 09:32

historic codes of practice used a
permissible stress design approach3,
limiting material stresses under varying
loading conditions to an allowable or
‘permissible stress’. This is different to
the typical modern codified approach of
‘limit state design’, and so understanding
the differences can be useful. Note
that although many old codes have
been superseded, they can be a useful
tool when trying to work with existing
structures.
Accurately determining the movement
of a structure can also be difficult, as it
is impossible to accurately understand
all aspects of the structural behaviour
(e.g. support conditions or connection
movement). It is therefore generally
beneficial to carry out comparative
studies between the existing and
proposed conditions, with sensitivity
analyses as required.
Where structural modelling is
not helpful or meaningful, it may be
possible to carry out in situ testing and
prototyping, although appropriate caution
should be taken to gain a reasonable
amount of certainty that the loading will
be achieved.
Finally, it is also important to consider
the entire building holistically and not
focus solely on specific interventions. For
example, forming large penetrations in
concrete slab bays originally designed
to act as continuous over multiple bays,
or removing areas of fl oor, or major
interventions for building services which
can significantly alter the existing building
system and affect the overall building
stability.
Foundations
Foundations should be assessed when
there is an increase in loading, e.g. due
to change of use or if additional storeys
CLIMATE Refurbis_TSE Jan 2021_The Structural Engineer 11
Making the most of refurbishment opportunities
MATT CHISNALL
are to be introduced – although often old
éFIGURE 1: 1–2
foundations can be justified to take an
Stephen Street in
London – underground increase in loading4.
parking and loading Reusing existing foundations
bay converted into is becoming a key consideration,
fl exible office space
with maximised fl oor- particularly in inner-city sites. This can
to-ceiling heights be due to congestion in the ground
(which may have resulted from several
generations of development) making it
difficult to install new foundations without
expensive foundation extraction.
Reusing the foundations can yield
significant cost savings and provide
increased programme certainty due
to the reduced risk associated with
groundworks.
Holistic design
Floor-to-ceiling heights
The fl oor-to-ceiling heights should be
reviewed in an existing building at an
early stage as these can infl uence how
it can be reused. For example, offices
typically require greater heights to
êFIGURE 2: Lowering
existing foundations accommodate service requirements, but
to increase fl oor- developing a truly coordinated solution
to-ceiling height can maximise the fl oor-to-ceiling height.
at George Green
Library, University of It is possible to work within the
Nottingham constraints of an existing building to
11
thestructuralengineer.org | January 2021
Climate emergency
maximise the fl oor-to-ceiling heights.
Refurbishment works at 1–2 Stephen
Street in London have transformed a
previously dark and dingy 1960s building
into an efficient and stylish workplace,
increasing both asset value and rental
income.
The underground parking and loading
bay have been converted into fl exible
office space and fl oor-to-ceiling heights
have been maximised by adopting a
semi-exposed services design with
fl oating bespoke metal rafts (Figure 1).
This required close coordination and
the transformation has increased the
lettable area by 10%, which significantly
increased the rental value.
Alternatively, more extensive
structural modifications are possible.
The existing basement in the University
of Nottingham’s George Green Library
would not meet modern building
regulations for headroom, daylight and
access. The columns were therefore
lowered to transform the basement into
a useable fl oor5, which required major
temporary works to support the existing
structure.
A pair of deep steel channels were
clamped onto the existing columns,
transferring their load onto a temporary
frame using hydraulic jacks (Figure
2). This process was repeated across
the entire basement (while the fl oors
above were occupied) and allowed each
column to be lengthened to create a
more useable level.
The carbon footprint of such
temporary works should also be
assessed – at George Green Library, the
works were reused several times and the
overall carbon savings outweighed the
emissions from fabricating the temporary
works.
Internal layout
When considering the future use of
an existing building, the internal layout
should be reviewed to understand
how reusing the building may meet
the client’s requirements. The existing
structure can be viewed as a constraint,
but often provides an opportunity
to cost-effectively do something
transformative when considered early
enough.
Opening up spaces in existing
buildings can transform them
significantly. If alterations can be limited
to removing only non-structural walls,
then this can be achieved quickly and
simply, but deeper interventions should
be considered where the potential
impact makes this worthwhile.
15/12/2020 09:32
 Opinion Planning application
Climate emergency Making procedures
the most of refurbishment opportunities

íFIGURE 3: Transformation
The Zeitz Museum of Contemporary of grain silo complex at Zeitz
Art Africa, in Cape Town, South Africa, Museum of Contemporary
Art Africa
is a radical transformation of a historic
grain silo, consisting of 42 tightly packed
concrete cylinders, which had been features, such as underground service
disused since 1990 due to containerised tunnels and basements, were also
shipping. reused to distribute services.
Rather than demolishing the
redundant structure, spaces have been Facade upgrade
carved out of the cellular concrete Many old buildings have poor
cylinders to form galleries and an atrium, environmental performance, often
allowing natural daylight into the spaces suffering from summer overheating and
and revealing the original intersecting significant heat loss in winter. When
geometries in an unexpected way contemplating reuse of an existing
(Figure 3). The structural engineering building, an important consideration
helped give this historic structure new life is the envelope and there are various
by reimagining the interior space while approaches that can be adopted.
retaining the industrial character6. The extreme is to remove the existing
The Newton Building at Nottingham cladding entirely, stripping back to the
Trent University contained redundant existing structure and replacing with
engineering workshops and a loading modern cladding. The weight of the
bay, and was subdivided with numerous new cladding should be considered to
walls. Opening up the lower levels either match what the structure was
previously blocked off by a combination originally designed for or supported, or
of walls, vertical bracing and shear walls to determine the extent of strengthening
stabilising the nine-storey tower has required.
radically transformed the spaces. The development of the Arup office
The bracing and shear walls have in London at 13 Fitzroy Street involved

TESSA BRUNETTE / ARUP

been totally reconfigured, with new stripping two existing 1950s buildings
bracing and goalpost frames providing back to the superstructure, allowing new
lateral stability (Figure 4), to create a cladding to be introduced to create a
new ‘communal lung’ for the campus. single office complex. Recladding the
This has secured the long-term future of existing buildings entirely meant that an
this Grade II* listed building (Figure 5). innovative approach could be adopted,
incorporating the ventilation ductwork
Upgrading building services distribution within the facade, resulting
Although the structure can often be in shallow raised fl oors for air supplies
reused in an existing building, existing and maximising the fl oor-to-ceiling height
services frequently need to be replaced (Figure 6).
with new systems. However, existing The passive performance of the
buildings should not be treated as a facade can be improved by incorporating
‘blank canvas’ with the new service measures such as secondary glazing.
distribution – the starting point should The Newton Building has long single-
be to coordinate and thread through the glazed facades between vertical stone
existing fabric.
Being proactive as a structural çêFIGURE 4: Reconfigured stability bracing and shear walls at
engineer can help guide the services lower levels of Newton Building, Nottingham Trent University
team towards solutions that require
minimal intervention for maximum
impact. This requires detailed
investigation and close coordination
between the structural and services
team members, but can generate
significant cost and programme savings.
It is often important that the mechanical
and electrical strategy is developed in
more detail than for a new-build.
The Newton Building’s previous life
as a chemistry department yielded
unsuspected drainage channels in
the laboratory fl oors and penetrations
through beams. These were utilised to
distribute the power, data and audio-
visual connections and maximised the
fl oor-to-ceiling height. Existing services
risers were also reused for vertical
distribution, with limited new risers
formed through the existing fl oor. Other

12
January 2021 | thestructuralengineer.org

CLIMATE Refurbis_TSE Jan 2021_The Structural Engineer 12 15/12/2020 09:32


HOPKINS ARCHITECTS
fins, but the envelope was vastly
improved by retrofitting secondary
double glazing with electronically
operated blinds within the cavity
between the existing and new
glazing.
Note that it may be necessary
to accept the performance of the
existing envelope without altering
the fabric in any way – often an
approach taken towards listed
or heritage buildings to retain the
original fabric and character.
CLIMATE Refurbis_TSE Jan 2021_The Structural Engineer 13
Making the most of refurbishment opportunities Climate emergency
íFIGURE 5: Opened- can impact the structure. It is therefore
up spaces at Newton essential that phasing of all disciplines
Building, Nottingham
Trent University
is incorporated into the design from the
beginning.
At the George Green Library, a
key aspect was ensuring continuous
operation. A detailed phasing strategy
was therefore developed to coordinate
construction works with providing an
operational facility (Figure 7). This
involved first constructing the adjacent
extension and lowering the existing
basement.
After completion of the extension,
the existing library operations were
‘decanted’ and re-located into
the extension, allowing the major
refurbishment of the existing building
to be completed. This resulted in no
temporary accommodation being
required and generated considerable
savings on potential ‘enabling’ costs.
Temporary works
Structural works to existing buildings
often require temporary works to be
considered at an early stage, as they
very often will influence the structural
design and construction methodology.
The temporary works can require
íêFIGURE 6: Original
significant structural input and may play
(left) and refurbished
building (right) at 13 a major role in establishing the financial
Fitzroy Street, London viability of a project.
Practical considerations
Phasing
Phasing the works can transform
existing buildings while still partially
occupied. This can be very attractive
as it may avoid the need for temporary
accommodation. However, it does
require careful consideration from
the outset and can also influence the
structural design and construction
methodology.
The implications for building services
can also be significant, which in turn
MORLEY VON STERNBERG
13
thestructuralengineer.org | January 2021
15/12/2020 09:32
 Opinion Planning application
Climate emergency Making procedures
the most of refurbishment opportunities
It may be necessary for the engineer
to highlight the temporary works as
a critical item, and careful feasibility
studies should be carried out so that
their viability and likely costs can
be assessed. Where significant, the
embodied carbon of these works should
be assessed as part of understanding
the impact of the work.
Opening up the spaces in the Newton
Building described previously could only
be achieved with early consideration
of the temporary works. The sequence
of works was carefully planned to
ensure that suitable structural support
was in place at all stages, that it could
physically be installed and that it was
suitably priced and programmed
(Figure 8).
Conclusions
The two parts of this article provide
a brief overview of the primary areas
that are necessary to consider when
dealing with existing buildings. Part
1 discussed ways in which engineers
can identify potential opportunities for
refurbishment at the early feasibility
stage. Part 2 has considered ways to
CLIMATE Refurbis_TSE Jan 2021_The Structural Engineer 14
éFIGURE 7: maximise these opportunities through
Consideration of design.
phasing to keep
existing George Green In order to make best use of our
Library occupied existing building assets, engineers
throughout works should be able to provide an informed
response to the client, which includes
thoroughly assessing the technical
feasibility of reusing the building. This
assessment can help reveal potential
opportunities to add significant value,
so the engineer can play a pivotal role in
unlocking that value.
Reusing an existing building is not the
answer in every case, but carrying out
an early assessment can reveal exciting
potential opportunities that would
otherwise be missed.
Stephen Fernandez
MEng, CEng, FIStructE, MICE
Stephen is a Conservation Accredited
Engineer and Associate Director at
Arup in the UK, leading the civil and
structural team across Birmingham and
êFIGURE 8: Sketches
illustrating early Nottingham. He leads multidisciplinary
temporary works design teams on projects locally and
considerations at
Newton Building, internationally and has extensive
Nottingham Trent experience working on existing
University buildings of different ages.
14
January 2021 | thestructuralengineer.org
HAVE
YOUR
SAY
@IStructE
tse@istructe.org #TheStructuralEngineer
REFERENCES
1) Hume I. and Miller J. (2015)
‘Conservation compendium.
Part 7: Imposed load in historic
buildings: assessing what is real’,
The Structural Engineer, 93 (6),
pp. 40–43
2) English Heritage (1994) Office
fl oor loading in historic buildings,
London: English Heritage
3) Wikipedia (2020) Permissible
stress design [Online] Available
at: https://en.wikipedia.org/
wiki/Permissible_stress_design
(Accessed: November 2020)
4) Tayler H. (2020) ‘A short guide
to reusing foundations’, The
Structural Engineer, 98 (11), pp.
20–23
5) Fernandez S. (2017)
‘Transformation of a 1960s
concrete structure – George
Green Library, Nottingham
University’, The Structural
Engineer, 95 (10), pp. 18–24
6) Archer F. and Brunette T.
(2018) ‘A silo in form only’, Arup
Journal, 53 (1), pp. 14–21
FURTHER READING
Addy N. (2014) ‘Making
sustainable refurbishment of
existing buildings financially
viable’, In: Burton S. (ed.)
Sustainable retrofitting of
commercial buildings, Oxford:
Routledge
Doran D., Douglas J. and Pratley
R. (2009) Refurbishment and
repair in construction, Caithness:
Whittles Publishing
15/12/2020 09:32
 Structural-Safety works with the professions,
industry and government on safety matters
concerned with the design, construction and
use of building and civil engineering structures.
We provide an impartial expert resource to share and to learn from the experiences of others.

You can participate by reporting concerns, in confidence, to the website. Reports are anonymous
and de-identified before being published. Reports can also lead to Alerts which influence the safety
of existing and new structures.

Visit the website to register for Newsletters and Alerts and to view the database of reports.

www.structural-safety.org
CROSS Confidential reporting on structural safety | SCOSS Standing Committee on structural safety

Sponsored by

TSE.Jan21.015.indd 15 14/12/2020 17:23

 Opinion Planning application
Climate emergency Lean but procedures
safe

3.Lean design

Structural safety when designing

lean in the climate emergency
The IStructE Safety, Health and Wellbeing Panel considers the safety
implications when aspiring to a lean design.

The Institution of Structural Engineers’
Safety, Health and Wellbeing Panel
finds itself in a difficult position when
considering the relationship between
safety and steps to mitigate climate
change. Simplistically, if you put
less material in a structure, then the
level of risk increases as there is less
‘redundancy’. While no one should
increase member sizes to guard against
design inadequacies, there are clearly
risks with going too far the other way.
In addition to the life-safety impacts
of failure, emissions due to demolishing,
removing and rebuilding only add to
the original emissions related to the
structure. Therefore, in a time where
we are all being urged to minimise and
optimise our designs, getting it right has
never been more important.
In this article, the Panel, which is
made up of a disparate group of people
drawn from all types of practice around
the world, describes some of the
topics it regularly debates – a summary
of members’ shared experiences of
close calls and dangerous situations
– and their relationship to the climate
emergency. Where possible, we also
make recommendations for mitigating
dangers, striving to create structures
that are both safe and sustainable.
percentages of over-stress (or a slight
erosion of factors of safety) is rarely
the primary cause of failure, and that
unnecessary overdesign like this is
misguided.
Codes, loads and liability
Similarly, the thoughtless application
of design codes has been shown time
and again to result in either overdesign
(which is wasteful) or underdesign
(which is dangerous). The importance
of understanding each code clause and
where it needs to be applied must not be
underestimated.
On the subject of codes, while we
agree that industry-accepted loadings
are rarely achieved in office buildings2, we
highlight the regularity with which loads
are increased above code, often driven
by the ‘added value’ perceived by clients.
Work by the SEI in the USA2 has
indicated that, in buildings examined
that were designed by engineers using
codes, most were ‘overdesigned’
(though it should also be noted that 25%
of the buildings tested were significantly
below strength).
Decreasing loading below code
allowances is difficult if we wish to avoid
being liable for redesign or rebuilding
our work, but clearly we should also
avoid this deliberate and unnecessary
overspecification of loads.
Moving to a performance-based
design approach can also allow a
more accurate assessment of building
performance – thus reducing the
amount of material used to resist the
codified imposed loads (even if the loads
themselves have not been reduced).
Increasing utilisation without
understanding failure
Increasing utilisation is not always a safe
solution. We regularly see situations
where small member sizes have led to
impossible connection designs. Similarly,
failure of connections themselves is often
overlooked, with several tower crane
collapses resulting from pull-out failure
of the bolts at the bottom of the mast.
In such cases, the marginal carbon cost
of bigger bolts would have been trivial,
and this sudden failure mode could
have been avoided if the engineer had
considered how their design might fail.
Avoiding sudden and brittle failures is

