Sample Structural Audit Report

Structural As
ssessment and Audit

A Report November,, 2014
TABLE OF CONTE
ENT
1.0. EXECUT
TIVE SUMM
MARY 5
2.0. AL
GENERA 7
3.0 INVESTIIGATIVE AND

A FIELD ACTIVITIE
ES FOR ST
TRUCTURA
AL
ASSESSSMENT 9
3.1 es
Objective 9
3.1.1 Structura
al Safety an
nd Servicea
ability 9
3.1.2 Cost Min

nimisation 10
3.2 Methodo
ology 10
3.2.1 Classifica
ation Of As
ssessment P
Proceduress 11
3.2.2 Assessm
ment Levelss 11
4.0 STRUCT SESSMENT OF THE EXISTING

TURAL ASS
NEP BU
UILDING 14
4.1 Methodss Of Data Ac

cquisition 14
4.1.1 Study Off Original Documents

D 14
4.1.2 Site Insp

pections 15
4.1.3 Materials
s Testing 16
4.1.3.1 Non-Desstructive Te
ests 16
1 Schimdt Hammer Tests

4.1.3.1.1 T 16
4.1.3.2 Destructiive Tests On

O Concrete
e 19
1 Coring Testing
4.1.3.2.1 T At The
T Existing
g NEP
Building 19
4.1.3.3 Destructiive Test On

n Steel 21
4.2 Methodss Of Structural Analysiss 21
5.0 ANALYSSIS OF RES UCTURAL ASSESSM

SULTS OF THE STRU MENT
OF THE EXISTING NEP BUIL
LDING 23
5.1 Columnss 23
© Copyright AIM Consultantss Ltd 2014 All Riights Reserved. Page 2 of 34
AIM/NG2014 40029/L/SOJ/06
Structural As
ssessment and Audit
5.2 Slabs 24
5.3 Piles 24
6.0 ONS
RECOMMENDATIO 28
6.1 g of Columns And She

Jacketing ear Walls 28
6.1.1 Reinforce
ed Concrette Jacketing
g Of Colum
mns And
Shear Walls
W 29
6.1.1.1 The Minimum Speccifications For

F Jacketin
ng Of Colum
mns 29
6.1.1.2 The Advaantages an

nd Disadvan
ntages Of Reinforced
R Jacketing of
o
Columnss And Sheaar Walls 30
6.1.2 Fibre Reinforced Po

olymer Jackketing Of Columns
C And
Shear Walls
W 31
6.1.2 .1 The Adva ymer Jacketing Of Columns

antages of Fibre Reinfforced Poly
And Shear Walls 32
6.2 Jacketing
g of Slabs 32
7.0 LIMITAT
TIONS 33
List of Figures
F
Figure: 1 - NEP EXISTING

E ACCOMMO
A ODATION BUILDING
B 8
Figure: 2 - TYPICAL REINFO ACKETING OF A REIN

ORCED JA NFORCED
CONCRRETE COLLUMN 30
Figure: 3 - TYPICAL FIBRE REINFORC

CED POLY
YMER JACK
KETING
OF REINFORCEDD CONCREETE COLUM
MNS 31
List of Tables
T
Table 1 - SUMMAARY OF SC
CHMIDT HA
AMMER TE
ESTS RESU
ULTS
ON COL
LUMN 18
Table 2 - STRUCTTURAL ELEMENTS CHOSEN

C FOR CORIN
NG
TESTS 20
Table 3 - SUMMAARY OF TH
HE RESULT
TS OF COR TS CONDUCTED
RING TEST
ON SEL
LECTED ST
TRUCTURAAL ELEMEN
NTS OF TH
HE EXISTIN
NG
NEP BU
UILDING 21

AIM/NG2014 40029/L/SOJ/06
Structural As
ssessment and Audit
Table 4 - SUMMAARY OF TH
HE FAILED COLUMNS S AFTER STRUCTURRAL
ANALYS
SIS OF THE
E EXISTING
G NEP BUIILDING WITH PROPO
OSED
NEW LO
OADS 23
DICES
APPEND
Appendiix 1 : THE G NEP BUILDING ARC

E EXISTING CHITECTU
URAL PLAN
NS
Appendiix 2 : PRO
OPOSED CONCEPT
C A
ARCHITEC
CTURAL PL
LANS
Appendiix 3 : SCH
HMIDT HAM
MMER TES
STING RES
SULTS
Appendiix 4 : COR
RING TEST
TS REPOR
RT
SULTS OF STEEL TENSILE STR

Appendiix 5 : RES RENGTH T
TESTS ON STEEL
S
SAM
MPLES EXTTRACTED FROM STRRUCTURALL ELEMEN
NTS IN
THE
E EXISTING
G NEP BUILDING
Appendiix 6 : STR
RUCTURAL
L MODELLIING AND CALCULAT
C ION RESULTS
FOR
R COLUMN
NS AND SH
HEAR WALL LS
Appendiix 7 : STR
RUCTURALL MODELLIING AND CALCULAT
C ION RESULTS
FOR
R SLABS
Appendiix 8 : STR
RUCTURALL MODELLIING AND CALCULAT
C ION RESULTS
FOR
R PILES
Appendiix 9 : RET
TROFITTIN
NG DETAILS
S

AIM/NG2014 40029/L/SOJ/06
Structural As
ssessment and Audit
1.0 EXECUT
TIVE SUMM
MARY
Total E & P Nigeria a Limited h

has appoin
nted M/S A
AIM Consultants Limite
ed as
Consulta ant for the NEP- Existing Acc commodation Building Revam mping
project.
ect Scope of
The proje o Work con
nsists of the
e following::
1. Viisual assesssment of th he existing building

2. Sttructural assessmentt of the capacity
c off the existting buildin
ng to
ac
ccomodate the new arrchitectural design
3. Deetailed design for all thhe structura
al modificattions to be done on exxisting
bu
uilding to addapt it to the new archhitectural de
esign
4. Es
stablish a life safety reeport on thee multi-purp
pose buildinng.
AIM Con
nsultants Limited
L hass accepted the offer and the project
p Scope of
Work.
Total E & P Nigeria Limited d has mandated M/SS AIM Consultants Limited
through its
i job speccification do
ocument 42
28-CSP-SOW-100-STR R rev02, to carry
out certa
ain function
ns,amongstt others. That mandate
e is extracte
ed below
“The COONSULTANT T shall carrry out a com

mprehensivve structura
al assessme ent of
the building Structure. The COONSULTAN NT shall preferably use
e non-destru
uctive
methodss to perforrm this asssessment.. In case destructive methodss are
required,, the CONSSULTANT sshall seek the t Compa any’s approoval before using
these me ethods.
ommended methods are :

The reco
• Viisual inspecction
• Ph
hysical mea asurement with its loca alisation
• Sc
chmidt Ham mmer test
• Magnetic dettection and sizing of reeinforcement bars
• Ulltrasonic Cooncrete tessting
• Cooring of existing concrrete followe
ed by crushing of cylind
ders
This asssessment shall enab ble the CONSULTA

C ANT to ha ave a com mplete
understa
anding of th
he existing SStructure of
o the building, the exis
sting dead loads
and the load path. ……………
… …………… ……………… ……………… ………………..
In parallel to the assessmen
a nt of the existing
e stru
ucture of the building
g, the
CONSUL LTANT sha all confirm if the Arcchitectural Design en nvisaged foor the
revampinng of th he building is ach hievable in terms of Structure.
………… …………....
This Phaase of the works
w shall be comprrehensivelyy addressed d in a Structural
Assessmment report. ”
uctural aud
This stru dit and asssessment report has adhered strictly to
o this
mandatee.

AIM/NG2014 40029/L/SOJ/06
Structural As
ssessment and Audit
Original documentts had be een perus sed thorouughly and carefully.V Visual
ons had bee
inspectio en carried o
out on the existing
e NE
EP accomm modation bu uilding
to locatee and ide entify dama aged or distressed
d structural elements. Non
destructive and desstructive te
ests had be een carried out on se elected structural
elementss in the building to dettermine the
e extent of corrosion,d
distress andd loss
of streng
gth in concre
ete and ste
eel.
Structuraal performaance of the building hadh been a

analysed ussing modelss that
reliably represent
r th
he propose ed future loaading on th
he building,, the behavvior of
the struccture and the resisitancce of its com
mponents.
Critical areas
a have been iden ntified and recommendations are
e made forr their
repairs and/or
a retro
ofitting.
essment wa
The asse as carried o
out based on
o internatio
onal standa
ards.

AIM/NG2014 40029/L/SOJ/06
Structural As
ssessment and Audit
2.0 GENERA
AL
The buildding consid

dered for the presentt Scope of Work is part of a larrger plot
rented by
b the Com mpany know wn as “New w Eastern Pole” (NEP). The re esidential
building was
w formerrly used for accommod dation.
The NEP P site is thhe former Russian embassy, lo ocated at 5-8

5 Molade e Okoya
Thomas Street, in Victoria
V Isla
and, in Lagos State, N
Nigeria. The
e project is situated
close to EKO 1 and d EKO 2 tow wers, to the
e South and
d on the oth
her side of the Itirin
Canal. NEP
N is designed for T TEPNG witth different usages, users and activities.
a
The resuult will be co
onstruction of 12,295 sqm of building spacee and 5,665 5 sqm of
refurbish
hment on a 86.28 acres land(Fig 1).
Existing buildings on the plot in

nclude
• A residential building (S
Structural + Asbestos assessmen
a nt)
• An ock (Future demolition – Asbestoss assessme
n Office blo ent)
• A service blo
ock (Future demolition – Asbestoss assessmeent)
• An
nnexes (As sbestos asssessment)
The exissting NEP building hhas 10-floo ors with a penthouse e floor. Th
he floors
accommodate seve eral blocks o
of flats. Floor utilization is as follo
ows:
• First floor: Open space//Atrium/Offices

• Tyypical Floorr (2nd – 8th):: 8nos Stud dio Apartme ents with din
ning, kitche
en and
toilet/bath
h(per floor).
• Niineth Floor:: 8nos Stud dio Apartme ents with din
ning, kitche
en and
toilet/bath
h(per floor)
• Peenthouse Floor
F : Laun
ndry,Lift ma achine roomm
Stairrcase to the e roof
The futurre use of th

he building w
will be for:
• Floor 1(Mezz zanine)-Sta

aff Club
• Floor 2-Crecche/Kinderggarden
• Floor 3-Arch
hives 01
• Floor 4-Arch
hives 02
• Floor 5-Arch
hives 03
• Floor 6-Arch
hives 04
• Floor 7-IST Storage/Wa
S arehouse
• Floor 8- CSPP Office Space 01
• Floor 9- CSPP Office Space 02
• SP Office Space 03
Floor 10- CS

AIM/NG2014 40029/L/SOJ/06
Structural As
ssessment and Audit
Fig 1: NEP
N Existin
ng Accomm
modation B
Building

AIM/NG2014 40029/L/SOJ/06
Structural As
ssessment and Audit
3.0 INVESTIG
GATIVE AN
ND FIELD ACTIVITIE
A S FOR STR
RUCTURA
AL ASSESS
SMENT
3.1. Objective
es
In generaal structuraal assessm ment is a process

p to determinee, how relia able the
existing structure is able to carry current and
a future lloads and to
t fulfil its ta
ask for a
given timee period.
Structurall assessme ent can b be initiated, when there has beenb a change in
resistance
e,such as structural
s deterioration
n due to tim
me-dependiing processses (e.g.
corrosion,fatigue) or o structurral damag ge by acccidental actions.
a S
Structural
assessme ent can be e initiated a
also when there will be a chang ge in loadiing (e.g.
increasedd traffic load
d) or an exttension of th
he design working
w life.
The strucctural asses ssment andd revampingg of the exiisting NEP building is initiated
due to a change
c in lo
oading (e.g. increased
d traffic load
d)
The first step

s of the assessmen
a nt process must
m always be the cle
ear specificcation of
the assesssment objjective. This is essen ntial to iden
ntify the most significcant limit
states.Ass sociated with
w the limit statess are the structurall variabless to be
investigatted and withh those the assessmeent procedure to be applied.
A wide ra
ange of diffferent asse
essment procedures exists
e with varying co
omplexity
and the choice
c of the
t approp
priate proce
edure depe
ends highlyy on the specified
s
requireme
ents of asseessment.
e two main objectives

There are o tto conduct assessmen
nt of existin
ng structures:
• the
e assurance
e of structural safety and
a serviceaability and
• the
e minimisation of costss.
3.1.1 Structura
al safety an
nd serviceability
The main n task of assessmen

a nt is to enssure that tthe structure or partss of the
structure do not fail under loading. The asssessment is carried out
o for ultim
mate limit
states,which are :
• losss of equiliibrium of tthe structure or partss of it as a rigid bo ody (e.g.

ove erturning)
• attaainment of the maximum resistan nce capacitty
• transformation n of the stru
ucture or paart of it into
o a mechanism
• insstability of th
he structuree of part of it
• sud dden chang ge of the asssumed stru uctural systtem to a ne
ew system (e.g.
(
sna apthrough)
A reduction of serrviceability may lead to a limitation of use u and therefore
t
serviceabbility assessment mig ght become e necessary. Service eability limit states
include :
• loc
cal damage which mayy reduce the e working life of the sttructure
• unaacceptable deformatioons which affect
a the effficient use
• exccessive vibrations which cause discomfort
d to
o people
AIM/NG2014 40029/L/SOJ/06
Structural As
ssessment and Audit
nd serviceability can b
Safety an be evaluated d for a variiety of reassons, among others
for changes in use oro increase of loads, effects
e of deeterioration
n, damage as a result
me loading events
of extrem e and concern about design and cons struction errors and
about the quality of building
b ma
aterial and workmansh
w hip.
Increasess of the ma
aximum livee load limitts and channges of use are prob bably the
main rea asons for structural
s a
assessment. For builldings like the existing NEP
building, such
s chang
ges could re
esult in the need to support highe
er floor load
dings.
It should be noted th
hat all strucctures are undergoing
u some degrree of deterrioration.
The effeccts of deterrioration aree structure and site sspecific. Cooncerning structural
s
strength, corrosion and fatigue e are the main deterioration prrocesses. Spalling,
S
cracking, and degrad ded surface e conditionss are typica
al indication
ns of deterio
oration.
3.1.2 Cost Minimisation
The obje ective of assessmen nt within structure manageme ent is to provide