Conservativism
We start with the topic of
conservativism, or ‘overengineering’.
Material strengths are generally well-
understood and well-defined; and codes
deal with the remaining uncertainty
through partial safety factors on
materials and loading.
There should, therefore, be no need
to add a further ‘factor of safety’ by
increasing member capacity. However,
the Get It Right Initiative1 highlights
that 23% of the industry’s turnover is ëFIGURE 1: It is
spent on correcting errors, which might preferable to avoid
sudden failure, such
suggest that it would be prudent to add
as that of the Pipers
HSE

some redundancy, ‘just in case’. Row car park in

Our experience indicates that a few Wolverhampton in 1997

16
January 2021 | thestructuralengineer.org

CLIMATE Lean but_TSE Jan 2021_The Structural Engineer 16 16/12/2020 11:19


always preferable (Figure 1). In beams
and slabs, this means ensuring failure
in bending occurs prior to shear – and
then ensuring ductility by verifying that
the rebar yields before the concrete
crushes (incidentally, this means that the
concrete can never be ‘fully utilised’).
Considerations like this make sure that if
failure does occur, the risk is minimised.
If an engineer is to push their designs
to the limit, it is even more important to
think about failure.
Finally, we are aware of many dramatic
failures resulting from lack of durability
(a possible cause of the collapse of the
Ponte Morandi in Italy in 2018). Getting
the detailing right is important in terms
of both safety and carbon – meaning
appropriate cover, free-draining steel
connections, and dry timber. Rebuilding
a structure due to poor detailing is an
inexcusable waste of resources.
Reuse
Where possible (and where this is a
lower-carbon option), adapting and
reusing structures is to be favoured. The
challenge is to persuade others of the
acceptability of a structure when either
‘it doesn’t meet modern codes’ or ‘there
are no records’. It takes a competent
engineer to look at the evidence and
agree that ‘it’s good enough’, taking
responsibility for the durability and
structural behaviour of the reused
structure.
The assessment techniques of existing
buildings proposed by the SEI2 would
allow an examination of an existing
structure to be undertaken to ascertain
its strength, and to understand whether
any deterioration had taken place –
allowing a confident assessment of a
building’s suitability for reuse to be made.
Allowing for future adaptability is
equally important – and designing
structures in a manner that will allow
them to be safely reused in the future
is as important as the safe reuse of our
existing building stock. Appropriate
consideration should be paid to the
future durability, inspectability and
adaptability of the structure.
Material choices
We should not lose sight of why steel and
concrete have become the mainstream
building materials of choice. With the use
of timber increasing in response to the
climate emergency, we must stress that
the industry’s understanding of timber
is still developing in many areas, most
notably fire3–5.
In fact, designing with any ‘new’
material (which is what engineered timber
is) carries risks that must be considered
by the engineer. Acknowledging the
CLIMATE Lean but_TSE Jan 2021_The Structural Engineer 17
IF WE INCREASE THE
SOPHISTICATION OF OUR
DESIGNS TO REDUCE OUR
CLIMATE IMPACT, WILL
CONTRACTORS ACQUIRE
THE SKILLS TO BUILD THEM?
‘unknown unknowns’ might be a good
place to start.
Changes in loading resulting
from climate change
What should we do with the structures
that we are designing now to account for
the different forces that climate change
is going to impose on them? We know
that global heating is making the weather
more extreme: increased rainfall and snow,
leading to increased loading; hotter and
colder weather, leading to more thermal
movement; colder weather, leading to
more icing, leading to more use of salts
as well as more ice accretion on lattice
structures.
As loads increase in the future, we may
need to strengthen certain structures,
highlighting the need to allow for safe
future adaptability in our designs. One
might consider increasing the capacity
today, but the certain increase in carbon
emissions from this needs to be balanced
against the possible savings in the future.
Is this ‘carbon investment’ worth it?
Upskilling in response to our
new philosophy of design
Much of the response to the climate
emergency requires a new approach to
structural design. Structural arrangements
optimised for carbon rather than
buildability, the use of novel materials,
and designing to the limits of the codes
are all examples of changes that require
the design team to embrace this new
approach.
We know that there are many safety
implications associated with this new
philosophy of design. Perhaps this
highlights the need to agree more design
time (and fees) to check our work more
thoroughly and avoid costly mistakes.
It certainly highlights the need to avoid
relying on finite element analyses with
little respect for the overall structural
performance or an understanding of its
true behaviour. A better understanding of
what makes a structure safe, or where a
safety margin variation is tolerable, might
be a good start.
We should also remember that while
some clients may see this new approach
as beneficial, others will want to quantify
the value it adds to the project – is it
17
thestructuralengineer.org | January 2021
Lean but safe Climate emergency
worth the risk? Similarly, if we increase the
sophistication of our designs to reduce our
climate impact, will contractors acquire the
skills to build them?
And how will (traditionally conservative)
insurers approach these structures?
They will need to be reassured that the
structural integrity and durability are not
compromised, proven to a recognised
standard. Not a safety risk, but a project
risk nonetheless.
Summary
There is no argument that we need to
adapt our structural designs to limit the
adverse impact of the built environment on
the living environment. It is a fearful crisis
that we must tackle, starting now.
But the solution is not as simple
as designing everything to work to
the maximum to minimise the upfront
embodied carbon. The process is much
more sophisticated, certainly in terms
of safety. And if we lose one structure
through minor safety mistakes (which
happens), we will have thrown a lot of
embodied carbon away.
To exercise any infl uence, engineers
need to understand the issues, be involved
in the design process at concept stage,
and take a positive lead on the solutions
that minimise the overall impact on the
climate. To achieve this, we need to
strive to be better designers, a little more
outgoing and communicative, and a little
less buried in the numbers.
Plenty to think about!
REFERENCES
1) Get it Right Initiative (2020) [Online]
Available at: https://getitright.uk.com/
(Accessed: November 2020)
2) Task Committee on Performance-
Based Design (2018) Advocating
Performance-Based Design. Report
to the ASCE Structural Engineering
Institute of Board of Governors [Online]
Available at: www.asce.org/uploadedFiles/
Technical_Areas/Structural_Engineering/
Content_Pieces/2018-sei-advocating-for-
performance-based-design-report.pdf
(Accessed: December 2020)
HAVE 3) Law A. and Hadden R. (2020) ‘We need
YOUR to talk about timber: fire safety design in
SAY tall buildings’, The Structural Engineer, 98
(3), pp. 10–15
4) Law A. (2019) Fire safety design:
we need to talk about timber [Online]
Available at: www.istructe.org/resources/
training/fire-safety-design-we-need-to-
tse@istructe.org talk-about-timber/ (Accessed: November
2020)
5) Deeny S., Lane B., Hadden R. and
Lawrence A. (2018) ‘Fire safety design in
@IStructE
modern timber buildings’, The Structural
#TheStructuralEngineer Engineer, 96 (1), pp. 48–53
16/12/2020 11:19
 Opinion Planning application
Climate emergency Timber procedures
and carbon sequestration

2.Low carbon

Timber and carbon

sequestration as a potentially significant carbon sink3.
But would it be better, from a carbon
perspective, to leave forests to grow
Will Hawkins discusses carbon sequestration and end-of-life naturally?
Figure 1 shows the changes
processes in timber structures, and the implications for sustainable in carbon storage within a typical
decision-making in structural design. commercially managed Sitka spruce
forest with a harvesting cycle of 50
years, using data from a Forestry
Introduction reported within Module A, or alongside Commission report4, and compares this
The first step towards reducing the it as a negative emission, it can create with an equivalent unmanaged forest.
embodied carbon of construction is the counterintuitive impression that This reveals several important points.
calculating it reliably and repeatably, using timber excessively can have Carbon uptake in newly planted
and it is therefore timely that a environmental benefits. saplings is initially slow, but then
strong consensus has formed The IStructE guide therefore advises accelerates as these become
around a lifecycle assessment (LCA) that sequestration should only be established. In an unmanaged forest,
methodology based on BS EN 159781. aggregated with emissions when end- sequestration continues until the total
This standard underpins the recent of-life values are also included, where carbon eventually tends towards a
guidance from the IStructE2, and the stored carbon is typically cancelled steady state.
breaks a product’s lifecycle down into out by re-emission at the end of life. A managed forest also achieves a
production (Module A), use (B), end of This article provides a rational constant carbon storage, albeit cyclic
life (C) and potential recovery/reuse (D). approach to the incorporation between each harvesting period and
As more of these stages are of sequestration in embodied lower than that of an unmanaged forest.
included within an LCA’s scope, a carbon calculations, and provides However, it also stores carbon in the
more complete picture of impacts is recommendations for effective climate- products produced from it. If these are
provided. However, often only Module focused timber design: sustainable amassed sufficiently over time, then the
A is included due to the considerable îFIGURE 1: Carbon sourcing, long lifespans and efficient total carbon sequestered accumulates
uncertainty surrounding end-of-life stored in trees, debris/ use of materials. and could eventually be greater than
litter and soil for typical
processes. Sitka spruce plantation that of an unmanaged forest.
For steel and concrete, which with 50-year rotation Rationalising timber Considering these observations,
both feature high-energy production period, compared with
forest left unmanaged
sequestration the approach to sequestration taken
processes, Module A dominates (with data from Forestry Growing trees and locking away carbon in this article is based on the following
lifecycle emissions. The production Commission4) in timber buildings has been proposed principles:
emissions for timber products, from
harvesting, drying and sawing, are
also significant; however, the mass
of carbon absorbed by the tree and
stored within the material itself can be
even greater.
Although this carbon is typically
re-released at the end of life due to
combustion and/or decomposition,
there are climate benefits of
sequestering atmospheric carbon
within long-lived timber products which
act as a carbon sink3.
For example, delaying carbon
emissions reduces cumulative climatic
energy input, buys time for adaptation
of both natural and man-made
systems, reduces the possibility of
reaching dangerous climate ‘tipping
points’, and increases the potential
for permanent storage through future
technologies such as carbon capture
and storage.
However, accounting for
sequestered carbon is often a
source of debate, confusion and
inconsistency. When sequestration is

18
January 2021 | thestructuralengineer.org

CLIMATE Timber s_TSE Jan 2021_The Structural Engineer 18 15/12/2020 09:34


Ò| Although an understanding of the
variation in carbon stored within a
forest is informative, this carbon is
not typically included in a building’s
LCA scope. Instead, only the carbon
in the timber product itself should be
included, in line with typical product
LCA methodologies5.
Ò| Harvesting, processing and
constructing a timber building
releases a ‘spike’ of carbon into the
atmosphere, whereas sequestration
occurs gradually.
Ò| Carbon accounting should always
start at zero – credit should not be
taken for a tree planted 50 years
ago, even if this eventually ends up
being used to build the structure
under investigation.
Ò| Where trees are harvested and
not replaced (deforestation), no
sequestration should be accounted
for, in line with current European
standards5.
This article recommends using
sequestration values corresponding to
the timber structure itself, such as those
given in the ICE database6 and IStructE
guidance2, rather than the entire forest
from which it came. However, the
assumed timing of sequestration is
that of the trees which replace those
harvested, starting from zero and
increasing until the next harvesting
cycle, assumed here to be 50 years.
This ‘forward-looking’ approach is
characterised and recommended by
Helin et al.7, and its implications are
explored hereafter.
Comparing concrete, steel
and timber building options
This section compares the embodied
carbon of concrete (fl at slab), steel
(composite) and timber (cross-
laminated timber (CLT) with glulam
frame) options for a six-storey building
structure. The designs are those
featured in a recent Buro Happold
study8, with all options featuring a
concrete core and foundations. The
calculation methodology follows
IStructE guidance2 and is detailed in a
separate publication9.
The analysis is cradle-to-grave;
Module D benefits (beyond the
system boundary), which are reported
separately in current standards1, are not
included. This has the same effect as
CLIMATE Timber s_TSE Jan 2021_The Structural Engineer 19
Timber and carbon sequestration
IT IS STILL
BETTER (FOR
THE CLIMATE)
TO BUILD
NOTHING AT ALL
THAN A TIMBER
BUILDING
assuming that all material production
is effectively decarbonised by the end
of the building’s 60-year lifespan, in
line with UK law, since offset materials
would also be zero carbon.
Three carbon life cycles are
considered for timber:
1) Typical sustainably sourced UK
timber with replanting (sequestration)
and a large carbon emission at
the end of life from recycling (55%
by mass), incineration with energy
recovery (44%) and landfill (1%)10, as
given in the IStructE guidance2.
2) As above, but without replanting
or sequestration, representing a
worst-case scenario (non-sustainably
sourced timber, uncommon in the
EU).
3) An optimistic scenario which
combines sustainable forest
management (sequestration) with
minimal emissions at the end of
life. It has been suggested that up
to 90% of combustion emissions
could potentially be captured using
bioenergy with carbon capture and
storage (BECCS)11. This has been
represented here by a 90% reduction
in Module C3–4 emissions. Carbon
capture is not permitted in a standard
LCA5, but is considered here as a
hypothetical scenario.
19
thestructuralengineer.org | January 2021
Climate emergency
éFIGURE 2:
The cumulative carbon emissions
Cumulative embodied
carbon emissions over a 120-year period for each
for concrete, steel
and timber options
structure are shown in Figure 2. The
concrete structure has the highest
of example building
structure8, including initial (Module A) emissions, followed by
three scenarios for
timber components
steel and then timber, for this structural
arrangement. For concrete and steel,
the use and end-of-life stages see only
small changes in embodied carbon. For
timber, however, subsequent changes
are significant.
In timber scenario 1, sequestration
causes a small, temporary period
of negative carbon emissions. This
lasts only while the building is in use,
ending abruptly upon demolition. If
the structure is in use for 100 years, it
would be carbon-negative for half its
lifetime, whereas the same structure
demolished after 40 years would never
reach negative carbon.
The dynamic climate impacts of
this temporary carbon storage are
considered, for a similar case study, in a
separate publication9. Despite the large
Module C emissions, the total cradle-
to-grave carbon is still lower than for
the concrete and steel options in this
scenario.
In scenario 2, without sequestration,
the significant release of carbon at the
end of life causes the timber option to
have the largest total embodied carbon.
This highlights the essential importance
of sourcing sustainable timber which
includes replanting, as is typical in the
EU.
Scenario 3 shows the potential for a
zero-carbon timber building if end-of-
life emissions can be avoided. This
is an optimistic scenario, relying on
technology which does not currently
exist at a meaningful scale. It would
therefore be misleading to consider
this in a typical embodied carbon
calculation, and not permissible using
today’s standards1,5. Even in this
15/12/2020 09:34
 Opinion Planning application
Climate emergency Timber procedures
and carbon sequestration
event, the large initial emission from
construction is not avoided, and still
contributes to global warming for
several decades9.
It can therefore be concluded that,
even under best-case conditions, it
is still better (for the climate) to build
nothing at all than a timber building.
Although this study shows concrete
as the highest-carbon option, and
timber as the lowest, these results
are specific to the designs in question
and do not represent a fixed hierarchy.
This timber design is very light,
featuring 100mm thick CLT fl oors, and
the concrete fl at slabs are relatively
inefficient at 9m spans compared with
ribbed or post-tensioned alternatives.
Figure 3 illustrates the point that
wasteful or inappropriate use of timber
could readily have a greater impact
than a more efficient concrete or steel
alternative: it is always better to use
less of any material. We cannot quickly
increase total timber supply, and must
therefore use this valuable resource
sparingly to enable maximum potential
uptake across the sector.
Conclusions
This article has demonstrated an
approach to accounting for timber
carbon sequestration in line with
established guidance. Through a simple
case study, several conclusions can be
drawn:
Ò| Timber must be sustainably sourced,
with replanting, for any potential
embodied carbon benefits over
concrete and steel to be realised.
Thankfully, sustainability certification
schemes (such as those run by the
Programme for the Endorsement
of Forest Certification and the
Forest Stewardship Council) are
well established and often a legal
requirement for import.
CLIMATE Timber s_TSE Jan 2021_The Structural Engineer 20
Ò| End-of-life carbon fl uxes are
significant for timber structures.
The climate benefits of timber
can therefore be maximised by
prolonging the life of structures,
reusing timber components or
recycling into new materials,
all of which keep sequestered
carbon out of the atmosphere.
Ò| It is hypothetically possible
for timber to have a negative
cumulative embodied carbon,
in the long term, when it is both
sustainably sourced and end-of-
life emissions are also avoided,
e.g. through new technologies
such as BECCS. This cannot be
relied upon in a typical embodied
carbon analysis, however, and
several decades of net positive
emissions still occur.
Ò| It is better to build nothing at all
than a timber building. Similarly,
wasteful use of timber can be
more damaging than an efficient
design in concrete and steel.
Acknowledgements
With thanks to Aurimas Bukauskas,
Sam Cooper, Steve Allen, Jonathan
Roynon and Tim Ibell for their
thoughts, contributions and
expertise.
Will Hawkins
MEng, PhD
Will Hawkins is a Lecturer in
Structural Engineering Design at the
University of Bath. His research and
teaching focuses on pathways to
zero-carbon building structures,
through design optimisation, novel
structural systems and low-carbon
materials.
20
January 2021 | thestructuralengineer.org
REFERENCES
1) British Standards Institution (2011) BS
EN 15978:2011 Sustainability of
construction works. Assessment of
environmental performance of buildings.
Calculation method, London: BSI
2) Gibbons O. and Orr J.J. (2020) How to
calculate embodied carbon, London:
IStructE Ltd
3) Churkina G., Organschi A., Reyer C.P.O.
et al. (2020) ‘Buildings as a global carbon
sink’, Nat. Sustain., 3, pp. 269–276, doi:
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-019-0462-4
4) Morison J., Matthews R., Miller G.
et al. (2012) Forestry Commission
Research Report: Understanding the
éFIGURE 3: Wasteful carbon and greenhouse gas balance of
use of timber could forests in Britain [Online] Available at: www.
have greater impact, forestresearch.gov.uk/research/
in both short and long understanding-the-carbon-and-
term, than efficiently
greenhouse-gas-balance-of-forests-in-
designed concrete and
steel alternative britain/ (Accessed: November 2020)
5) British Standards Institution (2012)
BS EN 15804:2012+A2:2019 Sustainability
of construction works. Environmental
product declarations. Core rules for the
product category of construction products,
London: BSI
6) Jones C. and Hammond G. (2019)
Inventory of Carbon and Energy (Version
3.0) [Online] Available at: https://
circularecology.com/embodied-carbon-
footprint-database.html (Accessed:
November 2020)
7) Helin T., Sokka L., Soimakallio S.,
Pingoud K. and Pajula T. (2013)
‘Approaches for inclusion of forest carbon
cycle in life cycle assessment – a review’,
GCB Bioenergy, 5 (5), pp. 475–486, doi:
https://doi.org/10.1111/gcbb.12016
8) Roynon J. (2020) Embodied carbon:
structural sensitivity study [Online]
Available at: www.istructe.org/resources/
case-study/embodied-carbon-structural-
sensitivity-study/ (Accessed: November
2020)
9) Hawkins W., Cooper S., Bukauskas A.
et al. (In press) ‘Rational whole-life carbon
assessment using a dynamic climate
model: Comparison of a concrete, steel
and timber building structure’, Structures
HAVE
YOUR 10) Wood for Good (2017) Environmental
SAY Product Declaration: 1m3 of kiln dried
planed or machined sawn timber used as
structural timber [Online] Available at:
https://woodforgood.com/assets/
Downloads/EPD/BREGENEPD000124.pdf
(Accessed: November 2020)
tse@istructe.org 11) Committee on Climate Change (2019)
Net Zero: The UK’s contribution to
stopping global warming [Online] Available
at: www.theccc.org.uk/publication/
net-zero-the-uks-contribution-to-stopping-
@IStructE global-warming/ (Accessed: November
#TheStructuralEngineer
2020)
15/12/2020 09:35
 2021 CPD course programme
Online training opportunities to
help meet your IPD/CPD objectives

(online) Temporary works appreciation (online) Business and strategic planning

14 Janaury 2021 10 March 2021

(online) Historic timber structures: (online) Demolition and structural

assessment and reuse refurbishment
1 February 2021 10 March 2021

(online) Temporary works design (online) Using computational design in

3-4 February 2021 practice
11-12 March 2021
(online) Conceptual design for structural
engineers: an introduction (online) Eurocode 9: design of aluminium
11 February 2021 structures
16 March 2021
(online) Lateral stability to building
structures (online) Conceptual design for structural
16 February 2021 engineers: an introduction
4 May 2021
(online) Eurocode 8: seismic design of
buildings (Institution HQ) Effective marketing for
18 February 2021 SMEs
5 May 2021
(online) Moving into engineering
management (Institution HQ) Conceptual design of
1-2 March 2021 bridges
10-11 May 2021
(online) Dealing with domestic clients
2 March 2021 (Institution HQ) Eurocode 6: masonry
design
(online) Writing skills for engineers 13 May 2021
3 March 2021

(online) Management accounting for SMEs

9 March 2021 View more at istructe.org/events

Book your place online at:

istructe.org/events

TSE.Jan21.021.indd 21 15/12/2020 10:14

 Professional guidance Business Practice Note | No. 37
BUSINESS
PRACTICE NOTES
have been developed by
the Institution’s Business
Practice and Regulatory
Control Committee to
provide guidance on aspects
of running a practice and
project management.
www.istructe.org/bpns
Introduction
The aim of this note is to highlight the
key issues that arise when reviewing the
work of another structural engineer. The
review may be an inherent part of the
project design process, particularly for a
major project, or it may have been called
because of concerns over the design.
A review may also be required
to accord with regulations or local
standards. For example, BS 5975:20191
identifies categories of design check for
temporary works, and most highways,
railways and some other structures (such
as wind turbine bases) require specific
design checks.
This note does not apply to:
Ò| internal checks and reviews of
work within the checking engineer’s
organisation (e.g. routine checking as
part of a quality management process
within a project’s design programme)
Ò| expert witness work
Ò| work associated with replacing
another engineer
Ò| reviewing another engineer’s work
during legal proceedings or where they
are contemplated.
Before undertaking a review,
engineers should read the IStructE
Code of Conduct and Guidance Notes2,
particularly Section 7.1 (more detail is
included below). The ICE Legal Note,
Reviewing the work of another Engineer
and replacing another Engineer3, is also a
very good reference.
Competence and confl icts of
interest
An engineer who is approached to
undertake checking work must be
satisfied that they are competent in the
specific field of engineering in question,
and that they have appropriate staff to
undertake the work.
To avoid confl icts of interest, they
must check what other connections they
may have to members of the design
team. If they do have connections, they
must raise them with the client and
BPN Checking an_TSE Jan 2021_The Structural Engineer 22
No. 37
Checking the work of
another engineer
Stephen Gregson provides guidance on how to approach an
appointment to review a design developed by another engineer.
either resolve the confl ict or decline the
appointment. A perceived confl ict of
interest could undermine the checking
engineer’s report and findings.
Ethical considerations
The check and review must be
undertaken professionally and factually,
so as not intentionally to damage the
reputation of the original designer.
It is also important that the checking
engineer works in a positive, collaborative
manner with the original engineer. The
briefing of the checking engineer’s staff
for the project should make this clear.
The checking engineer must normally
ensure that the original engineer has been
informed that the review will be taking
place. After all, if you put yourself in the
position of the engineer whose work is to
be checked, you would want to know if
another engineer was appointed to check
your work.
As noted, the checking engineer
must comply with the IStructE Code of
Conduct, in particular clauses:
1) Act with integrity and fairness and
in accordance with the principles of
ethical behaviour.
5) Undertake only those tasks and accept
only those appointments for which they
are competent.
7) Not maliciously or recklessly injure
or attempt to injure the reputation of
another person.
8) Avoid confl icts of interest.
There may be exceptional occasions
– usually in a legal case – when the
checking has to be confidential and the
original engineer is not told of the check3.
It must be stressed, however, that this
should very much be the exception.
The reason for the confidentiality
should be clear and the client should be
informed that the report and conclusions
are confidential. They must only be
regarded as preliminary until the checking
engineer has had a full dialogue with the
original engineer and design team, and
received all relevant information.
22
January 2021 | thestructuralengineer.org
Issues are likely to arise during the
checking process and these should be
discussed with and, if at all possible,
resolved with the original engineer.
However, should there be unresolvable
issues, then the checking engineer
should quickly make their concerns
clear to both the client and the original
engineer.
Remaining impartial
The checking engineer must remain
impartial and should not seek to supplant
the original design engineer. If the
checking engineer is later appointed to
replace the original designer, it could
reduce the credibility of the checking
engineer’s findings and report if the
checking engineer could be considered
not to have been impartial in their
checking work.
Scope of work
As with all projects, clearly defining and
agreeing the scope of work with the
client is essential. In checking and review
work, the scope can vary significantly.
The checking engineer, client and original
engineer, in particular, need to understand
the specific scope for the appointment.
A particular point is whether the scope
of the check is to be technical only or is
to include checking of other parts of the
engineer’s appointment, e.g. their scope
of work, contract documents, health and
safety risk assessments, and buildability.
The checking engineer should make
recommendations to the client to extend
their scope if they believe this to be
necessary, and that other areas of the
design or documentation need to be
checked.
The checking engineer has a duty
to warn (and discuss with) the original
engineer, and then the client, of any
health and safety issues that they may
find. This duty exists whether or not it
is explicitly stated in the scope of work.
Warning other relevant parties may then
also be necessary.
Ideally, the scope should include
15/12/2020 09:35

checking the designer’s risk
assessments. It may also be necessary to
contact the principal designer (according
to the CDM 2015 Regulations4)
concerning any health and safety issues
that arise.
The checking engineer should not
exceed their scope of work. It is easy
to get ‘drawn in’ and start proposing
solutions to problems and helping to
design or redesign the project; engineers
are problem-solvers after all.
However, unless their scope of work
says otherwise, the job of the checking
engineer is normally only to check the
design and report on it. Notwithstanding
this, a proactive, cooperative attitude
always helps.
If the checking engineer comes to
the conclusion that the original design
is seriously at fault, it is good practice to
recommend to the client that a further
opinion be sought.
Limit of liability
The checking engineer needs to have
appropriate professional indemnity
insurance cover. Their liability should be
only for the checking work that they have
undertaken using reasonable skill and
care. In the appointment, it is important
that the extent of liability in contract is
limited, preferably with a clear cap, and
that this has been agreed with the client.
There may also be liability in tort by the
checking engineer to the original engineer
and others.
The checking engineer’s liability for
‘fitness for purpose’ should be reviewed
carefully, and is normally specifically
excluded; it is rarely covered by
professional indemnity insurance. This is
important for design-and-build projects,
which can include fitness-for-purpose
clauses within the contractor’s contract.
In these cases, the checking engineer
may inadvertently pick up this higher-
level duty of care by the reference in their
appointment to the design-and-build
contractor’s contract.
Contact with original engineer
With the client’s agreement, the checking
engineer should contact the original
engineer. It is usually greatly to the benefit
of all that a dialogue be started between
the engineers. Checking should, if
possible, be undertaken in a collaborative
manner, liaising with the engineer whose
work is being checked and discussing
queries and concerns before reporting.
Remember that the original engineer
may have devoted a great deal of time
and consideration to the development of
their design, the nuances of which may
not be immediately recognisable to a
checker initially unfamiliar with a project.
BPN Checking an_TSE Jan 2021_The Structural Engineer 23
Business Practice Note | No. 37
The normal quality management
processes must, of course, be followed
in all dialogue. All meetings, phone calls,
emails and other contacts (face-to-
face, Teams, Zoom, etc. with express
consent), as well as any decisions
agreed between the engineers, should
be carefully recorded, in addition to
logging information in and out, minuting
of meetings, etc.
The engineer whose work is being
checked should be made explicitly aware
that such records are being made and
circulated. If records of meetings with
them are circulated, particularly to their
client, they should be invited to comment
on draft records before they are more
widely circulated.
One of the first – and key – steps
for the checking engineer is to try to
obtain any further information that
the original engineer may have which
could be relevant to the checking. It
is very possible that the documents
that are issued (at least initially) to the
checking engineer may not contain all
the information needed, and therefore
may not tell the whole story. For example,
the documents may have been handed
over by a lay person who does not
understand what they contain or omit.
Before starting the checking, it is
essential that the checking engineer
has all the facts (e.g. design brief and
assumptions) about the design, and also
preferably about the design process.
Report
The checking engineer’s report must be
factual and professional, and not include
hearsay, unnecessary and/or unverified
opinion, or anything of a defamatory
nature.
All information received must be
logged and, equally importantly,
information that is not available must also
be recorded and stated in the report.
Often these lists develop during the
checking process as more information, or
the lack of it, comes to light.
Everything relevant in the checking
process should be recorded, e.g. any
events where the original engineer has
not been cooperative, the cooperation
of other members of the design team,
contact with building control, any
limitations on the engineer’s review.
All issues raised by the checking
process must be logged, including
any resolution of issues, redesign,
strengthening, the checks of any
strengthening or improvement works,
and issues that remain unresolved.
Often this is done using a spreadsheet
so that the process of raising an issue,
discussions about it, and its resolution
can be tracked.
23
thestructuralengineer.org | January 2021
Professional guidance
The report (whether in draft or final
form) should only be sent to the client,
and not copied to other parties unless
instructed to.
This note has been prepared by
Stephen Gregson MA, CEng,
MIStructE, MICE on behalf of the
Institution of Structural Engineers’
Business Practice and Regulatory
Control Committee.
Members are reminded that they
should always comply with the
legislation of the region in which they
are working and should be aware of any
jurisdictions specific to that region.
Business Practice Notes are provided
as guidance to members, but do not
form part of the Regulations and/or
Laws of the Institution. All members
are obliged to abide by the Institution’s
Code of Conduct.
REFERENCES
1) British Standards Institution
(2019) BS 5975:2019 Code of
practice for temporary works
procedures and the permissible
stress design of falsework, London:
BSI
2) Institution of Structural
Engineers (2019) Code of conduct
and guidance notes [Online]
Available at: www.istructe.org/
about-us/istructe-code-of-conduct/
(Accessed: November 2020)
3) Metherall A. (2015) ICE Legal
Note: Reviewing the work of another
Engineer and replacing another
Engineer [Online] Available at:
www.ice.org.uk/knowledge-and-
resources/best-practice/reviewing-
the-work-of-another-engineer
(Accessed: November 2020)
4) The Construction (Design and
Management) Regulations 2015, SI
2015/51
FURTHER READING
HAVE
YOUR
Royal Academy of Engineering
SAY
and Engineering Council (2017)
Statement of Ethical Principles
[Online] Available at: www.
engc.org.uk/professional-ethics
(Accessed: November 2020)
South African Institution of Civil
Engineering. Joint Structural
tse@istructe.org
Division (2016) Guide to Good
Practice for Structural Engineering,
2nd ed. [Online] Available at:
www.jsd.co.za/wp-content/
uploads/2019/07/guide-to-
@IStructE good-practice-2nd-edition.pdf
#TheStructuralEngineer
(Accessed: November 2020)
15/12/2020 09:35
 Technical Technical Guidance Note | Level 3, No. 2
TECHNICAL
GUIDANCE NOTES
are published by The
Institution of Structural
Engineers to provide
guidance to engineers in the
early stages of their careers.
This note has been prepared
by AECOM on behalf of the
Institution.
www.istructe.org/tgns
CHRIS O’REGAN
BEng(Hons), CEng, FIStructE, FICE
Formerly Associate Director, Building
Engineering, AECOM, London, UK
Glossary
Restrained movement – axial
shortening of vertical elements occurs
within a state of containment and will
induce stresses in the structure as a
result.
Vertical movement of
structures
Terms and concepts
This Technical Guidance Note describes
axial shortening as vertical movement of
a structure. To understand this concept,
it is important to return to the principle
that vertical elements formed from
reinforced concrete will move in some
way as soon as they are constructed.
The predominant movement referred to
in this note is a vertical contraction of the
loadbearing element, which will cause an
overall downward displacement.
Structural engineers and building
contractors should be aware that axial
shortening occurs in all structures,
regardless of their height. However, it
only becomes a significant issue when
a building structure is taller than 15–20
storeys, depending on its structural
layout and the geometrical properties of
elements that make up its frame.
The causes of axial shortening relate
to the ways in which vertical elements
within a structure react to external
forces that they are exposed to. These
range from the more obvious application
of loads, to the more difficult task of
predicting interactions of components
within a composite material, such as
reinforced concrete. Time-dependent
properties also need to be considered
and are covered in depth later in this
note.
TGN Axial Shorte_TSE Jan 2021_The Structural Engineer 24
Level 3, No. 2
Axial shortening
Introduction
Until the late 19th century, the tallest buildings in the world were religious structures,
whose spires and domes pierced the sky. This changed in 1885, with the erection of
the Home Insurance Building – the world’s first tower block – in Chicago. Framed in
structural steel, it stood 42m high with 10 storeys of office space.
The new technology demonstrated in Chicago caught on in cities across the world
and the Home Insurance Building was quickly dwarfed by subsequent structures
as the race to the sky began. However, it brought with it a significant concern: the
vertical movement of vertical loadbearing elements in multistorey structures.
This Technical Guidance Note concerns the concept of axial shortening – a
phenomenon that occurs in vertical loadbearing elements within all structures, but
whose e ects are especially pronounced in those over 15–20 storeys high.
Reinforced concrete frames are most prone to axial shortening due to the impact
of shrinkage and creep on composite materials.
This note covers the causes of axial shortening, how it is assessed and predicted,
and the mitigation measures structural engineers and building contractors employ to
counter its e ects, particularly in relation to fit-out and facade installation following
building construction.
The note also refers to ways in which current codes of practice o er a means to
analyse structures for axial shrinkage.
Causes of axial shortening structures, the effects of shrinkage
The principal causes of axial shortening and creep should also be considered
of structures are described below. when calculating the magnitude of axial
Although each cause is described in shortening.
isolation, it is important to bear in mind
that they all occur at some point in Shrinkage
the life of the building and, therefore, It is important to differentiate between
have a cumulative effect on the vertical shrinkage and creep. Both add
movement of the structure. Each cause complexity when trying to predict the
should be allowed for when designing amount of axial shortening that will
and detailing components that have a occur in a structure, and both need to
direct interaction with, or connection to, be considered to determine the overall
the primary structure. magnitude of this movement.
Shrinkage of concrete occurs as it
Axial strain dries and solidifies while it is curing.
As stress is applied to a vertical or Many different types of shrinkage
near-vertical support element, it is affect reinforced concrete, but it is best
accompanied by strain that is exhibited described as a volumetric change due
by a contraction of the element as it to the loss of moisture by evaporation/
resists the load it has been designed drying.
to support. The magnitude of the axial Shrinkage is a time-dependent
strain increases incrementally as more deformation which reduces the volume
load is applied (as more fl oors are built of an element without any change to the
and/or as further load is added at already externally applied forces. It is a complex
constructed fl oors, e.g. superimposed phenomenon which is a function of
dead load and imposed load). the properties of the drying and ageing
All materials exhibit some form of concrete, and continues for many years,
axial shortening, but the behaviour is or even decades, after the concrete has
most pronounced in timber frames been cast.
and reinforced concrete structures. Shrinkage due to drying should not
Reinforced concrete is particularly be confused with autogenous shrinkage,
complex to assess due to the interaction a behaviour of the concrete that occurs
between the materials it is formed from, immediately as curing starts. Autogenous
i.e. concrete and mild steel. For concrete shrinkage is quite insignificant in terms
24
January 2021 | thestructuralengineer.org
15/12/2020 09:37