informatio
on about thhe structura
al state for optimisation of the po oint in time and the
extent of inspection,maintenan nce and rep pair work ((maximum operation effect at
minimum costs) and d for prioriitisation of maintenan nce and re epair work within a
stock of structures
s o parts of a structure
or e. Further oon it needs s to be achhieved to
minimise economic losses
l by disruption
d off operation of the struccture.
The asseessment res sults should

d be availaable in a form, useable in the strructure's
managem ment.It mea ans that innput valuees, calculattions and results should be
archived for future reference and reassessment. Also A the applied asse essment
routines should
s be unified with
hin a stockk to make rresults com
mparable an nd so to
make the right inspe
ection,mainttenance and repair de ecisions.
3.2 Methodology
The asses ssment of existing

e stru
uctures can
n be carriedd out with methods
m of varying
v
sophisticaation and effort. The ccore objectives, as desscribed aboove, are to analyse
the current load carrrying capa acity and to
o predict th
he future performance
p e with a
maximum m of accuraccy and a minimum
m of effort. Und
duly conservvatism but also too
lax restric
ctions shoulld be avoided.
In most cases
c it jud
diciously to
o start with
h simple co
onservative
e routines and
a use
more sop phisticated routines o only when the
t evaluated load carrying
c cap
pacity is
insufficien
nt.
y structural assessment should be
Generally b carried o out using limit state principles
p
with chara
acteristic va
alues and partial
p safetty factors.
If structurres have faiiled assessment to an acceptable e capacity, the engineer can

make a recommend dation, butt the techn
nical autho ority is likely to be ultimately
responsib ble for public safety an
nd therefore
e has to do the final de ecision. A structure,
s
failed in assessmen
a nt, may remmain in serrvice if it prresents a low
l risk, su
ubject to
monitoring g.
AIM/NG2014 40029/L/SOJ/06
Structural As
ssessment and Audit
3.2.1 Classifica
ation Of As
ssessment Procedurres
In genera
al assessmeent procedu
ures can be
e classified into three groups:
g
• meeasurementt based asssessment

• moodel based assessmen nt
• non-formal asssessment
Measurem
ment based
d serviceability assess
sment
ategory fall those asssessment ro

In this ca outines, wh
here the lo
oad effects are not
determineed by struc ctural analyysis but dirrect by measurement (e.g. perfo ormance
monitoringg,proof load
d tests).
Since only serviceab bility measu ures can bee determined directly,,the method d is only
erify structu
able to ve ural sufficiency within the
t Service eability Limit State. It is
i a two-
component procedurre where th he compone ents are as follows:
(1) measu urement of load effectss

(2) service
eability verification
Measurem ment based d assessmeent routiness are in general not complex. An e

example
applicatio
on is the evaluation
e of serviceeability measures like e displacement or
dynamic behaviour after a ne ew utilisatio
on or the structure.
s T
The assesssment of
sufficient an
nearly ins nd monitore
ed structurees may alsoo be based on this metthod.
ment base
Measurem ed assessm ment is of o little sig
gnificance to the structural
s
assessme
ent and revvamping of the existing NEP buillding and will
w therefore not be
used.
sed safety and service

Model bas eability assessment
ategory fall all those assessment routiness, where th

In this ca he load effe
ects are
determineed by mode el based structural analysis. Usin
ng this metthod ,Ultimaate Limit
State andd Serviceabbility State can be modelled an nd therefore e assessedd. It is a
three com
mponent pro ocedure wh here the com
mponents a are as follow
ws:
(1) acquissition of datta of loading

g and resisstance
(2) calcula
ation of load effects on n structural models
(3) safety and servicceability verrification
essment ap
Most asse pplications a
are process
sed based on a structu
ural model.
Model based safety and servicceability asssessment is of much significancce to the

structural assessme
ent and re evamping of o the exissting NEP building and will
therefore be used

AIM/NG2014 40029/L/SOJ/06
Structural As
ssessment and Audit
Non-formal assessm
ment
In this category fall assessmen nt routines which are based on tthe experie
ence and
the judgeement of the assessin ng engineerr. They are
e more or less subjecctive and
are applie
ed only exce eptional.
Most non--formal asssessment ta akes place within

w struccture manag
gement, wh
here the
structural condition is
s evaluated
d on the base of visual inspection
ns.
3.2.2 Assessm
ment Levels
s
As mentioned befo ore, assesssment pro ocedures vvary in so ophisticatio

on. It is
recommended to sttart the asssessment with simple but consservative lo ow level
methods and,in casse the asse essment fa ailed, move e on with more
m refine
ed upper
levels.
Admittedly, there may
m be cases were a mixture off methods with low and a high
complexitty is advisable. For insstance when a first ste ep low level assessme ent failed
and in a second ste ep the structure spec cific resistan nce and load parame eters are
achieved by more re efined investigation methods
m like
e NDT, the structural analysis
and the verificationc
can be carried out with h the same simple methods as in n the first
step and the
t assessment may now n result in
i sufficienccy.
The propoosed assesssment leveels are established for structuring the assesssment
process. They
T are noot imperativve and the boundariess of the leve
els are flexible.
The propposed asssessment levels used for the structural assessme

ent and
revamping
g of the existing NEP building are
e described
d below
Level 0: Non-formal
N qualitative assessmen
nt:
Assessme ent, based d on expe erience of the engin neer, is mostly

m used for a
preevalua ation of the structure. One is able to evaluaate visual deterioration
d n effects
like corrossion of stee
el memberss or visual signs
s of dam
mage (cracks, spallingg).
Level 1: Measureme
M ent based determinatio
on of load e
effect:
Assessme ent of serviceability by meas surement of o perform mance valu ues and
comparisoon with threeshold valu
ues. There is no structtural analyssis carried out. The
threshold values can n be given in codes or individuallyy specified.
Level 2: Partial
P facto
or method, based
b on document re eview:
Assessme ent of loadd-carrying capacity

c annd servicea
ability using informatiion from
design,coonstruction and inspecction docummentation. S
Structural analysis is generally
g
carried ouut using sim
mple methodds. Safety and
a service eability veriffication is based
b on
partialfacttors.

AIM/NG2014 40029/L/SOJ/06
Structural As
ssessment and Audit
Level 3: Partial
P facto
or method, based
b on supplementa
ary investig
gation:
Assessme ent of loadd-carrying capacity

c an
nd servicea ability using informatiion from
site speciific detailed
d non-destrructive inve
estigations. Structural analysis iss carried
out using g refined methods and detailled modelss. Safety and serviiceability
verificatio
on isbased on
o partial fa
actors.
Level 4: Modified
M tarrget reliabiliity, modifica
ation of parrtial factors::
on of the lo
Verificatio oad–carryin ng capacity with site-sspecific mod dified partia
al safety
factors. Structural
S prroperties as well as external
e circcumstances s can influeence the
safety me easure. Praactically, mo
odifying of partial
p factoors is carrie
ed out for groups
g of
structuress with simila
ar structura
al behaviourr or load inffluences.

AIM/NG2014 40029/L/SOJ/06
Structural As
ssessment and Audit
4.0 STRUCTU
URAL ASS
SESSMENT
T OF THE EXISTING
E N
NEP BUILD
DING
A team off engineers from AIM Consultants

C s Limited se
et out to ga
ather inform
mation
about ma aterial and structural properties and dimensions as well as ab bout the
previous, current an nd/or future
e loading on
o the stru ucture to determine
d tthe load
n the existin
effects on ng NEP buillding.
The secttions below w itemized and explained the processess taken to assess
structurally the existiing NEP bu
uilding.
4.1 Methods of Data Ac

cquisition
4.1.1 Study Off Original Documents

D s
AIM engiineers conducting the e structuraal engineerring assess sments of existing

buildings reviewed the original design and cconstruction n documen nts and
drawings,,including as-built
a drawwings, prior to visiting
g buildings for inspecttion. The
detailed structural
s ca
alculations including assumption
a s for the sttructural de
esign i.e.
the allowa
able live loa
ads were allso revieweed.
views helpe
These rev ed the engiineers to:
• undderstand bu uildings’ stru

uctural systtems and laayouts;
• iden
ntify critical areas for innspection;
• iden
ntify the spe ecified loadds to assesss usage and possibilityy of overloaading;
andd
• verify if unauthhorized add ditions or altteration works that affe
ect the stru
ucture of
buildings have e been carried out.
These stuudies and re eviews are in general the easiestt way of gatthering data a about
the structure to be as ssessed.Re esistance properties
p like materiall and structtural
s and dimen
properties nsion were obtained frrom codes, drawings and a other design
d
specifications (e.g. static
s calculations,subssoil conditio
on report), and
a from otther
constructiion docume ents
.
A typical list of information gathhered the team
t of enggineers fromm AIM Con nsultants
om this perrusal includ
Limited fro ded, as follo
ows:
- naame and ad ddress of bu

uilding
- buuilding’s usee
- daate of consttruction
- noo.of floors
- arrea of each floor
- type of consttruction
- pan betwee
sp en beams
- kinnd of founddation
- buuilding conttractor
- prrevailing wind direction
n
- avverage wind d speed

AIM/NG2014 40029/L/SOJ/06
Structural As
ssessment and Audit
- history of buiilding use

- exxtensions or
o rebuildingg carried ou
ut
- anny repairs
- anny accidentt,
- type of concrrete used ( cement, sa and, aggreg
gate, use off admixture
e)
- deesign strenggth
- fabrication method.
m
The existting archite

ectural pla
ans and thhe propose
ed architecctural planss of the
existing NEP
N building are avvailable an
nd can bee seen in Appendix x 1 and
Appendix x 2 respecctively.
4.1.2 Site Inspections

After the perusal of
o all these documents, the te eam of en ngineers fro
om AIM
Consultannts moved to
t the site tto carry out a detailed visual inspection.
They attempted with due diligen

nce,to carryy out the vissual inspec
ctions of:
• the
e condition of building structures– –to identify types of strructural deffects,
sig
gns of structtural distresss and defoormation, and signs off material
detterioration;
• the
e loading on n building sstructures–tto identify d
deviations frrom their inntended
usees, and/or misuse
m andd abuse, wh hich can ressult in overlloading;
• addditions or alteration
a wo orks affectin
ng building structures– –to identify
addditions or alteration
a wo orks that ca
an result in overloading g or adversse
effe
ects on struuctures; and
• non-structural componen nts that migght affect sttructural sysstems.
A comple ete set of relevant

r dra
awings sho
owing plan views, elev
vations and
d typical
structural details waas taken aalong on the
t inspecttion, on which recoording of
observatioons were made.
m
d particularly are the fo

Observed ollowing:
• Any settlemen nts in the fo

oundations..
• Vissual cracks in columnss, beams an nd slabs
• Cooncrete disin ntegration and
a expose ed steel reinnforcementts – photographs
cann be helpful.
• Slig
ght tapping g with hamm mer can revveal deterio oration in co
oncrete.
• Extent of corrrosion in reiinforcement.
• Staatus of Balcconies – sagging, defle ection, craccks?
• Craacks in walls indicating g swelling in R.C.C. members
m or distress
orddeflection oro corrosion.
• Leaakages & dampness
d in walls resuulting into cracks
c and corrosion.
• Chhanges carrried out affe ecting struc
cture.
• Chhange of user – from R Residential to Commerrcial ?
• Chhange of Pa artition Wallls?
• Staatus of lift and
a lift mach hine room

AIM/NG2014 40029/L/SOJ/06
Structural As
ssessment and Audit
Photograp phs of thes

se observattions were taken
t with good cammera ( Canoon 600D)
with the necessary
n zoom and micro lensses and polarized filte
ers which fa
acilitated
pictorial documentat
d tion of the o
observations.
A comple ete set of relevant

r dra
awings sho
owing plan views, elev
vations and
d typical
structural details waas taken aalong on the
t inspecttion, on which recoording of
observatioons were made.
m
All these observatio

ons and pho otographs have been documentted in the following
f
ubmitted earlier to the client, To
reports su otal Explorration and Production
n Nigeria
Limited(TEPNG):
1. Visuall Assessmeent Report

2. Life an
nd Fire Safe
fety Report
4.1.3 Material Testing

T
Inspectionns made byy the team o of engineerrs from AIMM Consultan nts yielded
informatio
on that indic
cates structtural proble
ems might e exist with so
ome structuural
elements,, considerinng the proposed chang ge in loadin
ng and thuss requiring testing.
t
Material te
ests are do
one for dete
ermining strrength para ameter of th
he used buillding
materials..The tests conducted
c w
were both destructive
d and non-de estructive. They
were cond ducted on site
s and at a laboratory y.
Paramete
ers that werre investiga
ated include
ed, amongsst others:
• crross section
nal and long gitudinal ge
eometry chaanges (dam mages) from
m
ovverloading (e.g.
( crackss, ruptures)) and from d
deterioratio
on processe
es (e.g.
co
orrosion,spa alling, fatigu
ue cracks)
• egrity (e.g. for hidden damage orr inhomogeneity
structural inte
• material strength using tension and d compresssion tests on
o samples,,
4.1.3.1 Non-Desttructive Te
ests
AIM carrieed out nonn destructivve testing of

o the strucctural eleme
ents of the existing
NEP build ding in ord
der to asce ertain the extent
e of ccorrosion,distress and
d loss of
strength in concrete and steel.
The proc cedures forr conductin

ng non-desstructive cooncrete tessting on structural
s
elements at the existing NEP bbuilding and
d the work m
method stattements ha
ave been
earlier exxplained and
a presen
nted in the e document AIM NEP N Work Method
Statemennt submitteed earlier submitted to the cclient, Tota al Exploration and
Productio
on Nigeria Limited(TEP
L PNG)
1 Schmidt Hammer Test