of magnitude when compared with
shrinkage due to drying.
The composite nature of a reinforced
concrete element results in shrinkage
that is dependent on the bond between
the steel (which shrinks on cooling) and
the concrete (which shrinks primarily
with loss of moisture and on cooling).
Built-in stresses are transferred from the
concrete to the steel reinforcement.
Figure 1 shows a section through
a reinforced concrete column with an
exaggerated shrinkage of concrete,
which is restrained by the steel. This
results in a transfer of force into the steel.
Since steel has a much greater modulus
of elasticity, the overall effect is a
reduction in the amount of shrinkage that
would otherwise occur in the absence of
reinforcement.
Construction sequence
During the construction of a building’s
frame, the vertical elements undergo
two forms of axial shortening that are
related to the application of load. Figure
2a shows the first shortening to occur,
which is caused by the permanent
self-weight of the fl oor structure as this
load is applied directly to the vertical
supporting elements, causing them to
contract as a result of elastic shortening.
This is known as pre-installation
shortening.
Each subsequent fl oor structure
applying load to the initial supporting
elements will cause additional vertical
movements to occur in those elements.
This is known as post-installation
shortening (Fig. 2b).
It is important to note that these
phenomena affect all subsequent vertical
supporting elements at each fl oor in
the structure and are additive to other
factors, such as shrinkage and creep.
The act of construction itself impacts
on the magnitude of axial shortening.
Methods and types of material used
are variables that alter the way in which
the concrete structure moves during its
lifetime.
Creep movements form a significant
part of axial shortening and are
related to the period during which
loading is applied and the sequence
of construction for each storey of the
building.
The way in which the concrete is
poured has an infl uence on the short-
term shrinkage of the vertical concrete
elements. Typically, the level at which the
concrete is poured is a theoretical one
and thus some shortening is recovered.
This becomes part of the expected
relative location of the fl oor slab, which will
continue to move after it has been cast.
TGN Axial Shorte_TSE Jan 2021_The Structural Engineer 25
Technical Guidance Note | Level 3, No. 2
Finally, the age at which elements are
installed into the structure infl uences
the magnitude of axial shortening. As
precast concrete columns are cast in
advance and stored before delivery
to site, they will have undergone initial
shrinkage by the time they are erected.
In contrast, shrinkage of adjacent in situ
concrete shear walls in cores occurs
during construction.
Creep
Even after the bulk of the shrinkage
effects and the initial elastic shortening
have occurred, a reinforced concrete
structure will continue to shorten during
the life of the building. Structures
wrapped in an enclosed facade will not
typically be affected by temperature,
so the predominant factor causing this
ongoing shortening is creep*.
Creep is defined as the shortening
of an element over time due to the
application of a sustained load. With
respect to axial shortening, creep occurs
within vertical support elements such
as walls and columns and will continue
to cause shortening for the life of the
building.
Many external and internal sources
impact on the magnitude of creep.
These include the strength grade of the
a) Pre-installation shortening
* Nonetheless, shrinkage does still occur in enclosed structures. In environments with a low relative humidity, shrinkage can be the governing
component of axial shortening in extreme cases.
25
thestructuralengineer.org | January 2021
íFIGURE 1: Shrinkage
within reinforced
concrete element
êFIGURE 2: Pre- and
post-installation
shortening
Technical
concrete, the relative humidity of the
environment the concrete was cast in,
and the geometrical properties of the
element.
Creep effects should be added to the
elastic axial shortening effects and the
shrinkage component of the shortening,
and – where necessary – temperature
effects.
Creep is a very complex behaviour
affected by time-dependent concrete
properties and a full discussion is
beyond the scope of this note. Designers
evaluating axial shortening should
ensure they are fully conversant with this
behaviour.
Detailing for axial shortening
In the design of taller buildings, axial
shortening is a particular concern
when non-structural elements, such as
partitions, finishes, ceilings and facade
components, are subsequently added
or connected to the structure. Some of
these elements are designed to achieve
very tight construction tolerances, and
facade or curtain wall systems must also
accommodate lateral movement of the
building due to external factors such as
wind.
Greater understanding of taller
structures and research into concrete
behaviour means that structural
engineers can design buildings to
mitigate some of the effects of axial
shortening. However, taller towers with
complex structural systems make the
task of designing for these effects ever-
more complex, so a holistic solution is
required.
Delaying the installation of brittle,
non-structural components, notably
cladding, will alleviate some of the effect
of post-installation frame shortening
on these elements, as some axial
movement will already have occurred.
However, engineers should take care
b) Post-installation shortening
15/12/2020 09:37
 Technical Technical Guidance Note | Level 3, No. 2
when preparing movement reports to
highlight the creep component that is
likely to occur after these elements are
attached.
A further issue that should be
considered is the potential for differential
axial shortening between adjacent
vertical elements that have significantly
different geometry. For example,
the vertical movement of a wall in a
reinforced concrete shear core will be
different to that of an isolated column.
Therefore, if they are relatively close
to one another, a horizontal element
fixed between them could experience
significant rotation.
To counter this problem, the layout
of the structure should be developed to
mitigate the impact of differential axial
shortening by placing vertical elements
sufficiently far apart from one another
(Figure 3).
In a tall building, the largest differential
axial shortening between columns and
core walls will typically occur at around
two-thirds to three-quarters of the
height of the structure (Figure 4). This
is primarily because the higher up the
tower a vertical element occurs, be it a
wall or column, the smaller the imposed
gravity load to cause shortening. In
addition, higher elements will experience
less shortening due to creep effects as
they are subjected to a lower sustained
load.
The same is true for column-to-
column differential movement. This is
especially crucial for edge and corner
columns, where excessive differential
settlement arising due to differently
loaded columns (e.g. typical columns
with typical loads and either columns
with significantly heavier loads due to
transfers or columns which extend
TGN Axial Shorte_TSE Jan 2021_The Structural Engineer 26
íFIGURE 3: Modifying
arrangement of further up a building than adjacent ones)
structure to counter can impact cladding design. Cladding
differential axial panels typically have limited capability
shortening
to accommodate ‘racking’ deformation
unless they have either opening joints or
wider and specially detailed joints.
It is also possible to mitigate the
impact of axial shortening by altering
the material composition of vertical
elements. By increasing the amount of
reinforcement in a column, provided the
section size is the same throughout its
length, it is possible to reduce the creep
that occurs between the concrete and
the two materials.
This is not always practical, however,
given the strict requirements of BS EN
1992-1-1 with respect to reinforcement
within columns, as well as other issues
such as cost, material efficiency and
structural embodied carbon.
Baker et al. (2007) proposed an
analytical method to account for
reinforcement by consideration of strain
compatibility between the concrete
and the steel. This formulation is often
incorporated in structural analysis
packages that predict the magnitude of
axial shortening of building structures.
One approach to reduce the impact
of axial shortening on the structure is
to limit the applied stress onto vertical
support elements by optimising their
size, location and number, thereby
reducing the amount of axial shortening
they exhibit.
ìFIGURE 4: Differential
shortening between
core walls and columns
in tall building
26
January 2021 | thestructuralengineer.org
It is also possible to predict the
amount of axial shortening that will occur
so that the placement of horizontal
elements that are supported by vertical
can be pre-set at a higher relative level.
This is especially useful when vertical
supporting elements have a large
cross-section and are therefore more
susceptible to effects that lead to axial
shortening. However, due to lack of
certainty when calculating predicted
vertical movements of structures, this
method is not often adopted.
The adoption of precast elements
effectively removes some of the
shrinkage and reduces creep due to
the age of the concrete at first loading.
This is especially efficient when used
in combination with pre-setting in situ
concrete elements.
Another approach is to install
horizontal members with rigid
connections between columns and
core walls that are likely to be subject
to significant axial shortening. These
elements reduce the impact of differential
settlement; however, they need to be
designed to withstand the high shear
forces that will be generated as the
movement occurs.
Any modifications to the structure will
have an impact on its overall stiffness
and will attract more load, which could
become problematic in terms of element
and connection design.
It is also possible to relieve the stress
DAEWOO ENGINEERING & CONSTRUCTION
15/12/2020 09:37

that builds up between columns and
core walls by installing a storey-height
perimeter truss around the frame of
the building (Figure 5). This is known
as a ‘belt truss’ and has the effect of
minimising uplift as the columns in the
perimeter must resist tension as well as
compression due to the presence of the
truss.
The primary use of a belt truss, when
working in combination with a shear
core and outriggers, is to stiffen the
building structure, but an added benefit
is a reduction in the impact of axial
shortening.
Assessment of axial shortening
Analysis of axial shortening is quite
complex due to the number of variables
that need to be considered. It requires a
sound understanding of how a vertical
reinforced concrete element contracts
during its lifetime within a building
structure.
This note has explained the causes of
axial shortening and mitigation measures
that are used to address the issue, with
a focus on creep and shrinkage. The
nature and behaviour of the composite
materials that form reinforced concrete
structures require engineers to carefully
plan layouts to allow for, or mitigate, the
effects of axial shortening.
A common design example that an
engineer may need to consider is a
steel-framed superstructure fixed to a
reinforced concrete core. The core will
exhibit axial shortening that is different
from that of the steel frame, requiring
allowances to the erection of the
steelwork to accommodate the resulting
differential movement.
BS EN 1992-1-1 provides guidance
on how to calculate the effects of creep
and shrinkage on reinforced concrete
elements in Section 3.1.4 and Annex
B. These methods rely on sophisticated
computational tools to provide a
reasonably accurate model of the
magnitude of axial shortening.
This approach considers three
variables that impact on the creep and
shrinkage of a reinforced concrete
element – the relative humidity of the
ambient environment the concrete was
cast in, the size of the element, and the
material properties of the concrete with
respect to its mix design – and can be
summarised as follows:
Ò| Consider the key variables that
impact creep and shrinkage in
reinforced concrete, i.e. humidity,
element section geometry, and the
composition of the concrete.
Ò| Determine the creep coefficient,
φ(t,t0), which is related to Ec, which
can be taken to be approx. 1.05Ecm,
TGN Axial Shorte_TSE Jan 2021_The Structural Engineer 27
Technical Guidance Note | Level 3, No. 2
Belt truss
where Ecm is the secant modulus of
elasticity of concrete, which varies
depending on the strength grade
of concrete. The value of the creep
coefficient can be read from Figure
3.1 of BS EN 1992-1-1 for concrete
that is exposed to a stress 0.45fck,
where fck is the characteristic
compressive cylinder strength of
concrete at 28 days. It is typically
in the order of 1.5–2.0 for most
elements.
Ò| Calculate the creep deformation of
the concrete based on the age of
the structure as the load is applied.
Ò| If the compressive stress of the
concrete exceeds 0.45fck(t0), where
(t0) is the age of the concrete at
the time of loading, then non-
linear analysis needs to be used to
determine the creep and shrinkage
of the concrete structure.
Ò| Consider humidity as the values
given in Figure 3.1 of BS EN
1992-1-1 are valid for ambient
temperatures between 40°C and
+40°C and a mean relative humidity
between 40% and 100% (typically,
RH = 50% and RH = 80% are used
for internal and external elements,
respectively).
Ò| Calculate the shrinkage strain
based on drying and autogenous
shrinkage strain. Each occurs at
different rates as the concrete ages.
27
thestructuralengineer.org | January 2021
Technical
Most structural analysis packages
permit a ‘staged construction
analysis’, whereby a structure can
be ‘built’ virtually in time and ‘loaded’
sequentially according to an anticipated
construction sequence, allowing for the
effects of elastic deformation, creep
Outrigger and shrinkage. The analysis will allow
for the development of these effects
over time, as well as those of material
properties (e.g. elastic modulus) where
relevant.
While prediction of movements
related to reinforced concrete is much
more difficult than in steel construction,
such models can provide insight into
the magnitude of movements which will
occur during construction, at the time
of component installation, and after
installation during the lifetime of the
structure.
However, even with the most
sophisticated modelling efforts,
movements observed in practice may
vary from those predicted. It is therefore
advisable to validate such models and
bracket behaviours and properties
between upper and lower bound
attributes, so that the engineer can
understand the full range of movement.
To assess the validity of models
used to determine the impact axial
shortening has on a structure, based
ëFIGURE 5: Belt
truss within structure on the method contained in BS EN
relieving impact of axial 1992-1-1, it is possible to apply simple
shortening (columns rules of thumb and compare them to
omitted for clarity)
the results:
Ò| Vertical concrete elements move
by approx. 1mm/m. This takes into
account both shrinkage and creep
effects that have been described in
this note.
Ò| The larger the cross-sectional area
of the element, the less axial vertical
movement there is likely to be.
Ò| Increasing the amount of
reinforcement in an element, while
maintaining the cross-section size,
can reduce axial shortening.
Ò| Increasing concrete strength can
reduce axial shortening.
Ò| Using elements of the same size,
but with different concrete strengths
and reinforcement, alters the
magnitude of axial shortening.
ANALYSIS OF AXIAL
SHORTENING IS QUITE
COMPLEX DUE TO THE
NUMBER OF VARIABLES
THAT NEED TO BE
CONSIDERED
15/12/2020 09:37
 Technical Technical Guidance Note | Level 3, No. 2
Applied practice
BS EN 1992-1-1:2004+A1:2014
Eurocode 2: Design of concrete
structures. General rules and rules for
buildings
NA+A2:14 to BS EN 1992-1-
1:2004+A1:2014 UK National Annex
to Eurocode 2: Design of concrete
structures. General rules and rules for
buildings
Further reading
Baker W.F., Korista D.S., Novak L.C.,
Pawlikowski J. and Young B. (2007)
‘Creep and shrinkage and the design
of supertall buildings – a case study:
the Burj Dubai Tower’, ACI SP-246:
Structural Implications of Shrinkage
and Creep of Concrete, 246, pp.
133–146
TGN Axial Shorte_TSE Jan 2021_The Structural Engineer 28
Concrete Society (2008) TR67:
Movement, restraint and cracking
Resources
in concrete structures, Camberley,
Concrete Society
The Concrete Society
Fintel M., Ghosh S.K. and Iyengar www.concrete.org.uk/
H. (2005) Column shortening in
tall structures – prediction and The Concrete Centre: RC Spreadsheets
compensation, Skokie, Il: Portland to BS EN 1992-1-1 (TCC55: Axial
Cement Association Column Shortening and TCC55X: Axial
Column Shortening:24 storeys)
Fu F. (2018) Design and analysis of www.concretecentre.com/Publications-
tall and complex structures, Oxford: Software/RC-Spreadsheets-v4C/RC-
Butterworth–Heinemann Spreadsheets-v4B-2-Contents.aspx
Kim H. and Shin S. (2014) ‘Reduction
of di erential column shortening in
tall buildings’, Int. J. Civil Environ.
Struct. Construct. Arch. Eng., 8 (2), pp.
145–148 AECOM is built to deliver a better world. We design,
build, finance and operate infrastructure assets
Working group of The Concrete Centre for governments, businesses and organisations in
and fib Task Group 1.6 (2014) Tall more than 150 countries. As a fully integrated firm,
buildings: Structural design of concrete we connect knowledge and experience across our
buildings up to 300m tall, London: MPA global network of experts to help clients solve their
The Concrete Centre and Lausanne:
most complex challenges.
Fédération internationale du béton (fib)
28
January 2021 | thestructuralengineer.org
15/12/2020 09:37
 MultiPly timber pavilion Project focus

Design and construction of

the MultiPly pavilion using
cross-laminated tulipwood
SIMON BATEMAN
MEng, CEng, MIStructE, MICE
îFIGURE 1: MultiPly
pavilion at original Senior Structural Engineer, Arup,
V&A site for London London, UK
Design Festival
CAROLINA BARTRAM
MA, MDesS, CEng, FIStructE
Associate Director, Arup, London, UK

SYNOPSIS

This paper describes the

design, fabrication and erection
of the MultiPly timber pavilion,
which was made from the first
cross-laminated timber (CLT)
to be manufactured at volume
in the UK. Fabricated from
American tulipwood, it was
originally displayed at London
Design Festival 2018 and has
since been reconfigured and
exhibited at design festivals in
Milan and Madrid.
The pavilion comprises a
‘vertical maze’ of stacked
boxes and staircases allowing
the public to reach a height
of over 9m from the ground.
Designed to be completely
demountable and reusable, it is
intended to be an exploration
of the issues surrounding
timber’s place in the circular
economy and its use in
modular construction.
This paper details the
development of the pavilion’s
concept, its analysis and
design through use of both
physical and computer
models, the manufacture of
the tulipwood CLT, and the
fabrication and erection of
the pavilion on a highly
constrained site – all taking
ED REEVE

place within a timescale of less

than seven months.

29
thestructuralengineer.org | January 2021

MultiPly pavilio_TSE Jan 2021_The Structural Engineer 29 15/12/2020 16:14

 Project focus MultiPly timber pavilion

Once the desired configuration had been agreed,

Project credits
Sponsor
Client
Architect
Structural engineer
Fabricator and contractor
Timber processing
CLT manufacture
Testing and technical advice to
CLT manufacture
Adhesives and delamination
testing
Lighting design
Introduction
The MultiPly pavilion (Figure 1) is the latest in
a series of collaborations between Arup, the
American Hardwood Export Council (AHEC) and
London Design Festival (LDF) to promote the use of
structural hardwoods in construction and explore
issues relating to design in timber. Each is delivered
with a different architect, using donated American
timber, to a landmark site in London.
Arup delivered the Timber Wave in 20111 (with
AL_A), the Endless Stair2,3 in 2013 (with dRMM
Architects) and the Smile4 in 2015 (with Alison
Brooks). The architect selected for LDF 2018 was
Waugh Thistleton Architects (WTA), a practice
specialising in timber construction.
A challenging brief was developed, exploring
different aspects from previous years. The pavilion
had to:
Ò| visibly demonstrate the application of CLT to
housing
Ò| be erected as quickly as possible in the V&A
museum’s busy Sackler Courtyard, a site with
very limited loading capacity and access
Ò| be completely demountable, and ideally
reconfigurable (all connections would therefore
need to be reusable)
Ò| be made from a limited amount of donated
tulipwood, processed and manufactured into
CLT in the UK, unlike previous pavilions
Ò| be made from low-grade tulipwood not suitable
for joinery use
Ò| follow a programme of less than seven months
between initial sketches and realisation on site.
American Hardwood Export Council
London Design Festival
Waugh Thistleton Architects
Arup
Stage One Creative Services
Glenalmond Timber Company
Construction Scotland Innovation Centre
Edinburgh Napier University
Henkel
SEAM
architecturally. After setting up rules to begin with,
the team decided to allow a large cantilever at one
end to add drama and demonstrate the strength
of the hardwood.
The constraints of the site also had to be
considered, as the courtyard is a long-span
roof over a gallery below, with strict loading
limits. Preliminary calculations were used to
check overall loading limits, which informed the
maximum height of the structure, the plan area
and the occupancy.
Initial checks against stresses and the amount
of timber available meant that two types of panels
were proposed: 100mm and 60mm thick (five and
three layers of 20mm board respectively). These
would be assembled into boxes using computer
numerical controlled (CNC)-cut castellated edges
(Figure 3).
the extremely tight programme meant that the order
had to be placed with the contractor, and panel
production begun, while the structural design was
ongoing.
Initial hand calculations were carried out on
the overall stability of the structure, and of key
elements, to demonstrate that the structure was
feasible and to allow an initial order for panels to
be released, allowing production to start before the
final numbers of each panel type were known. Initial
calculations were also carried out on connections to
allow these to be sketched up for pricing.
Structural analysis
A number of approaches were used to analyse and
design the structure. The process started with basic
hand calculations to verify basic stability in response
to wind loads, as well as estimate the load in key
connections. Hand calculations were also used
to design the fl oor and roof panels. As more
sophisticated modelling methods progressed, these
hand calculations were used as checks against
computer analysis results.
For more detailed element and connection
design, finite element (FE) modelling in Oasys GSA5
was used (Figure 4). As CLT is an orthotropic
composite material, effective properties were
calculated for in-plane and bending behaviour
in each direction, for application to the FE shell
elements.
Figures published by AHEC6, determined on
previous LDF projects, were used, with three sets
of properties depending on the panel build-up and
orientation. Particular attention had to be given
to in-plane shear, the effects of which can be
significant in CLT.
Connections between elements on MultiPly
generally act as hinges and were modelled as such.
In order to ensure that loads in connections were
not underestimated, it was important that they
were modelled in the correct locations, so they

Design concept and initial design

A number of concepts were explored by WTA and
Arup before the team settled on an arrangement of
standardised ‘boxes’ stacked to create a vertical
maze. During this stage of design evolution, the
engineering team devised simple engineering rules
(Figure 2) to aid the architect in arranging the
boxes in a way that would be stable. This enabled
WTA to explore many different box configurations.
ARUP

ëFIGURE 2: Initial
With engineer and architect collaborating, a final ‘rules’ for stacking
form was reached that worked both structurally and boxes

30
January 2021 | thestructuralengineer.org

MultiPly pavilio_TSE Jan 2021_The Structural Engineer 30 17/12/2020 10:50

 MultiPly timber pavilion Project focus

acted with the correct lever arm in any overturning

behaviour.
Load distribution through the structure is
sensitive to the panel type and orientation, and
connection position. Therefore, as the design
developed, and panels changed and connections
moved, this information had to be fed back into the
model for re-analysis.
Once analysis was complete, panel stresses
were checked against effective capacities for each
panel type in each direction, taking into account
buckling for compression members, which was
critical especially at free edges of the thinner
panels. Connection forces were also extracted for
connection verification.