4.1.3.1.1 T
The Schmmidt Hamme er test perfformed werre carried out dance with the BS
o in accord
Code to estimate
e the
e in situ stre
ength of concrete.
The method of using

g the hamm
mer is hereb
by explained
d:
AIM/NG2014 40029/L/SOJ/06
Structural As
ssessment and Audit
A smoo oth surface,, preferablyy a formed one is required for th

he test. A smooth
s ,
clean, drry surfacess without aany defect like honey--combing, visible
v craccks, and
hollow sound
s is se
elected. Ann area of approximattely 300m mmx300mm m will be
rubbed with
w carbora andum ston ne or grinde
ed to removve loosely adhering sccales, or
remains of plaster mortar,
m if an
ny.
mmer will be used in the horiizontal, verrtically ove

The ham erhead or vvertically
downwarrd positionss as well ass at any inte
ermediate a
angle, provided the ha
ammer is
perpendiicular to the
e surface un
nder test.
With the hammer pushed hard d against th

he concretee, the body is allowed to move
away from the conc crete until th
he latch connects the hammer mass
m to the plunger.
The plun nger is the
en held perrpendicularr to the concrete surfface and the body
pushed towards the concrete e. This movement exxtends the spring hold ding the
mass to the body. When the maximum extension of the spriing is reached, the
eases and the
latch rele t mass iss pulled tow wards the su
urface by th
he spring.Th he mass
hits the shoulder ofo the plung ger rod and reboundss because the rod is pushed
hard aga ainst the concrete.
c D
During rebo
ound the slide indicattor travels with the
hammer mass and d stops at the maxim mum distance the mass
m reachhes after
reboundiing. A buttoon on the sside of the body is pu ushed to lock the plun nger into
the retrac
cted positio
on and the rrebound nu umber is reaad from a scale
s on the
e body.
About 10 0 hammer rebound rreadings, 5 on 2 mo olded facess, against the

t side
surfaces in the midddle two thirds of the structural elements. The techniician will
avoid teesting the same spo ot twice.Off these reeadings,abnnormally high and
abnorma ally low results (outliers) will be discarded and the avverage of th
he other
readingss will be worked
w out. The average readings will be termed rebound
number for
f the strucctural element under test.
t
Please note
n that factors innfluencing hardness of the con ncrete surfface like
moisture condition of the surfface, carbo onation, test location within
w the member,
m
direction of test etc are taken into consideration and
d a correcteed rebound number
is workedd out.
This proccedure is re
epeated forr all the stru
uctural elem
ments.
The commpressive sttrength of cconcrete aggainst eachh rebound number

n is obtained
o
from a graph
g prepa
ared on correlation esstablished between
b re
ebound num mbers at
core testt locations & equivalent cube strrength values.The statistical analysis will
be carrie
ed out for a set of values of comp
pressive strrengths obtained by thhe above
method.
The resu ults of the Schimdt Hammer tessting done on the existing NEP building
can be found
f in Appendix
A 3 of this reeport as ite
emized floor by floorr for the
columns, shear walls and slabs.Howeve er the summmary of the
e Schmidt Hammer
H
or all the co
testing fo olumns can be read fro
om Table 1 below.

AIM/NG2014 40029/L/SOJ/06
Structural As
ssessment and Audit

AIM/NG2014 40029/L/SOJ/06
Structural As
ssessment and Audit
4.1.3.2 Destructtive Tests On Concre

ete
AIM carrried out desstructive tessting of the

e structural elements of
o the existing NEP
building in order to ascertain the
t extent of o corrosion n,distress and
a loss of strength
ete.This wa
in concre as made necessary by the desire to confirm results obta ained by
non-desttructive testting.
The proocedures forf conduccting destrructive con

ncrete testing on structural
s
elements
s at the exxisting NEPP building and the work
w methodd statemennts have
been earlier explain
ned and prresented in
n the docum ment AIM NEP
N Workk Method
Statemennt submitteed earlier submitted to the client,
c Tota
al Explorattion and
Productio
on Nigeria Limited(TEPNG)
4.1.3.2.1
1 Core Tes
sting At Th
he Existing
g NEP Building
After a series of meeting b between AIM,TEPNG and APA AVE(the third party
consultan nts), the fo
ollowing decisions were made about the co
oring opera
ations at
the existiing NEP bu uilding
• Thhe number of cores to o be taken at

a site for destructive
d testing wass agreed
to be ten(10)) in numberr.
• Teen critical elements-co
e olumns, sla
abs and she ear walls-wwere to have a core
eaach taken out
o of them..
The elem
ments to be cored have
e to satisfy the followin
ng criteria:
COLUMN
NS:
• Thhe damage ed column on

o the groun
nd floor dessignated ass column C228.
• Coolumns havving NDT values con nsidered ass outliers i.e. columnss having
the highest and
a lowest NNDT valuess
SLABS:
• Coore sample es are to be taken from

f 3rd to
o 7th floor slabs as tthey will
upport the proposed heaviest loads i.e. IST ware
su ehouse(7th flr) and
rd
A
Archives(3 -6th flr)
SHEAR WALLS:
W
• Co
ore sample
es are to be
e taken rand
domly
In respec
ct of the ab
bove, the fo
ollowing stru
uctural elem
ments were
e chosen fo
or coring
and testing.(see Table 2)

AIM/NG2014 40029/L/SOJ/06
Structural As
ssessment and Audit
Structural Floor At Which

h Designnated Rea
asons For Testing
Element Elemment Structtural
Groupinng Is Lo
ocated Elemeent To Be
Testedd
C28 Stru
uctural Dammage thouggh with a
com
mpressive strength
s vallue of
1ST
S
FLOOR 54.6
67N/mm2
C17 Loww outlier compressive strength
valu
ue of 30.3NN/mm2
C8 Loww outlier compressive strength
valu
ue of 30.4NN/mm2
MNS
COLUM 2ND
N
FLOOR
C16 Higgh outlier co
ompressive
ength value
stre e of 62N/mm
m2
10TH
T
FLOOR
R
ANY CENTRAL
C Hea
avy Load:A
ARCHIVES
3RD
R
FLOOR POINT
T ON THE
FLOORR SLAB
4TH
T
FLOOR ANY CENTRAL
C Hea
avy Load:A
ARCHIVES
SLABS POINT
T ON THE
FLOORR SLAB
5TH
T
FLOOR ANY CENTRAL
C Hea
avy Load:A
ARCHIVES
POINT
T ON THE
FLOORR SLAB
6TH
T
FLOOR ANY CENTRAL
C Hea
avy Load:A
ARCHIVES
POINT
T ON THE
FLOORR SLAB

7TH
T
FLOOR ANY CENTRAL
C Hea
avy Load:IS
ST
POINT
T ON THE STO
ORAGE/WA AREHOUS
SE
FLOORR SLAB
SHEAR-- 1ST
S
FLOOR ELEVA
ATOR WAL
Low LL
w outlier compressive strength
WALL valu
ue
Table 2: Structura
al Elements
s Chosen F
For Coring
g Tests
The coring operatioons took th

hree (3) daays (Thursdday,Friday and Mond day) and
were coonducted byb LAFARG GE Readyy Mix (Nig geria) Limitted supervvised by
engineerrs from AIM
M and witnesssed by a HSE
H engine
eer from TEEPNG.
Ten(10) core samp ples were oobtained frrom the strructural ele
ements at site and
were carrted away to
o the labora
atory for tes
sting.
The crushing of th
he concre ete cores extracted
e ffrom the NEP
N building took
th
n Mondayy 10 Nove
place on ember 2014 at LAF FARGE’s laboratory at their
concrete
e batching plant at B
Bar Beach,V
Victoria Island, Lagoos.
It was witnessed
w b represe
by entatives of
o AIM,LAF OTAL and APAVE
FARGE,TO
(the third
d party con
nsultants)..
AIM/NG2014 40029/L/SOJ/06
Structural As
ssessment and Audit
An officia
al report on
n the coring
g tests resu
ults had bee
en sent in by
b LAFARG GE. This
report ha
ad been submitted to the client,T Total Explo
oration and Production
n Nigeria
Limited(TTEPNG). A copy of thiis report can be found in Append dix 4.
mary of the coring test results can

Howeverr, the summ n be read frrom Table 3 below.
Table 3: Summary Of The Re esults Of The Coring Tests Con

nducted Onn
Selected
S Structural E
Elements At
A The Exissting NEP Building
B
Please note
n that the design grade of conncrete of th
he existing building ass can be
seen fro
om the exissting structtural drawings are CC30 and C4 40 (30N/m mm2 and
40N/mm2).
4.1.3.3 Destructtive Tests On Steel
AIM carrried out desstructive tessting of the o the existing NEP

e structural elements of
building in order to ascertain the
t extent of o corrosion n,distress and
a loss of strength
in steel.
Three sa amples of Y16 bars were extrracted from m structuraal elementss in the
existing NEP building and takken to the steel
s testing laboratorry at the Fa
aculty of
Engineerring,Univers
sity of Lago
os,Nigeria for
f testing. The
T results s of the stee
el tensile
strength testing can
n be seen in Append dix 5: Resu ults Of Steeel Tensile Strength
Tests Foor Steel Sam
mples Extraacted From
mStructural E Elements In
n The Existting NEP
Building.
4.2 Methods
s Of Structtural Analy
ysis
If there
e are sig gns of sttructural distress
d and their causes are
a not
apparentt,structural analyses would be needed to o determine whether original
designs were
w adequuate or if sttructures ha
ave since become ove
erloaded.

AIM/NG2014 40029/L/SOJ/06
Structural As
ssessment and Audit
These an
nalyses sho ould be bassed on reviews of origginal documments and drawings
d
and/or measureme
m nts of exissting memb bers. Such structural analysis
a sh
hould be
done acc
cording to the latest buuilding code
es.
AIM engiineers have

e followed the
t above statements
s strictly.
Having obtained the info ormation about

a the
e strength
h of ste eel and
concrete(constructio on materials) using de estructive a
and non-de
estructive teests, the
structuraal performance of the existing NE EP buildingg was analysed usingg models
that relia
ably represe
ent the load ding on the structure, the behaviour of the sstructure
and the resistance of its components.Th he analytica
al model was
w made to t reflect
the actuaal condition of the exissting structu
ure.
Typical simple
s ana hods used are space
alysis meth e frame and grillage analysis
combined with a simple load distribution and linea ar elastic material
m be
ehaviour,
which ressult in a low
wer bound e
equilibrium solution.
For the structural

s an
nalysis, AIM
M engineers
s used the ffollowing so
oftwares:
1. CSSC Orion vs17

v
2. Be
entley’s Sta
aadPro vs 8 8i
3. Prrokon Strucctural Analyysis and De
esign vs 2.5
5
4. CSSC SAFE vsv 12.
5. MS Excel 20 007 spreadssheets.
The strucctural analyysis and m

modeling ressults for the
e existing NEP
N building
g can be
found in :
Appendixx 6: Structu
ural Modelliing and Callculation Re
esults for Columns/Sh
C ear
Walls
esults for Sllabs
esults for Piiles.
These ap
ppendices can
c be foun
nd at the ba
ack pages o
of the reporrt.

AIM/NG2014 40029/L/SOJ/06
Structural As
ssessment and Audit
5.0. ANALYSSIS OF RE
ESULTS OOF THE ST
TRUCTURA
AL ASSES
SSMENT OF
O THE
EXISTIN
NG NEP BU
UILDING
5.1 s and Shea

Columns ar Walls
Structura
al modellingg of the existing NEP building ussing the new
w loads (du
ue to the
proposedd change in use) ind dicates thatt some columns will fail under the new
loading conditions.
c
The resuults of the structural modelling as related to columnns can be found

f in
Appendixx 6: Structtural Mode elling and Calculation
n Results for
f Columnns/Shear
Walls at the back off this reportt.
Howeverr the summary of the ffailed colum

mns and thee recommen nded streng gthening
and repa
air methodss are tabulated in Table
e 4 below on
o floor by floor
f basis.
Floor Fa
ailed Grid *Re
ecommend dation For Repair
R
colu
umns Location And Stre
engtheningg
Ist floorr/ C36
C 6/37
mezzanin ne
C26
C 10/29 Reinfforced Concrete Jacke
eting
C26
C 16/23 or
2nd floo
or C26
C 22/17 Carboon Fibre Ja
acketing
C26
C 28/11
C26
C 34/5
3rd floo
or Noo failed colu
umns
th
4 floo or C
C1B 48/7 Reinfforced Concrete Jacke
eting
or
Carboon Fibre Ja
acketing
5th floor Noo failed colu

umns
6th floor C
C1B 48/7 Reinfforced Concrete Jacke
eting
or
Carboon Fibre Ja
acketing

umns
8th floor C1
eting
C
C1 32/15 or
C
C1 38/9 Carboon Fibre Ja
acketing

umns
10th floo
or C17
eting
C15
C 14/33 or
Carboon Fibre Ja
acketing
Table 4: Summary
S O The Failled Columns After Sttructural Modelling
Of M O The
Of
E
Existing NEEP Buildinng With Pro
oposed Ne ew Loads
*TTo be discussed in the
e “Recommeendation” ssection.

AIM/NG2014 40029/L/SOJ/06
Structural As
ssessment and Audit
5.2 Slabs
Structura
al modellingg of the existing NEP building ussing the neww loads (du ue to the
proposedd change in n use) indiccates that some
s slab panels
p willl fail under the new
loading conditions.
c
The resu ults of the structural modelling as related to column ns can be found
f in
Appendixx 7: Structuural Modelliing and Callculation Re
esults for Slabs
S at the
e back of
this repo
ort.
Howeverr the summ mary of the slab invesstigations in n simple terms of passsed and
failed sla
abs and column strips are tabulatted in the fo
ollowing tab
bles on pag
ges 25 to
27.
5.3 Piles
Structura
al modelling
g of the existing NEP building ussing the new
w loads (du
ue to the
proposedd change in use) indicates that no pile will
w fail unde er the new
w loading
condition
ns.
The resu ults of the

e structurall modelling
g as relateed to piless can be found
f in
ural Modelliing and Calculation Reesults for Piles
P at the
e back of
this repo
ort.