Statical indeterminacy
The arrangement of panels and boxes forming
MultiPly is highly indeterminate. Combined with
the brittleness of timber, this presents an unusual
challenge. There are a number of uncertainties in
timber elements and connections (such as timber
stiffness variability, bolt fit and connection friction)

ARUP
which affect the relative stiffness of possible load ìFIGURE 3:
paths; therefore, the load paths that develop in Key features of
reality may not be those in the analysis model. MultiPly ‘box’

Furthermore, these can vary over time due to

effects such as creep and drying movement or
swelling.
With a brittle material such as timber, it is not
sufficient to simply carry out an elastic analysis
and design for the forces, as, unlike with steel
and reinforced concrete, we cannot rely on the
structure to plastically deform and redistribute
load if the actual load distribution does not refl ect
that designed for. This could lead to connections
or elements being overloaded and the structure
would simply fail. Accordingly, a methodology had
to be developed to ensure that this highly irregular
structure could be designed safely.
The methodology used was based on alternative
load paths. The most indeterminate part of the
structure was considered to be the large cantilever,
which requires a horizontal ‘pull’ reaction at the top
to prevent it from tipping over (Figure 5). A physical
model was assembled, and engineering judgement
was used to assess the primary credible paths for
this to be traced through the structure (Figures
6 and 7). Four load paths were identified in all.
îFIGURE 4: Typical
plot of panel
stresses in GSA
ARUP
LOAD DISTRIBUTION
THROUGH THE
STRUCTURE IS
SENSITIVE TO THE
PANEL TYPE AND
ORIENTATION
Depending on relative stiffness, the cantilever could
be supported by just one of these, or multiple load
paths in combination.
The understanding gained from the physical
model was used to tune the behaviour of the FE
model. By using GSA’s analysis stages feature and
selectively adjusting element properties, the model
was configured to analyse the key load paths
in turn and combine the results for element and
connection design. This ensured that whichever
distribution of loads occurred within the finished
structure, the team could have confidence that it
would be within the design capacity of the elements
and connections.
Connections
As previously noted, the connections needed to be
demountable and reusable. The challenge the team
set itself was therefore to have no glue, screws,
nails or anything else irreversible between elements
anywhere on the structure. The team did, however,
have the benefit of CNC manufacture to employ in
creating a suite of connections.
To form the boxes, a CNC-cut castellated edge
was applied to each panel allowing them to slot
together. Large-scale furniture-type connectors,
with a fabricated threaded steel barrel, were used
to hold the panels tightly together (Figure 8).
Between boxes, vertical bearing connections
were achieved as often as possible by aligning the
walls on plan so that walls overlapped. These were
held in position with a tie connection comprising a
threaded rod embedded within the panels above
and below, with plates held in a CNC-cut pocket
(Figure 9). These connections were also used to
transmit tension and shear between boxes above
and below. Around some connections which
appeared susceptible to out-of-plane forces,
screws were added through the thickness of the
panel as reinforcement.
In a small number of places, brackets were
introduced, secured back to embedded barrels
within the walls using long bolts. These were used
where high tension or shear was concentrated at a
corner, which was key to stability of the structure.
During initial fabrication, panels were
manufactured to include all connections
required for the London configuration, which

had been incorporated into a global 3D model

and programmed into the CNC machine. When

31
thestructuralengineer.org | January 2021

MultiPly pavilio_TSE Jan 2021_The Structural Engineer 31 15/12/2020 16:15

 Project focus MultiPly timber pavilion
îFIGURE 5: Cantilever box showing push,
pull and bearing supports required
ARUP
additional connections were needed for the Milan
and Madrid installations due to the change in
configuration, logistical constraints prevented all of
these being CNC-cut in the same way; therefore,
limited screw connections between boxes were
introduced.
Timber sorting, grading and testing
While developing the Endless Stair with dRMM in
2011, Arup had identified that tulipwood was one
of the few hardwoods suitable for CLT thanks to its
combination of high strength but still relatively low
density, enabling ease of machining, and also its
ARUP
ease of gluing.
The tulipwood used for MultiPly was timber
which had been rejected for joinery use and would
ordinarily have gone to waste. As grading for joinery
is purely aesthetic (e.g. by colour), there was a high
chance that much of the timber could achieve a
high grade structurally, provided it met requirements
including grain direction and knot size. The donated
wood was initially received at Glenalmond Timber
Company, near Perth in Scotland, which carried out
grading and processing of the boards.
The UK standard for structural grading of
hardwoods is BS 57567, and the TH1 visual grade
was used as a basis to sort the wood. To maximise
ìFIGURE 7: Illustration of
two possible alternate load
paths which would each have
different effect on panel and
connection loads
MultiPly pavilio_TSE Jan 2021_The Structural Engineer 32
ìFIGURE 6: Card
model used to
manually visualise
possible load paths
the yield from the limited raw material, boards
were subdivided where necessary, with large knots
cut out of boards which otherwise met the TH1
criteria, and the boards finger-jointed back together
(Figure 10).
AHEC had already carried out structural testing
on TH1 graded tulipwood, and therefore panels
made of this wood could be used for primary load-
carrying elements of the structure with confidence
in the design stresses and other structural
properties.
WAUGH THISTLETON ARCHITECTS
32
January 2021 | thestructuralengineer.org
This first grading left behind a large quantity of
wood which did not meet the TH1 grade, but could
still be useful in fulfilling functions not structurally
integral to the pavilion, such as non-accessible
roofs. Structural criteria were defined for a lesser
grade and a yield of this wood was obtained. This
minimised the amount of wood ultimately going to
waste, which was typically wood with very large
knots, very irregular grain, or which was split or
warped so that it could not be laminated.
Following grading, the boards were finger-jointed
and re-cut into boards 2.7m long for fabrication
of 2.7m square panels. They were then planed
to a regular size of 20mm thick by 75 or 100mm
wide. Samples of these boards were taken for
testing, which was carried out by Edinburgh Napier
University (Figure 11).
Material properties were tested to find mean and
characteristic values, including density, to ensure
that published values for tulipwood were valid for
this design. The strength of the typical finger joint
produced at Glenalmond was also measured, to
determine a characteristic tensile stress for the
boards.
CLT panel production
MultiPly featured the first CLT manufactured
at volume in the UK. It was produced at the
Construction Scotland Innovation Centre (CSIC)
near Glasgow. CSIC operates a vacuum CLT press
measuring 13m × 3.5m, in which four 2.7m square
panels were fabricated simultaneously.
One hundred and two panels were fabricated in
total for the structure over a period of five weeks, as
well as a number of test pieces. Fifty 100mm thick
(five-layer) panels and twenty-eight 60mm thick
15/12/2020 16:15
 MultiPly timber pavilion Project focus

îFIGURE 8:
Furniture-style
connection
with recess and
embedded barrel

WAUGH THISTLETON ARCHITECTS

îFIGURE 9:
Box–box pocket
connection FOLLOWING
GRADING, THE
BOARDS WERE
FINGER-JOINTED
AND RE-CUT INTO
BOARDS 2.7M LONG
(three-layer) panels were made from the structurally
designated TH1 timber. A further twenty-four 60mm
panels were made from the lower-grade timber.
The standard for production of CLT, BS EN
163518, states that bonding shall take place not
more than 24 hours after planing. This is partly to
ensure that, once the boards have been planed to a
fine level of precision, there is not time for a change
in moisture level to occur, which would significantly
PETR KREJCI

alter the board thickness and affect bonding.

íFIGURE 10: Timber boards
following sorting, grading
and finger jointing
PETR KREJCI
With the production process being split over two
sites, and the panel production process being more
time-consuming than the planing, this presented
a logistical challenge requiring close coordination
and ‘just-in-time’ delivery. Early each morning,
the boards for the day’s panels were selected at
Glenalmond, planed and loaded onto pallets.
After a 90-minute journey to CSIC, the boards
were sorted, primed and then hand-laid within
the CLT press, to three or five layers as necessary
(Figure 12).
Adhesive was applied and the rubber-like
membrane was then used to cover the panels,
and a vacuum was applied for five hours as per
the adhesive manufacturer’s recommendations
for hardwoods and for the chosen adhesive. The
panels were then unloaded and sprayed on each
side with layers of a protective lacquer.

Each batch of four panels took approx. seven

hours of press time. This ran in a ‘daytime’ and
‘night-time’ shift, allowing manufacture of eight
panels per day.

33
thestructuralengineer.org | January 2021

MultiPly pavilio_TSE Jan 2021_The Structural Engineer 33 15/12/2020 16:15

 Project focus MultiPly timber pavilion

Because of the ambitious nature of the

structure, the team needed full confidence in
the quality of the panels. A representative from
the adhesive manufacturer, Henkel, visited CSIC
early in the process to confirm that the panel
manufacture was taking place in accordance with
its recommendations. Henkel also kindly offered
to carry out delamination tests on small samples.
These were sent to Germany for testing, which also
confirmed the quality of production.
Arup engineers also monitored the glued joint
thickness of the finished panels, which was not
allowed to exceed 0.3mm to ensure that bonding
was effective; this meant that adjacent boards
needed to be machined to a very close tolerance.
The use of the CSIC vacuum press allowed high-
PETR KREJCI

quality CLT to be produced using bespoke layups,

in a wood not traditionally used for CLT, producing ìFIGURE 11: Testing of wood samples at
a product not currently available from the major CLT Edinburgh Napier University
suppliers in Europe.

Fabrication and assembly

The contractor appointed to fabricate and
assemble the pavilion was Stage One Creative
Services. A five-axis CNC machine which had been
programmed from the 3D model was used to cut
each individual panel and its connections to less
than 1mm tolerance (Figure 13). The ‘fl atpack’
panel components were then assembled into the
17 boxes of MultiPly (Figure 14), and a section
of the structure was erected within Stage One’s
warehouse to trial the procedures for assembling
the structure. The boxes were prepared with
the stairs pre-installed as well as lighting to door
openings.
Following disassembly of the trial, the boxes
were loaded onto fl atbed trucks for the journey
to the V&A Museum in London. The courtyard
PETR KREJCI

itself presented the final challenge: it would not ìFIGURE 12: Laying-up
accommodate a full-sized mobile crane, so the of panels at CSIC

structure had to be assembled using a smaller

spider crane, progressing from the back of the
courtyard to the front, using temporary propping
as necessary (Figure 15). Each of the boxes at
base level was placed on a custom-made platform,
CNC-cut to accommodate the fall of the courtyard,
to create a level surface.
The primary structure was completed within just
four days due to the accuracy of fabrication and of
the preformed connections. A further three days
was required to complete the balustrades and
lighting. Following completion on site, the pavilion
was open for approximately two and a half weeks
before disassembly. Over 160 000 people visited
the V&A during the festival.

Reuse
A key theme of MultiPly was the exploration of
disassembly and reuse, and the team had the
opportunity to test this potential immediately
following the end of LDF. Following disassembly
at the V&A, six boxes were transported three
miles to Bloomsbury and reassembled as part of
an exhibition for New London Architecture at the
Building Centre.
PETR KREJCI

MultiPly has also been shown in new

ìFIGURE 13: CNC-
configurations at the Salone del Mobile, Milan cutting of panels at
(April 2019; Figure 16) and Madrid Design Festival Stage One
(February 2020; Figure 17).

34
January 2021 | thestructuralengineer.org

MultiPly pavilio_TSE Jan 2021_The Structural Engineer 34 15/12/2020 16:16

 MultiPly timber pavilion Project focus

as a pavilion, it is anticipated that the panels will

be downcycled to a new, longer-term use. This
could involve, for instance, cutting up the panels to
fabricate new elements (such as stairs) which could
be installed in a new building. This is preferable to
resorting to biomass or landfill, which would result
in return of the carbon, originally sequestered in the
timber, to the atmosphere.

Conclusion
MultiPly has been a challenging and rewarding
project for architect, engineer, manufacturer and
contractor alike. It is a significant achievement in the
use of engineered timber in the UK. It has included:
Ò| analysis and design of a highly irregular structure,
requiring a subtle mix of ‘first principles’
engineering and advanced analysis to ensure
confidence in a brittle material
Ò| further examples of how hardwood CLT can be

ARUP
used, building on knowledge and experience
gained on previous LDF projects such as the
Endless Stair and the Smile
ìFIGURE 14: Assembly of box using
castellated corner connections Ò| the first CLT manufactured at volume in the UK,
using a vacuum press to create high-quality CLT.
íFIGURE 15:
This is particularly suited to unusual woods and
Assembly on site bespoke panel layups
at V&A, showing Ò| use of 3D modelling and CNC fabrication of all
temporary propping
in place
connections to create finished panels, ready for
assembly
Ò| creation of a timber structure which can be fully
disassembled and reassembled by using only
AHEC

reversible, bolted connections.

ìFIGURE 16: MultiPly at Salone del Mobile, Milan 2019

REFERENCES

The original design for MultiPly was only for the

configuration in London, but the standardisation 1) American Hardwood Export Council
of geometry was intended to ensure that future (2020) Timber Wave [Online] Available at:
arrangements would be possible without substantial www.americanhardwood.org/index.php/
modification. en/examples/our-projects/timber-wave
Both the Milan and Madrid configurations (Accessed: November 2020)
presented different challenges: Milan was a much 2) American Hardwood Export Council
more slender construction, while Madrid had more (2020) The Endless Stair [Online] www.
PETR KREJCI

cantilevers and was at a much more exposed site. americanhardwood.org/index.php/en/

Each configuration required some re-analysis and examples/our-projects/the-endless-stair
(Accessed: November 2020)
re-engineering of connections.
Once MultiPly has reached the end of its life 3) Campbell A., Groat H. and Lawrence A.
(2014) ‘Engineering the Endless Stair’, The
Structural Engineer, 92 (9), pp. 16–21
íFIGURE 17: 4) American Hardwood Export Council
MultiPly at Madrid (2020) The Smile [Online] Available at: www.
Design Festival 2020 americanhardwood.org/index.php/en/
examples/our-projects/the-smile (Accessed:
November 2020)
5) Oasys Ltd (2020) Oasys GSA 10 [Online]
Available at: www.oasys-software.com/
products/structural/gsa/ (Accessed:
November 2020)
6) American Hardwood Export Council (2005)
Structural Design in American Hardwoods,
London: AHEC
7) British Standards Institution (2017)
BS 5756:2007+A2:2017 Visual strength
grading of temperate hardwood.
Specification, London: BSI
8) British Standards Institution (2015)
BS EN 16351:2015 Timber structures. Cross
laminated timber. Requirements, London: BSI

35
thestructuralengineer.org | January 2021

MultiPly pavilio_TSE Jan 2021_The Structural Engineer 35 15/12/2020 16:16

 OpinionPlanning
Opinion A newapplication
approach procedures
to fl oor loading
Viewpoint
A new approach to
fl oor loading
Alastair Hughes sets out a proposal to simplify the Eurocode approach to fl oor loads by
moving from an occupancy-based categorisation to one based on loading.
Introduction
For most buildings of more than one storey,
the important variable action – the payload, so
to speak – is gravity loading imposed on fl oors.
Currently, in the Eurocodes, values for design
are derived from the intended occupancy of
the space in question, according to a table in
EN 1991-1-11 – or strictly speaking its National
Annex (NA), because nations do not always
see eye to eye.
These assumptions affect safety, so EN
1991-1-1, while offering RVs (Recommended
q- and Q-values), has to tolerate a credibility-
stretching range of national choice for its 12
categories or subcategories of occupancy. The
UK NA2 generates multiple sub-subcategories,
each with its own pair of values. The motive
may have been to ease the transition from
predecessor standards, but the result is
complexity and disharmony. In 2021, with first-
generation Eurocodes up for revision, we have
an opportunity to do better.
This article explores the idea of categorising
the opposite way round: not by occupancy
but by loading. Four categories, with q = 2,
3, 4 and 5kPa (kN/m2 if preferred), will cover
most normal building fl oors. As now, each of
these equivalent uniformly distributed loads
is partnered by an alternative singly applied
roving point load, Q, of 2, 4, 4 and 5kN
respectively (with one outlier: car parking fl oors
at 10kN, to allow for a wheel change).
Instead of quoting two values (in kPa and
kN) for every variant of occupancy, the table
can simply list the occupancies that each
category is good for. This new approach is not
revolutionary in any other sense. There is no
intention to overturn the traditional loadings or
their modus operandi. It does, nevertheless,
provide opportunities to tidy up, to refresh and
to promote borderless structural safety.
Why make this change?
There are three motives. First, it refl ects the
spirit of the age we live in. None too soon,
the ‘long life/low energy/loose fit’ ethos3 is
being embraced wholeheartedly. Well-made
buildings are outliving their original occupancy
and being repurposed, not demolished. Time
is running out for the kind that was tightly
VIEWPOINT Floor_TSE Jan 2021_The Structural Engineer 36
designed, sometimes even to different loadings
on different areas of the same fl oor. In future, a
building (or fl oor) ought to be reusable for other
occupancies listed against its category, or any
lower one.
Second, it advances the ease-of-use
agenda and reduces error potential. Just four
standard categories, with memorable load
values. Bespoke design will still have a place
for occupancy categorised as ‘5+’, mainly
storage and industrial. Above 5kPa, loadings
change character and lose any probabilistic
pretensions. Essentially, such loadings are
‘superstandard’ and project-specific; values
to match operational needs must be declared,
then respected, by the client.
Third, with a modicum of rounding up, it can
lubricate the process of European consensus.
The categories are neutral; shouldn’t the
nations be able to agree on which is the
minimum for each occupancy? Table 1
includes suggestions as a starting point. These
are informed by the work of PraxisRegelnBau
(PRB)4 – Practice-oriented Rules in Building
Construction, a 2011 initiative by a number
of German construction industry associations
to promote Eurocode improvements, with
a focus on ease of use – which is gratefully
acknowledged. Tentatively, the table has been
extended to cover roofs as well as fl oors.
Rounding up
Any slight increase in design loading, though
safety-enhancing, is bound to result in some
loss of economy. This is not so much the
result of higher point loads, Q, which rarely
IN FUTURE, A
BUILDING (OR
FLOOR) OUGHT
TO BE REUSABLE
FOR OTHER
OCCUPANCIES
LISTED AGAINST
ITS CATEGORY
36
January 2021 | thestructuralengineer.org
govern, but rounding up by 0.5kPa in the area
loadings, q, will (at least for residential that was
only 1.5kPa to start with) have a perceptible
impact.
Or will it? Within living memory in the UK,
CP35 brought the loading down from 40psf
(1.92kPa) for residential (other than small
houses) to 1.5kPa. If we didn’t notice buildings
getting cheaper then, we won’t notice them
getting more expensive now!
It is sobering to refl ect that 1.5kPa
accommodates less than two people per
square metre; a third will exhaust the load
factor. Since many residents host social events
from time to time, some of which get really
crowded, there must be fl oors around that
owe their survival either to the forgiving nature
of timber in the short term or the diluting effect
of substantial permanent concrete.
So, 2kPa for all residential, back into line
with many other nations, could be viewed as
a rectification. It would also spare us some
head-scratching. For certain residential
subcategories, the current UK NA demands
2kPa, so users may already be adopting this
value. Nobody wants to design against a
patchwork of different loading.
Since we have been cheerfully designing
offices for 4 or even 5kPa for years, rounding
up from 2.5 to 3 should not startle the quantity
surveyor, and consistency between ‘upstairs’
and ‘downstairs’ office levels is a bonus. For
parking, the same increase might be viewed
differently: as overdue acknowledgement
that cars have been putting on weight
over the years. Explicit recognition that live
load reduction (LLR) may apply to parking
structures, for the vertical structure at least,
would sugar the pill.
Tidying up
In retail, EN 1991-1-1 retains an obsolete
distinction between department stores (5kPa)
and the rest (4kPa), while supermarkets
go unmentioned. Although many would
regard 5kPa as today’s de facto ‘industry
standard’, 4kPa remains tenable as a minimum
requirement.
As part of this exercise, staircases deserve
a fresh look. Escape routes can experience
16/12/2020 09:33
 A new approach to fl oor loading
TABLE 1: Loading categories for floors (and roofs)
Category UDL q PL Q Occupancy
(kPa) (kN)
0 0 0 Roof of a private or agricultural glasshouse or
polytunnel (not accessible to the public) with
maintenance, snow clearance and repair conducted
from the ground.
NOTE Loads from wind, snow and any suspended
planting or equipment need to be accounted for.
1 0.6 1 Roof with access only for the purposes of
maintenance and repair.
NOTE q acts on the vertically projected area of the
roof (may optionally be disregarded where the slope
exceeds 60°). Snow load substitutes for q, if higher.
An occupied roof is treated as a fl oor of the
appropriate category (2 or above).
2 2 2 Residential (including hospital wards and hotel
bedrooms, their bathrooms and circulation areas).
Stairway within private house or residential unit.
Catwalk for technical and maintenance staff
(including associated stairway or ladder).
3 3 4 Office.
Non-residential healthcare, education.
Hospitality with fixed seating or tables.
Laboratory with no heavy equipment.
Assembly area with fixed seating as in a church,
cinema or theatre.
Stairway (or horizontal escape passage) serving no
more than four levels of Category 2 or non-assembly
Category 3.
10 Parking (of cars and light vans in typical
arrangements with each space accessible) including
ramps.
4 4 4 Retail, library, gallery, hospitality/assembly without
fixed seating.
Balcony cantilevering from a fl oor in Category 2, 3
or 4.
Stairway (or horizontal escape passage) other than
those included under Category 2, 3 or 5.
5 5 5 Public space, sports hall, concourse, station
platform, footbridge.
Any area that may be subject to intense crowd
loading including ramps, stairways and circulation
areas.
Light storage.
5+ As required As required Storage, industrial, plant, exhibition hall.
(>5) (<5) Area accessible to heavy vehicles.
Heavy laboratory.
NOTE 1 These loadings provide for typical patterns of occupancy. Areas within a library or office that are
dedicated to compact book or document storage must be separately identified (as 5+). However,
small rooms for electrical distribution, cleaning equipment, etc. may be considered part of the
occupancies they serve.
NOTE 2 Each category will accommodate any of the occupancies listed against a lower category, except
that parking has a higher requirement for Q. Reminder: fire safety and escape provision to be
verified before changing occupancy.
NOTE 3 This table is for new design. For assessment of old structures, reduced loadings (e.g. q-values
0.5kPa lower) may be justifiable, depending on actual occupancy and effectiveness of control.
greater intensity of load than the fl oors
they serve, in a simultaneous evacuation
scenario like a fire drill. 4kPa seems a prudent PERHAPS THE
assumption for this somewhat exceptional MOST AWKWARD
design situation, but a lower figure, say
3kPa, should suffice where the number of CATEGORISATIONS
escapees is limited (fewer fl oors and/or purely ARE THOSE WITH
residential). 4kPa is also a prudent assumption
for cantilever balconies, no matter what
q GENERATED
occupancy they extend from, to cover the rare LARGELY OR
but real possibility that people might line the WHOLLY BY PEOPLE
37
thestructuralengineer.org | January 2021
VIEWPOINT Floor_TSE Jan 2021_The Structural Engineer 37
Opinion
railing while the head of state comes by.
Corridors might also be reconsidered;
nowadays they are as ‘movable’ as the
partitions and it makes no sense to distinguish
them from the spaces on either side (whence
their load must have come). In future, why
not regard corridors as part of the fl oors they
serve?
Perhaps the most awkward categorisations
are those with q generated largely or wholly
by people. When does an assembly become
a crowd? For many fl oors without obstacles to
movement, Category 4 will be appropriate, but
intense crowd loading would call for Category
5. Indeed, crowds can exceed 5kPa, as lift car
designers know, but exceptional situations are
part of what we have load factors to cover.
Treating 5kPa as an upper limit is justified
by long experience. By the same token,
a Category 4 fl oor will sustain a degree of
exceptional overload and the temptation to
upgrade ‘just in case’ may deserve to be
resisted.
The present article cannot remove the need
for judgement, but can provide a framework
for clear verdicts that owners can agree and
users can understand. Take, for example, a
space with ‘Laboratory’ written above the
entrance. It might belong in Category 3 (not
so different from a kitchen), Category 5+ (a
structural testing lab) or anywhere in between.
In situations like a sculpture court or the feet
of a mezzanine, ‘real’ point loads (as distinct
from tabulated Q-values) can act alongside
surrounding q and one another. The tabulated
Q-values might themselves require an uplift
where specialised needs apply. For instance,
the current UK NA demands 2.7kN (not 2) in
a (residential) billiard room and 7kN (not 5) in
a drill hall. (Quite what this 7kN represents is
not obvious. A field gun? For some of these
numbers, inherited from CP3 or even prewar
practice, a shake-out may be overdue.)
Inconveniently, and questionably, it also calls
for 4.5kN in corridors (probably the ghost of
what was once a round figure: 1kip (1000lbf)).
Perhaps, as suggested above, corridors might
simply and safely be treated as part of the
fl oors they serve.
Space does not allow full discussion of
LLR6. It is suggested that all, but only, the
occupancies listed against Categories 2, 3 and
4 in the table should qualify for discretionary
reduction of q by not more than 50%, with the
proviso that LLR is for vertical structure only
(not beams and trusses) if the load is from
assembly or parking. Borderless structural
safety would also require consensus on a
reduction formula.
Conclusion
The basic framework of standardised loading
categories with q-values graduated in whole
16/12/2020 09:33
 Opinion A new approach to fl oor loading
REFERENCES
numbers of kilopascals, associated with
Q-values subject to occasional upward-only
adjustment, offers a practical way forward.
It should be emphasised that the present
article has no official status. It is promoted
to the responsible committees, and to the
profession at large, not just for the UK but as
a pan-European solution with something to
offer the wider world. A new approach that is
straightforward, comprehensible, easy to apply
and fully compatible with EN 1990 and its
subsidiary Eurocodes.
Alastair Hughes
MA, MIStructE, MICE
Alastair Hughes is a retired structural
engineer, mainly involved with concrete,
steel and composite building design,
but latterly in the business of Eurocode
interpretation. For SCI, he has authored or
co-authored several design guides, including
P394 on wind actions. He represents
the Institution on BSI’s steelwork code
committee.
Now available
Expand your design horizons with
Computational engineering
Peter Debney takes the reader on a
practical, theoretical, and philosophical
journey through computational engineering
with a fresh, engaging, and often
humorous style.
Forewords from Chris Wise, Tristram
Carfrae, and John Leech.
Buy now:
www.istructe.info/computational
VIEWPOINT Floor_TSE Jan 2021_The Structural Engineer 38
1) British Standards Institution (2002) BS
EN 1991-1-1:2002 Eurocode 1. Actions on
structures. General actions. Densities, self-
weight, imposed loads for buildings, London:
BSI
2) British Standards Institution (2005) NA to
BS EN 1991-1-1:2002 UK National Annex to
Eurocode 1. Actions on structures. General
actions. Densities, self-weight, imposed loads
for buildings, London: BSI
3) Gordon A. (1972) ‘Designing for survival: the
President introduces his long life/loose fit/low
energy study’, RIBA Journal, 79 (9), pp. 374–376
4) Initiative PRB (2012) [Online] Available at:
www.initiative-prb.de/ (Accessed: December HAVE
2020) YOUR
5) British Standards Institution (1967) CP 3
SAY
Chapter V-1:1967 Code of basic data for the
design of buildings. Loading. Dead and imposed
loads, London: BSI [Superseded, withdrawn]
6) Hughes A. (2013) ‘The future of live load
reduction’, New Steel Construction, May/Jun, @IStructE
pp. 32–34 and Jul/Aug, pp. 32–34 tse@istructe.org #TheStructuralEngineer
38
January 2021 | thestructuralengineer.org
16/12/2020 09:33
 Aligning temporary works with the Digital Plan of Work Opinion

Viewpoint

Aligning temporary works

with the Digital Plan of Work
Temporary works can often be overlooked at the strategy stage of a project. However,
introducing temporary works digitally from the very beginning of a project delivers many
benefits, including the ability to help teams win tenders by providing more buildable solutions,
argues Duncan Reed of Trimble.

Introduction works coordinator (TWC) does not normally indicative schedule of the scope of temporary
In the UK, the design and management occur until a contractor is in place. So, should works required on a project.
of temporary works is covered by BS some form of a TWC, in an advisory or
5975:20191, which gives recommendations consultative role, be required from the start, as 1 Preparation and Briefing
and guidance on the procedural controls to be a contributor to these strategic decisions? Having outlined that there is a need for
applied to all aspects of temporary works in In digital terms, the temporary works temporary works, the involvement of a TWC
the construction industry. design can be considered as conceptual or temporary works professional to guide
This standard describes temporary works modelling. Volumes or placeholders can be the preparation of an adequate design brief
as ‘providing an “engineered solution” that is used to indicate where temporary works may will benefit any project greatly. This brief
used to support or protect either an existing be necessary. These can also provide an will define the scope of the works and also
structure or the permanent works during
construction, or to support an item of plant
or equipment, or the vertical sides or side-
slopes of an excavation during construction
operations on site or to provide access’.
Temporary works are often designed
by a separate engineering team from the
permanent works. It is vital that both sets
of engineers collaborate efficiently from the
beginning of a project to ensure that the
most appropriate temporary works scheme is
designed, to enable the permanent structure
to be erected.
One way that this can be achieved is for
both parties to work digitally and for temporary
works requirements to be properly considered
throughout the overall plan of work. The Digital
Plan of Work2 (DPoW), based on the eight
stages of the RIBA Plan of Work3, does not
currently consider temporary works at all,
but it gives a potential framework as to how
design teams could work together better so
this could be achieved (Figure 1).

0 Strategic Definition
The start of any project begins with defining
the scope at a strategic level and looking
at which option is best to be progressed to
fulfil the needs that have been identified: new
build, an extension or refurbishment works.
In all three cases, some form of temporary
ìFIGURE 1: Temporary
works will be required and temporary works works can we aligned with
expertise will, therefore, likely be needed from eight stages of Digital Plan
the outset. of Work
However, the appointment of a temporary

39
thestructuralengineer.org | January 2021

VIEWPOINT BIM fo_TSE Jan 2021_The Structural Engineer 39 15/12/2020 09:39

 Opinion Aligning temporary works with the Digital Plan of Work
the information needed to verify the works.
This can be defined digitally in the exchange
information requirements (EIR) as the
temporary works deliverables for the project
information model (PIM), as well as linking with
the requirements of The Construction (Design
and Management) Regulations4.
Similarly, the amount of information needed
to make a decision can be defined as the level
of information need, aligning the temporary
works requirements to the digital processes
defined in the new BS EN ISO 19650-
1:20185 standard. Determining information
requirements in this way ensures that just the
right data is defined from the start.
2 Concept Design
On larger or more complex schemes, the
appointment of potentially multiple TWCs
makes things more complicated. Therefore,
it becomes even more important that the
distribution of information is accurately
managed. This is where another regularly used
digital tool for permanent works designers
should be opened up to accommodate the
developing temporary works design – a
common data environment (CDE).
When temporary works information is
created digitally and held in a CDE, filters can
be applied to ensure that only the relevant
information is available to the TWCs. An
example could be if parts of the scheme
are not yet approved for erection (so not
‘Published’ data), or it is simply a part of the
project that a TWC is not responsible for
supervising.
Authorised signatories can also be assigned
to standard digital forms to ensure that the
scheme is signed off by the correct member(s)
of the temporary works team. For example,
by implementation, risk or design check
categories.
3 Spatial Coordination
As humans, our world is three-dimensional
and we generally see in 3D. So, it therefore
follows that 3D geometric information can give
a much better understanding of a design than
2D information. Developing a temporary works
scheme using 3D information ensures that
all the data is combined in one digital model,
providing various benefits:
Ò| Calculations can be embedded or linked to
a 3D model.
Ò| In a 3D model the viewing options are
infinite, allowing the TWC or erection team
to inspect any part of the scheme from any
angle, with isometric views to explain the
details of the design.
Ò| Drawings are still a vital data exchange
mechanism for the industry. Using 2D
drawings that derive from the data in a
VIEWPOINT BIM fo_TSE Jan 2021_The Structural Engineer 40
3D model ensures that the information is animations for a temporary works supervisor
completely coordinated. (TWS) to refer to, such as for the erection
Ò| Specifications do not need to be separate and dismantling sequence (which may not
from the main design, as they would have be the same), allows transparency that may
been previously. Instead, specifications can be lacking in a word-heavy document. Visual
be linked to a 3D model (Box 1), which method statements break down the barriers
means that they can never be lost; the of language too, allowing method statements
information is there for anyone to check at created in one country to be used anywhere in
any time. the world.
By creating a constructible model of the
4 Technical Design proposed scheme, it is also possible to ensure
Independent checking is a vital process the accurate procurement of the specific
for temporary works. Reviewing the 3D materials for the temporary works structure.
information and data can explain the design This could be the volume of aggregate required
and loading assumptions. Equally, a design for a piling mat or the number of components
produced digitally has the potential to be for a scaffolding scheme. By defining the
checked far more quickly and accurately than level of information need at each stage of the
by trawling through reams of handwritten or works, it is possible to have an accurate bill of
printed calculations. materials available from a model.
Analysis software can provide a visual
indication of the loads on a structure, allowing 6 Handover
quick initial checks to be carried out, and the While Handover in the RIBA PoW relates to
temporary works designer to review the most practical completion of an asset, I would argue
highly loaded areas in more detail. that for temporary works this actually could
To ensure that the independent check is relate to the point when the installation of the
only carried out at the appropriate stage, the temporary works structure is completed.
use of a CDE and changing the status of the This is probably the most critical part of the
design from ‘Work in Progress’ to ‘Shared’ temporary works process, as it is when the
would be the trigger for the check. In these approval to place loads onto the temporary
digital workfl ows, the design check certificate structure is given. It can only take place
remains the fundamental requirement for following the issue of a permit to load. In order
each and every temporary works item on a to issue this, the TWC or the TWS must be
project. The creation of a digital certificate is satisfied that the installation is in accordance
the gateway to allow the transfer of the data with the design.
associated with a temporary works design to As the installation can sometimes be a large
be moved within the CDE from ‘Shared’ to scaffold or inaccessible falsework, it can be
‘Published’. a daunting task to check that the scheme is
right. However, when temporary works have
5 Manufacturing and been created in a digital format, it is possible
Construction to use augmented reality (AR) applications
Risk assessments and method statements to overlay the digital model onto the physical
are a crucial part of every temporary works works and check the installation in detail.
scheme. The sequence of hold points, such Even without AR technology, the increased
as erection, loading or dismantling, are adoption of mobile devices on sites, together
fundamental parts of any temporary works with the use of QR codes or barcodes
design process and are unique to this part of attached to the temporary works structures,
the industry. allows the TWC or TWS to inspect the physical
Using the model to provide views or even structure with the ‘Published’ digital record to
Box 1. Linking specifications to a 3D model to share information
In Tekla Structures, for example, specification data, such as geometric data
or steel and timber grades, is automatically generated as components are
chosen. Additional information, such as classification data (e.g. Uniclass Tools
and Equipment codes), can also be added by means of user-defined attributes.
Product data sheets in PDF format can also be tagged to objects in models
hosted in Trimble Connect and shared, so they are accessible to anyone (for
free) without the need to have access to the original 3D authoring software.
40
January 2021 | thestructuralengineer.org
15/12/2020 09:39
 Aligning temporary works with the Digital Plan of Work Opinion