AIM/NG2014 40029/L/SOJ/06
Structural As
ssessment and Audit

AIM/NG2014 40029/L/SOJ/06
Structural As
ssessment and Audit

AIM/NG2014 40029/L/SOJ/06
Structural As
ssessment and Audit

AIM/NG2014 40029/L/SOJ/06
Structural As
ssessment and Audit
6.0. RECOMMENDATIO
ONS
The reco ommendatiions made e by AIM Consultants Limited to rehabilitate the

structura
al elements that will fail using the new loadss (due to the e proposed d change
in use) are
a derived after the in nspection ofo the existing NEP bu uilding,its structural
s
evaluatio
on and a rough cost/be enefit studyy of the diffe
erent solutio
ons.
Strengthening of the existing sstructural elements tha

at will fail using
u the ne
ew loads
(due to the
t propossed change e in use) iss needed to
o increase the streng gths and
stiffnesse
es of such failing
f elem
ments.
AIM Con
nsultants is hereby reccommending
g the follow
wing strengtthening techniques
1. Reinfforced Conccrete Jacke

eting
2. Carboon Fibre Ja
acketing
These re
ecommenda
ations are e
explained in
n graphical details in Appendix
A 9.
Jacketingg is the mostm popularly used method for f strength

hening of building
structura
al elements especiallyy columns. The most common tyypes of jacckets are
steel jackket, reinforcced concrette jacket, fibre reinforcced polymeer composite jacket,
jacket with
w high teension mate erials like carbon fibrre, glass fibre etc. The main
purposess of jacketin ng are:
1. To inccrease concrete confinnement by transverse fibre reinfo orcement

2. To inccrease sheear strength
h by transveerse fibre re einforcemennt,
3. To inccrease flexural strengtth by longittudinal reinfforcement provided.
p
Jacketing
g serves to
o improve the
t lateral strength an
nd ductility by confine
ement of
compresssion concre
ete.
It should be noted that

t retrofittting of a few
w memberss with jacke
eting or som
me other
enclosingg techniques might not be efffective eno ough to im mprove the e overall
behaviouur of the strructure, if th
he remainin ng memberss are not du
uctile.
6.1 Jacketin
ng Of Colum
mns And S
Shear Wallls
Jacketingg of columnns consists of added concrete

c wiith longitudinal and traansverse
reinforce
ement aroun nd the exissting colum mns. This tyype of stren ngthening immproves
the axial and shearr strength of columns whilew the fle
exural strenngth of colu
umn and
strength of the beam-column jjoints rema ain the samme. It is also
o observed that the
g of colum
jacketing mns is not successfu ul for imprroving the ductility. A major
advantagge of colummn jacketing g is that it improves th he lateral lo
oad capacity of the
building in a reaso onably unifform and distributed
d w
way and hence
h avoidding the
concentrration of sttiffness as in the ca ase of she ear walls. This
T is howw major
strengtheening of fouundations m may be avo oided. In adddition the original fun
nction of
the build
ding can be e maintaine ed, as therre are no major
m channges in thee original
geometry y of the building with this technique.

AIM/NG2014 40029/L/SOJ/06
Structural As
ssessment and Audit
The jackketing of columns reco

ommended by AIM is generally carried
c out by using
two methhods:
1. Reeinforced concrete
c jaccketing and
2. Fibre Reinforrced Polym
mer jacketingg.
6.1.1 Reinforc
ced Concre
ete Jacketiing of Colu
umns And Shear Walls
Reinforce ed concrette jacketingg can be employed

e as a repaiir or streng gthening
scheme((Figure 2). Damaged
D r
regions of the
t existingg members should be repaired
prior to th
heir jacketin
ng. There a
are two maiin purposess of jacketin
ng of colum
mns:
1. Increase in th
he shear ca
apacity of columns
c in order
o to acccomplish a strong
olumn-weakk beam dessign and
co
2. Too improve the
t columnn's flexural strength byy the longitudinal stee
el of the
jacket made e continuouus through the slab system anchored a w
with the
foundation.
It is achie
eved by pa assing the n
new longituudinal reinfo
orcement th
hrough hole es drilled
in the slab and by y placing new concrrete in the slab/beam m/column joints as
illustrated
d in figure 1. Rehabilitated sectio
ons are designed in this way so that the
flexural strength
s off columns should be greater th han that off the slabss/beams.
Transverrse steel ab bove and be elow the joint has beeen provided
d with detaills, which
consists of two L-s shaped tiess that overrlap diagonally in oppposite corne ers. The
longitudinnal reinforrcement usually is concentrated in the e column corners.
Windows s are usuallly bored th
hrough the slab to alloow the stee
el to go thrrough as
well as too enable the concrete casting pro ocess
6.1.1.1 The Minimum Specifications

s For Jacke
eting Colum
mns
The minimum speciifications fo

or jacketing columns in
nclude
1. Sttrength of the
t new ma aterials sha
all be equaal or greater than thosse of the
exxisting colu
umn. Concrrete strengtth shall be at least 5 MPa grea ater than
the strength of the existting concrette.
2. Foor columnss where exxtra longitu udinal reinfforcement is not req quired, a
minimum of 12φ bars in n the four corners
c andd ties of 8φ
φ @ 100 c/cc should
bee provided with
w 135° b bends and 10φ
1 leg lengths.
3. Minimum
M jaccket thickneess shall bee 100 mm.
4. La
ateral suppport to all the longitudin
nal bars shaall be provided by tiess with
an
n included angle of no ot more than n 135°.
5. Minimum
M diaameter of tiees shall be 8 mm and not less than
onne-third of the
t longitud dinal bar dia
ameter.
6. Vertical
V spaccing of ties shall not exxceed 200 mm, where eas the spaacing
close to the joints
j withinn a length of
o ¼ of the clear
c height shall not exceed
e
1000 mm. pre eferably, thee spacing of ties shall not exceed d the thickneess of
AIM/NG2014 40029/L/SOJ/06
Structural As
ssessment and Audit
the jacket or 200 mm whichever

w is less
Fig 2: Ty
ypical RC Jacketing
J o a RC Co
of olumn
6.1.1.2 The Adv

vantages and
a Disadv
vantages Of Reinforrced Conc
crete Jacke
eting of
Columns
s And She
ear Walls
The adva
antages of using reinfo
orced concrete jacketing are as follows:
f
1. To
o increase the
t shear & flexural ca
apacity of B
Beam
2. To
o improve the compresssive strength & moment carrying
g capacity of
o
co
olumn
3. Ea
ase in consstruction
4. Ea
asily available materia
al
The disadvantages of using re

einforced co
oncrete jackketing are as
a follows:
5 he sizes of the section

Th ns are increeased and the free ava ailable usab
ble
sp
pace becom mes less.
6. Huuge dead mass
m is add
ded.
7. Reequires adeequate dow welling to the existing ccolumn.
8. Lo
ongitudinal bars need to be anchored to the foundation n and sho ould be
co
ontinuous thhrough the slab.
9. Re es in existing column, slab,
equires drilling of hole s beams and footings.
10. Pllacement of ties in beaam column joints is no ot practically
y feasible.
11. Th
he speed of implemen ntation is slo
ow