Conclusion
Although the DPoW is usually applied to
DEVELOPING A just the permanent works of a project,
there is no reason why there couldn’t
TEMPORARY WORKS be a Digital Plan of Temporary Works.
SCHEME USING 3D Applying this eight-stage plan with HAVE
YOUR
INFORMATION defined data requirements ensures that
all the participants understand the status SAY
ENSURES THAT ALL of the temporary works information on a
THE DATA IS project.
While some schemes may move
COMBINED IN ONE through several of these stages in a
DIGITAL MODEL few hours, the transparency that is
tse@istructe.org
@IStructE
created by aligning the temporary works #TheStructuralEngineer

scheme against these eight DPoW

enable easier checking.
Issuing the permit to load through the CDE
also gives all parties greater confidence in the
temporary works processes on the project.
7 Use
The in-use phase of a temporary works
scheme is very different from that of the
permanent works. For example, structural
integrity checks are required on a regular
basis and these must be recorded for legal
purposes. Having these processes digitised,
available via mobile devices and linked to the
project’s CDE allows far greater rigour to be
applied to them than was ever possible with
paper-based systems.
Real-time updates directly from the field,
perhaps supplemented with sensor data,
provide a much greater level of confidence
and the ability to share the information in
easily digestible project dashboards.
Finally, at the end of the requirements for
the temporary works scheme, the permit to
dismantle can also be issued through the CDE
to trigger the removal of the materials on site.
stages provides confidence to all parties
involved in a project. What’s more, the
common terminology of the DPoW
stages allows the rest of the team to
understand how far the temporary works
design has progressed by defining it in
terms commonly understood.
Although BS 5975 does not have
the same eight-stage plan, this article
shows that the actual requirements of
the temporary works standard can be
aligned to the DPoW relatively easily. It is
also possible to develop digital processes
in accordance with BS 5975 that are not
only aligned to the DPoW, but which can
be replicated and easily implemented
across the wide range of temporary
works solutions required on any project.
Duncan Reed
Duncan Read is Digital Construction
Process Manager at Trimble. For more
information about Trimble, visit
www.tekla.com/uk/solutions.
REFERENCES
1) British Standards Institution (2019) BS
5975:2019 Code of practice for temporary
works procedures and the permissible stress
design of falsework, London: BSI
2) NBS (s.d.) BIM Toolkit [Online] Available
at: https://toolkit.thenbs.com/ (Accessed:
December 2020)
3) Royal Institute of British Architects (2020)
RIBA Plan of Work 2020 [Online] Available
at: www.architecture.com/knowledge-and-
resources/resources-landing-page/riba-plan-
of-work# (Accessed: December 2020)
4) The Construction (Design and Management)
Regulations 2015, SI 2015/51
5) British Standards Institution (2019)
BS EN ISO 19650-1:2018 Organization and
digitization of information about buildings and
civil engineering works, including building
information modelling (BIM). Information
management using building information
modelling. Concepts and principles,
London: BSI

Enter a sketch in the next competition – deadline 4 January 2021

The Drawing Board
is The Structural
Engineer’s quarterly
sketching competition,
judged by Ron Slade
FIStructE of WSP.
Sketches must be: To take part, submit your
• hand drawn (no CAD, except for ‘guided freehand’) entries to: tse@istructe.org
• from a real project or assignment
Each published entry will receive
• at a suitable scale for publication (i.e. not too
a free single e-book from the
intricate/detailed).
Institution’s current list of titles.
Please also submit a short description (150 words) to put
the sketch into context. Background sketch by Kevin Lyons (Lyons O’Neill)

41
thestructuralengineer.org | January 2021

VIEWPOINT BIM fo_TSE Jan 2021_The Structural Engineer 41 15/12/2020 09:40

 Opinion Letters
Verulam
Readers’ letters, comments and queries
Art of persuasion
DAVID BRETT
Congratulations to Will Arnold and his
colleagues for a fascinating webinar on
‘The art of persuasion and collaboration’
as part of the Structural Awards trio of
webinars. This is a very tricky subject
which comes naturally to some, but is
difficult for others as it’s rarely taught. Also
practising it online is even more
challenging.
Important aspects which came out of
the webinar were humility and the ability to
listen carefully and comment objectively on
your colleagues’ ideas, which certainly
helps in arriving at a consensus. Climate
change and sustainability are relatively new
subjects for most building industry
professionals, so have introduced new
aspects to the conversation. Finding a
path acceptable to all the professional
team has become even more difficult, so
‘thinking time’ is critical.
Chairing or moderating meetings online
requires considerable skill and expertise,
so that even the most junior members of
the team can contribute to the
conversation, as there is no monopoly for
good ideas – particularly when IT and
artificial intelligence are involved. Avoiding
jargon – or at least explaining it – is
important, so that all members of the team
can follow the conversation easily.
Watching and listening to yourself online
can be an excruciating experience for
most people, so attention to lighting,
background and upper dress can be
important, as over 80% of your impact is
visual. A ‘sound check’ before the meeting
starts is also important, so that your
colleagues can hear you clearly. Being brief
and making every word count certainly
helps to contribute to the conversation.
I’ve found from experience that helping
your colleagues to identify the main issues
and examine possible solutions helps them
to whittle it down to a couple of viable
solutions (both of which may be
acceptable to you), and you can let them
choose the one they prefer. That way they
think it’s their idea so give it their full
backing, particularly if you congratulate
them on their choice!
Psychology plays an important part in
communication skills, so listening and
crediting your colleagues with good ideas
helps with persuasion and collaboration.
VERULAM_TSE Jan 2021_The Structural Engineer 42
HAVE
YOUR
SAY
Everyone likes praise and we can
usually rely on our regular
correspondent for positive feedback.
Watch the
webinar
You can view the webinar on
‘The art of persuasion and
collaboration’ on demand at
www.istructe.org/resources/
training/art-of-persuasion-and-
collaboration/.
Engineering in
the domestic
sector
ALISON CHURCH
Like Dave Pexton (Verulam, October 2020),
I am also reading the comments on
domestic engineering with interest as a
sole practitioner in the Northeast of
England. Dave’s experience of having a
stability frame vetoed by the client/builder is
one we can all sympathise with. It is hard
but vital that we walk away from projects
when our advice is not taken on issues we
see as critical; maybe this will get the
message across eventually.
With regards to the need for a stability
frame, I have taken the approach of using
Building Regulations Approved Document
A regulations on opening sizes as a starting
point for all domestic works. I appreciate
that strictly these are not applicable to all
projects, but I see them as a loosening of
the masonry codes to apply to small,
domestic-scale projects and this concept
can be easily understood by a lay client.
If we are working outside this guidance,
then additional stability is required. I have
tried many times to prove the lateral
capacity of retained masonry to British
42
January 2021 | thestructuralengineer.org
Send letters to…
All contributions to Verulam should be
submitted via email to: tse@istructe.org
Contributions may be edited on the grounds
of style and/or length by the Institution's
publishing department.
Standards, with very little success,
obviously because they are intended to
design everything masonry right up to
multistorey tower blocks.
It’s probably about 50:50 whether
clients are delighted to have a smaller
opening and save costs or whether they
opt for a stability frame.
With regards to how to load the
stability frame in a terrace, it is difficult
for the client to understand why they
have to do things differently from their
neighbours, but I find they generally
accept that they should be carrying their
part of the lateral loads once they
understand the concepts. It’s worrying
that the checkers within the councils are
not picking up on works which are
outside Approved Document A, and do
not provide additional stability – perhaps
this is something we can educate on…
I am aware that building control/
inspectors have also been a hot topic of
debate for Verulam, but one thing that
has not been discussed is the storage
of structural drawings and calculations.
Some councils I find very helpful and
supply a full set of information, even for
‘old’ projects; others will not supply
information or do not have the
information.
In one instance, I was told this is
because it was contracted out to a
private inspector, who has since closed,
and the documents are no longer
available. Worrying. Another council told
me they only store documents for 15
years. I imagine this is due to the legal
requirements for minimum storage.
This seems like a fair amount of time
until we start to consider the climate
emergency, and the unnecessary works
and materials we are carrying out or
using because we do not know the
structural layout as designed or built,
and we are having to make
assessments on what may or may not
have been built and the level of
workmanship.
We often talk about designing for
now, not considering potential future
uses that may never materialise, but
where does this leave us in the future
when we have no ‘spare’ capacity and
no drawings to work to.
I look forward to the comments of
others on these issues.
17/12/2020 10:51

Alison continues themes many
members have written in about. We
have touched on the storage of
structural records before [Ed. – see,
for example, Verulam, February 2018
and June 2018]. In the past,
accumulation of paper records may
have been burdensome. But is it so
difficult with cheap electronic
storage?
DAVID WILSON
An interesting letter from Dave Pexton. As
to his question of when a sway frame is
needed in a terraced block, I think the
answer starts with checking the
arrangement for compliance with Diagram
14 in the Building Regulations. If it does
not comply (and as there is no legislation
to prevent neighbours from doing the
same), then the design must provide
equivalent robustness.
Most of our correspondents seem to
think the same way, so no doubt
others facing the challenge can cite
Verulam in justification.
Golden rules
ANDREW HASTE
I considered with interest a golden rule
within Robert Tucker’s letter in the
November issue, reported to have been
previously published in The Structural
Engineer.
The golden rule read, ‘If more than
two-thirds of a primary structural wall
covering the width of a building is to be
removed, then some form of sway frame
needs to be introduced.’ This is the first
time I have come across this rule.
The deemed-to-satisfy
guidance within the
Building Regulations
2010 Approved
Document A – ‘Structure’ I WONDER
(applicable to England) HOW OUR PI
does not stipulate that a
sway frame needs to be
INSURERS WILL
introduced if in excess of RESPOND TO
two-thirds of a wall is to PROBLEMS
contain openings.
I would like to share an WITH BUILDING
example relevant to WORK FROM
assessing the need for
provision of a sway
THIS COVID-19
frame, based on a cavity PERIOD
masonry wall with
100mm inner and outer
leaves and a 100mm cavity width:
1) Imagine an external wall of 4.8m
overall length with a central 3.0m opening
leaving 0.9m length of wall on each side;
this may be seen to satisfy Approved
Document A Diagram 14, so could be
thestructuralengineer.org | October
VERULAM_TSE Jan 2021_The Structural Engineer 43
considered and approved by building
control without referring to a structural
engineer.
2) Then imagine the same wall but
5.3m overall length with a 3.5m central
opening, again leaving 0.9m length of
wall at each end; this is outside the
scope of Approved Document A, but
does the wall panel have any less
resistance to sway compared with the
original 4.8m long wall design? To me
there is no less sway resistance; in fact,
sway stability is probably enhanced
slightly due to the greater overall width.
It is well known within domestic
building construction that builders,
architects or homeowners sometimes
feel that structural engineers produce
structural solutions that are ‘too heavy’
or ‘over the top’.
As designers, we are today urged to
avoid unnecessary use of natural
materials to help reduce carbon
emissions. There is also the issue of
attempting to minimise costs and trying
to keep things simple.
All golden rules are necessarily
simplifications, but at least provide
a ‘first feel’. Can anyone else share
examples?
Remote
building control
ALAN MITCHELL
On many projects, engineers rely on the
approved/building inspector to ensure
that the works are constructed in
accordance with Approved Document A
of the Building Regulations and as
interpreted on the engineers’ drawings.
Our drawings often contain the wording:
‘all site works to be constructed to the
satisfaction of the building/approved
inspector’.
This year I understand that inspectors
in some areas have relied on builders
sending in photographs of certain
building works to show construction
compliance. Presumably this is to avoid
the inspector potentially being in
proximity to coronavirus. I question the
wisdom of this remote approach.
On a recent project, my company
designed cold-rolled purlins using
manufacturer A and we approved
drawings showing same. On a visit to
site, I noticed a bundle of purlins labelled
by manufacturer B. We eventually got
these removed from site and replaced
by the originally specified purlins.
I suspect that this issue would have
been addressed by the site building/
approved inspector in normal times.
However, I have concerns that there
may be surprises waiting for us in years
43
January 2021
2019
Letters Opinion
to come. I wonder how our professional
indemnity insurers will respond to
problems with building work from this
Covid-19 period.
There are a number of points in here.
First, it is not wise to overly rely on
building control departments to
assure compliance: they have limited
obligations and limited resources.
Second, there really is an industry-
wide safety concern that site
verification practice is not adequate:
there are too many cases of
structures being built in non-
conformance to design intent. These
trends are all exacerbated by the
current Covid-19 crisis and it seems
for the immediate future we must rely
on all parties ‘doing the right thing’.
Climate change
and population
growth
PETER WRIGHT
It is with great interest that I read the
current articles on engineering to reduce
our carbon footprint. For example, reusing
existing buildings may have some benefits,
but this surely can only be of use in
countries with a stable, or reducing,
population.
I started work in 1971 with Redpath
Dorman Long (Scunthorpe) and this year I
will retire. The world was quite different in
those days and it is hard to imagine how
anything happened without mobile phones
and computers.
Carbon emissions were barely
mentioned in the 1970s and the world was
on the verge of an energy crisis with OPEC
rationing oil supplies. This decade sparked
the North Sea oil and gas boom and the
demise of coal. Carbon emissions went
mostly unmentioned. Some
conservationists did express concern on
pollution, population and sustainability,
which today remain quite similar to those
of Greta Thunberg.
In 1971, the population of the world
stood at 3.8bn and today it is just below
8bn. By 2050, it is expected to reach
10bn. It is difficult for one to imagine the
natural resources required to support
another 2bn people on an already
overcrowded planet.
The UK is leading the way in achieving
carbon neutrality, but it is estimated that
we contribute only about 1% of the world’s
harmful emissions. However, Asia is
responsible for just under 50% of global
pollution, with China alone contributing
35% of this. While the West is investing in
renewable energy, China is building a
coal-fired power station every week or so.
15/12/2020 16:27
AKT II
Opinion Letters
The greatest challenge will be in
controlling climate-changing emissions on
a global basis for an ever-increasing world
population.
Peter’s letter highlights the difficulties
of prediction: who in the 1970s would
have predicted a world being able to
survive without oil? Given that we
can’t easily predict, we must err on
the side of extreme caution. We all
know that waste is unacceptable and
the least risky option is to strive for
sustainability. Moreover, we are one
world, we either work together or we
may be doomed together: so let’s pool
our expertise internationally.
A dissenting
voice
IAN WHITLAM
The Institution of Structural Engineers
appears to have been hijacked. Is the
Institution a learned society or is it a
political lobbying organisation? To declare
a ‘climate emergency’ is a political
statement and one that is not backed up
by real-world evidence.
For the last few months, articles in The
Structural Engineer have included
comments and statements relating to the
‘climate emergency’ that simply do not
stand up to critical review. Recent
statements such as: ‘This (nearly 1°C)
change in global temperature has
manifested itself though increased levels of
fl ooding, drought and fires’ and ‘1.5°C is
the expected tipping point beyond which
the effects of warming become extreme
and hard to control’ are opinions held by a
particular group of people. They are
presented as being statements of scientific
fact. The science of climate change is not
settled, but the Institution appears to be
suggesting that it is.
The Viewpoint article in the September
2020 issue of The Structural Engineer was
certainly nothing more than political
propaganda. At least one of the main
authors, and an author mentioned in the
list of references, appear to have active
connections with Extinction Rebellion.
I would urge members to read widely
about this issue, ideally from published
original research, and to make up their
own minds about the ‘climate emergency’,
rather than accepting at face value
everything that they might read in this
learned journal.
Verulam is happy to print dissenting
views and no doubt other readers will
respond to Ian’s. But as a starter, the
Institution has not been highjacked:
the general consensus of those
involved is that the scientific evidence
VERULAM_TSE Jan 2021_The Structural Engineer 44
all points one way and the risks of no
action outweigh the risk of action.
Nonetheless, Verulam would
concur with Ian that members be
encouraged to read up on the subject,
with the UN Intergovernmental Panel
on Climate Change (www.ipcc.ch/) a
good place to start.
Lastly, it is the construction
industry that has declared a climate
emergency, with practices across the
built environment professions signing
up in support of this position. The
Institution’s role is to support the
structural engineering profession in
adapting and preparing for the future.
Co-location,
Co-location,
co-location
DAVID BRETT
The excellent Viewpoint article, ‘Co-
location, co-location, co-location’, by
Peter Watkins in the November/December
issue of The Structural Engineer, raises a
conundrum which planners and
construction industry professionals have
been trying to resolve for decades.
Mixed development of industrial and
commercial buildings and housing to
economise on land usage is desirable but
difficult, as the objectives are diametrically
opposed. Housing requires ‘quiet
enjoyment’ for quality of life, whereas
industry and commerce requires the ability
for 24/7 activity and access.
For many decades, council estates,
social and private housing have been built
near or adjacent to industrial estates (or
vice versa) with varying degrees of
success. Slough Estates was an early
example, and was very successful
commercially, but incurred the wrath of the
Poet Laureate, Sir John Betjeman, who
famously wrote: ‘Come, friendly bombs,
and fall on Slough! It isn’t fit for humans
now. There isn’t grass to graze a cow.’
44
January 2021 | thestructuralengineer.org
One of the reasons for its success
was that the farsighted developers built
a community centre at an early stage of
the development to help encourage
people to relocate to Slough. Councils
have done something similar ever since
by reserving some council housing for
key workers, doctors, teachers, nurses,
etc., so that they don’t need to join the
housing list. Proximity to your place of
work is highly desirable so that you can
walk or cycle to work – particularly now
– and also helps to reduce your carbon
footprint.
Noise pollution is probably one of the
biggest problems, both fl anking and
airborne, and is difficult to resolve.
Flanking transmission requires
discontinuities in the structure and
fl oating fl oors, and airborne generally
requires mass and acoustic double
glazing and air-conditioning, which is not
practical or desirable for most housing.
User requirements for industrial and
commercial buildings also tend to
change quite frequently, whereas they
don’t for housing, so trying to combine
them in a single structure is challenging!
Of the mixed developments I’ve seen,
Hemel Hempstead appears to be one of
the most successful with superb
landscaping, pedestrian and cycle
paths, and traffic separation, all of which
help to establish a pleasant working and
living environment. The government has
also recently announced reforms to give
tenants a greater voice and strengthen
the regulators’ powers in the wake of the
Grenfell disaster, which may infl uence
the design of future developments.
The UK history of urban planning (or
lack of it) holds many lessons. While
not mainstream for us, it’s good to
know the background. How many of
us understand the structural
constraints linked to minimising
noise and vibration transmission?
Any o ers for simple primers?
AUKETT SWANKE ARCHITECTS
15/12/2020 16:27
 Sub
Diary
section
dates Main
At the
section
back

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

Diary dates
charge to attend. Registration
is not required except for the
Annual Business Meeting held
in January.

Industry workshops and CPD

courses are held at HQ unless Note that more current information may be available from
otherwise stated.
the Institution website: www.istructe.org/events

ONLINE CONFERENCES Price (early booking): Members: £255 + REGIONAL GROUPS

Wednesday 17 March
Young Researchers Conference
Price: Free
Further information: www.istructe.org/
events/hq/young-researchers-conference/
Registration: Opens in January 2021
Tuesday 27 April–Thursday 29 April
Stadia and long span structures
conference
Key speakers: Knut Göppert and Mark
Sheldon
14:00–16:30
Price (until 31 December 2020): Members:
£135.00 + VAT; Standard: £215.00 + VAT
Booking: www.istructe.org/events/hq/stadia-
and-long-span-structures-conference/
Wednesday 12 May–Thursday 13 May
Digital design and computation
e-conference
Keynote speaker: Professor Caitlin Mueller
13:00–17:00
Price (until 31 December 2020):
From £125 + VAT
Booking: www.istructe.org/events/hq/digital-
design-computation-conference/
ONLINE CPD COURSES
Monday 1 February
Historic timber structures: assessment
and reuse
Dr Keerthi Ranasinghe
10:00–17:30
Price (early booking): Members: £255 +
VAT; Standard: £335 + VAT
Booking: www.istructe.org/cpd-2021
Wednesday 3–Thursday 4 February
Temporary works design
Ray Filip
10:00–17:30
Price (early booking): Members: £415 +
VAT; Standard: £545 + VAT
Booking: www.istructe.org/cpd-2021
Thursdays, 11 February–4 March
Conceptual design for structural
engineers: an introduction
Oliver Broadbent
10:30–12:30
VAT; Standard: £335 + VAT
Booking: www.istructe.org/cpd-2021
Tuesday 16 February
Lateral stability to building structures
Chris O’Regan
14:00–18:00
Price (early booking): Members: £125 +
VAT; Standard: £195 + VAT
Booking: www.istructe.org/cpd-2021
Thursday 18 February
Eurocode 8: seismic design of buildings
Professor Costas Georgopoulos
10:00–17:30
Price (early booking): Members: £255 +
VAT; Standard: £335 + VAT
Booking: www.istructe.org/cpd-2021
Tuesday 2 March
Dealing with domestic clients
Rob Langley
13:00–17:00
Price (early booking): Members: £145 +
VAT; Standard: £195 + VAT
Booking: www.istructe.org/cpd-2021
WEBINAR
Wednesday 24 February
Latest innovations in designing seismic-
resilient steel structures
Fabio Freddi and Massimo Latour
13:00–14:15
Price: Members £45.50 + VAT; Standard
£70 + VAT
Registration: www.istructe.org/events
ONLINE LECTURE
Wednesday 27 January
The Zagreb earthquake: a virtual
reconnaissance mission
Dr Emily So and colleagues
18:00–19:15
Price: Free
Registration: www.istructe.org/events/hq/
the-zagreb-earthquake-livestream/
Regional Group Committee members should submit details of forthcoming events to:
regionsupport@istructe.org
Chester and North Wales
Thursday 7 January
Repair and conservation of masonry bridges
David Wiggins
18:00–19:30
Registration: www.istructe.org/events/chester-
north-wales/repair-and-conservation-of-
masonry-bridges/
INTERNATIONAL
CONFERENCES
Seattle, WA, USA
CANCELLED
SEI Structures Congress 2021
Washington State Convention Center,
Seattle, WA, USA
Further information:
www.structurescongress.org/
Sheffield, UK
Wednesday 1–Friday 3 September 2021
Eurosteel 2021 (postponed from 2020)
The Diamond, University of Sheffield, UK
Registration: Re-opens on 1 January 2021.
Delegates who have already registered for
September 2020 will be eligible for a full refund.
Further information:
https://eurosteel2020.com/
Cape Town, South Africa
Monday 5–Wednesday 7 September 2022
SEMC 2022: Eighth International Conference
on Structural Engineering, Mechanics and
Computation
Cape Town, South Africa
Deadline for special session proposals: 30
June 2021
Deadline for submission of abstracts: 30
September 2021
Further information: www.semc.uct.ac.za
Contact: alphose.zingoni@uct.ac.za

45
thestructuralengineer.org | January 2021

Diary_TSE Jan 2021_The Structural Engineer 45 16/12/2020 11:21

 At the back Spotlight on Structures

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

The latest issue of Structures (Volume 28, December 2020)
is available at www.sciencedirect.com/journal/structures/vol/28.
Editor-in-Chief, Leroy Gardner, has selected a paper entitled
‘Study on the cyclic bending behaviour of CFRP strengthened
full-scale CHS members’ as his ‘Featured Article’ from this issue.
The article will be available free of charge for six months.

Editor-in-Chief’s
Featured Article
Study on the cyclic bending
behaviour of CFRP strengthened
full-scale CHS members
T. Tafsirojjamana, Sabrina Fawziaa,
David P. Thambiratnama, Xiao-Ling
Zhaob
a
School of Civil and Environmental
Engineering, Faculty of Science and
Engineering, Queensland University of
Technology, Brisbane, Australia
b
Department of Civil and Environmental
Engineering, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia
Abstract
Circular hollow steel (CHS) members
have been regarded as structural
elements of choice for use in civil
infrastructure. Despite the risk of
seismic damage of steel structures
during an earthquake due to its cyclic
characteristics, studies on
the cyclic strengthening of
CHSs have been minimal.
In the present study, a new
finite element (FE) modelling
approach is developed and
applied to study the cyclic
performance of carbon
fibre reinforced polymer
(CFRP) strengthened
CHS specimens. The
modelling techniques are
first validated using results
from the authors’ previous
experimental parametric
ntal work. A detailed par
arame
a tri ric
c
study is then
hen carried out to evaluate tthe
h
he
effects of CFRP bond length, CFRP layerr
numbers, ratio of thickness of CFRP to
thickness of CHS, CHS member diameter-
to-thickness ratio and steel grade on the
cyclic performance of the CFRP strengthened
Call for papers
CHS members. Results confirm the SEMC 2022: Eighth
significant effects of these parameters on the International Conference
cyclic performance of CFRP strengthened on Structural Engineering,
CHS members. The efficiency of CFRP Mechanics and Computation,
strengthening increases with an increase 5–7 September 2022, Cape
in the ratio of the thickness of CFRP to the Town, South Africa
thickness of CHS and also with an increase
SEMC 2022 aims to bring
in the diameter-to-thickness ratio of CHS
together academics, researchers
specimens. Conversely, the efficiency of CFRP
and practitioners in all areas of
strengthening reduces with an increase in the
structural engineering and related
steel grade. Moreover, the ultimate moment
disciplines (including mechanics
capacities obtained from the FE analyses
of materials and structures, and
of the bare and CFRP strengthened CHS
associated computation), to
specimens agree reasonably well with the
review recent achievements in
theoretically predicted values.
the advancement of knowledge
and understanding in these areas,
Ò| Read the full paper at https://doi.
share the latest developments, and
org/10.1016/j.istruc.2020.09.015
address the challenges that the
present and the future pose.
Authors are invited to prepare
an abstract of 200–300 words,
and submit this to the Conference
Editor, Prof. Alphose Zingoni of the
University of Cape Town, via email
(alphose.zingoni@uct.ac.za).
Abstract submission deadline:
30 September 2021
Further information:
www.semc.uct.ac.za

Register for alerts

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

46
January 2021 | thestructuralengineer.org

Spotlight_TSE Jan 2021_The Structural Engineer 46 16/12/2020 09:34

 Prepare your business for
post-lockdown success with
FindanEngineer.com

Maximise your exposure to reach potential customers locally. Find an engineer

is the UK’s only directory dedicated to structural engineers consulted by
thousands of potential customers.

This unique directory has been helping the industry gain clients, identify
competitors and source suppliers for over 20 years.

Subscribe for only £120 + VAT per year at:

FindanEngineer.com

Online CM exam
preparation course
20% discount until 31 December

Prepare for your Chartered Membership Exam

wherever you are in the world.

You will learn to:

• Plan your own preparation for the exam
• Recognise what is required to pass each module
• Create viable solutions to exam questions
• Use conceptual tools to develop answers
• Identify any gaps in your preparation

Get started at
istructe.org/onlineexamprep

TSE.Jan21.047.indd 47 15/12/2020 10:16

 Att the
th k
he back
ba
ack Th
he Drawing
The Drraw
wing
g Board
Boa
B ard
d

The Drawing Board

Judged by Ron Slade.

This month Ron has chosen a sketch submitted by Thomas Moll of Arcadis in The
Netherlands. Thomas receives an e-book of his choice from the Institution bookshop.

Thomas’s sketch shows the structural Phase 2: Construction of the

challenge he faced when working on
the design for a new auditorium in The
Netherlands. To enable the
construction of the auditorium, an
existing parking deck between two
buildings had to be demolished.
However, the deck was an integral
part of the stability of the buildings.
Phasing of the construction works
was crucial to ensure safe
construction, so he prepared this
sketch to show the construction
sequence and shared it with the client
in the early stages of design. It was
subsequently included in the tender
package.
Translation of the Dutch descriptions
on the sketches:
Phase 1: Existing situation (the
starting point)
basement slab and additional
structural provisions to prevent
floating of the structure in the
temporary building phase (the site has
a very high water table)
Phase 3: Demolition of the existing
parking deck
Phase 4: Installation of new
foundation piles through old and new
basement slabs
Phase 5: Construction of the timber
roof structure
Phase 6: Construction of the steel-
framed auditorium followed by the
timber floors
Thomas uses simple but elegant
hand-drawn additions on repeated
backgrounds; you don’t have to be
able to read Dutch to understand the
intended process.
Ron Slade
BSc(Eng), CEng, FIStructE
Ron Slade is Structural Director at
WSP. Ron received his BSc First
Class Honours in Civil Engineering
at City University, London and became a
Chartered Member of the Institution of
Structural Engineers in 1971 when he was
awarded the Institution’s A.E. Wynn prize. He
was first appointed as a director in 1982.
Ron is also the author of Sketching for
Engineers and Architects, published by
Routledge.

48
48
January
J nu
an arrry 2021
ua
anuary 20
2002
21
2 tth
thestructuralengineer.org
hes
stttrrruc
1 | thestructuralengineer.
s ctttu
c ura
u alen
a engin
ine
nee
eer
er.o
r or
org
rg

THE DRAWING BOAR_TSE Jan 2021_The Structural Engineer 48 15/12/2020 09:41

 Telephone: +44 (0)20 7880 6245 Email: structuralengineer@redactive.co.uk Products & Services

ESAB launches high-performance,

multi-process welding systems for
extreme environments
For enhanced multi-process welding capabilities and portability in harsh industrial environments,
ESAB Welding & Cutting Products has introduced its Aristo® 500ix inverter-based welding
power source and Robust Feed Pulse and Robust Feed U6 wire feed systems.
The Aristo 500ix provides outputs for MIG/MAG, flux cored, MMA and TIG welding, offering
maximum output of 500A/39V at 60% duty cycle and a 100% duty cycle rating at 400A/39V.
When paired with Robust Feed Pulse or U6, users can weld with solid wire up to 2.0mm and
cored wire up to 2.4mm. These feeders offer a 50mm dinse terminal, while the Robust Feed U6
also enables gouging.
‘Many fabricators want the benefits of pulsed MIG welding and advanced wire control, but they
hesitate because of harsh welding conditions,’ says Arne Lagerkvist, Global Product Manager,
Heavy Industry Welding Equipment, ESAB. ‘The Aristo 500ix and Robust Feed system puts those fears to rest.’
Further information: ESAB
(web: www.esab.com; tel: 01992 768515)

Mabey Hire expands its groundworks solutions in

its MyConstruct portal
Introduced in 2020 as a means of providing its customers with instant access to
hundreds of pre-engineered groundworks designs, Mabey Hire has now added
even more standard solutions to its intelligent MyConstruct portal. Designed to help
reduce the turnaround time from enquiry to delivery of the equipment to site for
low-risk excavations, it includes a bank of project designs for low-risk groundworks
schemes. The system’s original 500 standard solutions featured trench sheets and
bracing frames for four-sided excavations. However, 150 new designs have been
added for trench and manhole boxes and it also now incorporates pre-engineered
designs for all examples of simple groundworks schemes. MyConstruct can be
used at the tender stage of a project and for reactive work, and project designs are
downloadable to customers. Every scheme design is a Standard Solution defined under BS 5975:2019 section 13:10.
More complex or high-risk schemes can be sent to Mabey’s experts for a bespoke temporary works design.
Further information: Mabey Hire
(web: www.mabeyhire.co.uk)

REINFORCED CONCRETE DETAILING

WANT TO ADVERTISE
z R.C. Detailing Specialists
YOUR PRODUCTS & z Established 1980
Extensive experience
SERVICES HERE?
z
z Proven reliability
z Large capacity
Contact 020 7880 6245 or email
structuralengineer@redactive.co.uk Paul Benham Ltd
The
The
Th
SStruct
ruu
TheStructuralEngi
TheS
Th
heStru
heStruct
heStruc
he flag
fla
flagship
neer
ip publica
publication
on of The Institution of Structural Engineers
Civil & Structural Engineering Draughting Service

mail@paulbenhams.co.uk
www.paulbenhams.co.uk
01273 730956

49
thestructuralengineer.org | January 2021

TSE.Jan20.049-050.indd 49 10/12/2020 14:33

 Services Directory Telephone: +44 (0)20 7880 6245 Email: structuralengineer@redactive.co.uk

SOFTWARE STRUCTURAL DESIGN & CAD DRAWING

QUIKFRAME TONY DOYLE ASSOCIATES LTD

COMPUTER AIDED DESIGN & DRAWING
THE FASTEST, EASIEST
2D ANALYSIS PROGRAM

1st and 2nd order, elastic critical load.

Built in optional powerful design modules Au t o CAD D r a u g h t i n g S e r v i c e s
EC3, EC5, BS5950, BS5268
Established in 1988, we are a team of

GET THE JOB DONE! professional technicians with ofÀces in

Weston super Mare, providing an efÀcient
VISIT on-demand service for our clients

www.quiksoft.co.uk - RC Detailing Specialists -

- Structural Drawing GA·s & Details -
and download your free trial - Bespoke Drawings for all Applications -

Email: sales@quiksoft.co.uk
Tel: 01934 808468
or call 08456 250 280 www.tonydoyleassociates.co.uk
ANALYSIS & DESIGN ANALYSIS & DESIGN

SCALE STRAP software for analysis and

design of cold formed, concrete, steel
and pre & post-tensioned structures.
Structural Calculations
Fine GEO5 geotechincal software for
Introducing SCALE 5 for iPad, including: soil structure interaction, slope stability,
earth pressure, sheeting & pile design.
● Over 600 SCALE proformas, for neatly composed pages of
structural engineers' calculations, showing full calculations Trial downloads at www.sigma-x.net
for both Eurocodes & British Standards, pdf & Word output. UK: +44 (0) 203 603 1442
● LUCID for reinforced concrete detailing, and SPADE for Ireland: +353 (0) 86 85 45 425
steelwork, masonry and timber component detailing. www.sigma-x.net
● NL-STRESS for 2D/3D, elastic, plastic, and stability
analysis, with linking between analysis and design, and ANALYSIS & DESIGN

3D visualisation of results.

● 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

50
January 2021 | thestructuralengineer.org

TSE.Jan20.049-050.indd 50 10/12/2020 14:33

 Telephone: +44 (0)20 7324 2755 Email: tsejobs@redactive.co.uk Recruitment

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 suɉciently diverse to Äll any vacancy, regardless of seniority.

Our Äve options oɈer various levels of targeting and visibility. These include:

£379 £879
DIGITAL DIGITAL & PRINT

Job board ad live for 1 month, Job board ad live for up to 3 months,
with logo with logo
Featured in top section of search
results
Included on two job newsletters
£1,575 ¼ page in The Structural Engineer
RAPID RESPONSE

Job board ad live for 1 month,

with logo
Featured in top section of search
results
Call 020 7324 2755
Included on two job newsletters or email
¼ page in The Structural Engineer tsejobs@redactive.co.uk
Targeted email sent to matching to book your advertising today.
candidates

“
We needed to recruit an additional structural engineer for our growing Berkshire-
based business, and looked to the Institution to find the right candidate. I was
pleased to learn that their recruitment service has been streamlined. The new
options (five, with a further opportunity to create a bespoke package) offer
various levels of exposure and targeting.
We went with the competitively-priced ‘Digital & Print’ option. Our vacancy was
immediately added to The Structural Engineer Jobs Board, and was followed up
with a print advertisement in The Structural Engineer. We received response in

”
two spikes – coinciding with the digital and print pushes - and were delighted
with the quality and quantity of response. Having successfully recruited one of
the short-listed candidates, we’ll certainly use the service again.
John M Staves, Managing Director,
Michael Aubery Partnership

51
thestructuralengineer.org | January 2021

TSE.Jan21.049-050.indd 51 14/12/2020 17:32

 The Designer’s First Choice of Engineering Software

Building
Dessign Suite

At the corre of thee Masa te

terSSer
e ie
es
Building Dessig
ignn Su
Suit
ite
e is
i a sta
tate of
the art modellin ng en nvi
viro
r nm
ro nmen
ennt
compriseed of
of::

Ma
ast
sterFr
t ramame
e Pro
Ma
M ast
s errKey Wi
Wind
nd Ana
naly
lysi
lysi
sis
Mast
Ma ster
ste CA
erCAD BI
CAD BIM
M

He
H ere
e you
o hav a e th
thee flexi
xibi
xib lity
ty to
mode
mo del an
anyt
ythi
yt hing
hin fro
ng om Mu ult
l i-sttor
o ey
frram
mes
es,, po
port
rtal
al fra
ame
m s;s to th he mo ost
s
comp
co mple
lexx sp
ports sta adi
d a.

“Mas
“M a te
asterS
rS
Ser
erie
i s is
ie i bri
rill
llia
lliant
nt.. Ev
Ever
e y
day we are savini g de
desisign
gnn tim
ime.
e.””
e.
ANT
NTONY
ONY FREEMAN
Andy Mann Sttrucctur
tural
a Des
De ign
gn Lt
Ltd
d

Civil & Structural Computer Services Ltd.

Visit our website to start your 3 Castle Street, Carrickfergus, BT38 7BE, UK
FREE 14 DAY TRIAL or to BOOK A DEMO info@masterseries.com

www.masterseries.com +44 (0)28 9036 5950

TSE.Jan21.052.indd 52 14/12/2020 17:24