AIM/NG2014 40029/L/SOJ/06
Structural As
ssessment and Audit
6.1.2 Fibre Re
einforced Polymer
P Ja
acketing Of Columns
s And Shea
ar Walls
Fiber Reeinforced Polymers

P (FRP) composites comprise fibe ers of highh tensile
strength within a po olymer mattrix such ass vinylester or epoxy. The
T role off FRP for
strengtheening of exxisting or neew reinforc
ced concrette structure
es is growin ng at an
extremely rapid pac ce owing m mainly to th
he ease an nd speed ofo constructtion, and
the posssibility of application
a without dis
sturbing thee existing functionalitty of the
structure
e.
Fiber Reinforced Po
olymers (FR
RP) involve
es the follow
wing concep
pt:
• Involves wra apping of RC columns by high sttrength-low weight fibe er wraps

to provide passive co onfinementt, which in ncreases both
b streng
gth and
duuctility (Figu
ure 3).
• FRRP sheets s are wra apped arou und the ccolumns,witth fibers oriented
peerpendicula ar to the loongitudinal axis of column, and d are fixedd to the
co
olumn using g epoxy ressin.
• Thhe wrap not n only provides pa assive confinement and a increa
ases the
co
oncrete stre ength, but also
a provide
es significan
nt strength against she
ear.
Fiig 3: Typical FRP Jac

cketing of RC Colum
mns
AIM/NG2014 40029/L/SOJ/06
Structural As
ssessment and Audit
6.1.2.1 The Advvantages Of

O Fibre Reinforced
R Polymer J
Jacketing Of Colum
mns And
Shear Walls
W
The adva
antages of using Fibre
e Reinforced Polymer Jacketing are as follo
ows:
1. It provides a highly effective confinnement to ccolumns.

2. Thhe original size, shape e and weighht of the meembers is unaltered
u (u
unlike
anny other jaccketing).
3. Du ue to the fact that the origina al shape a and size ofo the mem mbers is
prractically un
naltered, thismethod iss particularlly useful forr strengthen ning
historic and artistic
a massonry structtures.
4. Du ue to the orthotropy built in by y fiber orieentation,the
e wraps esssentially
prrovide onlyy confineme ent without interferingg with the axial
a load which
w is
taken comple etely by conncrete column as agaiinst steel jaacketing, wh here the
jacket takes most of the e axial load and becom mes suscep ptible to bucckling.
5. No drilling off holes is re
equired as against
a con
ncrete and steel
s jacketting.
6. Thhe FRPs ha ave extremely good co orrosion ressistance, which makess them
highly suitab ble for marinne and coasstal environnments.
7. FRRP wrapss prevent further deterioration
d n of concrete and d inside
re
einforcemen nt.
8. Ass the wraps are availlable in lon ng rolls,connstruction jo
oints can be b easily
avvoided.
9. Eaase of insta allation, wh
hich is similar to puttin
ng up wall papers, ma akes the
usse of FRP sheets a very cost-e effective annd efficientt alternative in the
strengthening g of existing
g buildings.
10. Prrovides min nimal disturbbance to exxisting struccture and generally
g thee
strrengthening g work can be perform med with no ormal functio oning of strructure.
6.2 Jacketin
ng Of Slabs
s
In compaarison to the
e jacketing of reinforce
ed concrete
e columns, jacketing ofo
reinforce
ed concrete columns a and beams with
w slabs isi difficult yielding goo
od
confinemment becausse slab cauuses hindrance in the jacket.
j
For slabss, only the use

u of Fibre
e Reinforce
ed Polymer((FRP) jacke
eting is
recomme ended by AIMA Consulttants Limite
ed.(see App
pendix 9)
The introoduction off reinforced

d concrete column he eads (capittals) at the column
slab juncctions of the
e affected ffailed slab and column strips is also
a recommmended
by AIM Consultants
C s Limited.

AIM/NG2014 40029/L/SOJ/06
Structural As
ssessment and Audit
7.0. LIMITAT
TIONS
This repoort has beeen prepared

d at the req
quest of Tottal Explorattion and Pro
oduction
Nigeria Limited (TE EPNG) to perform a detailed sstructural assessmen
a nt of the
existing NEP
N buildin
ng.
AIM Con nsultants Limited offers no warranty regarding the condition of co

oncealed
construction or subsurface conditions beeyond what was revea aled in theirr review.
Any com mments reg garding conncealed construction or subsurfface conditions are
our profe
essional oppinion,baseed on enginneering exp
perience annd judgeme ent, and
are derived in acccordance with curre ent standarrd of caree and proffessional
practice.
Various other non structural, cosmetic anda structu

ural damage unrelated d to this
assessmment may have been observed throughout
t ure, some o
the structu of which
are disccussed inge eneral in this reportt. Howeverr a detaile ed inventorry of all
cosmeticc, non struc
ctural and sstructural damage
d waas beyond thet scope of AIM’s
assessmment. Comm ments in this report are not intended to be comprehen nsive but
are repreesentative of observeed conditions. Repair recommen ndations discussed
therein are conce eptual and will requ uire additio
onal engineering dessign for
implementation.
AIM have e made eve ery effort to

o reasonably present the t various s areas of concerns
c
identified
d during the e course off various sitte visits. If there
t are perceived om
missions
or misstaatements in n this repoort regarding the obse ervations made,
m AIM ask that
they be brought to o their atten ntion as sooon as posssible, so that t they have
h the
opportun nity to fullyy address those omissions o or misstatements in a timely
manner.
This report has been prepare ed on beha alf of and ffor the exclusive use of Total
Exploratiion and Production
P Nigeria Liimited (TE
EPNG). This report and a the
discussioon containe ed herein shall
s not, in whole orr in part, be
b dissemin nated or
conveyed d to any othher party or used or re
elied upon by any othe er party,in w
whole or
in part, without
w priorr written consent.

AIM/NG2014 40029/L/SOJ/06
Structural As
ssessment and Audit
APP
PENDIC
CES

AIM/NG2014 40029/L/SOJ/06

Sample Structural Audit Report

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Sample Structural Audit Report

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Structural As

ssessment and Audit

3.0 INVESTIIGATIVE AND

3.1.2 Cost Min

4.0 STRUCT SESSMENT OF THE EXISTING

4.1 Methodss Of Data Ac

4.1.1 Study Off Original Documents

4.1.2 Site Insp

1 Schimdt Hammer Tests

4.1.3.2 Destructiive Tests On

4.1.3.3 Destructiive Test On

4.2 Methodss Of Structural Analysiss 21

5.0 ANALYSSIS OF RES UCTURAL ASSESSM

6.1 g of Columns And She

6.1.1.1 The Minimum Speccifications For

6.1.1.2 The Advaantages an

6.1.2 Fibre Reinforced Po

6.1.2 .1 The Adva ymer Jacketing Of Columns

Figure: 1 - NEP EXISTING

Figure: 2 - TYPICAL REINFO ACKETING OF A REIN

Figure: 3 - TYPICAL FIBRE REINFORC

Table 2 - STRUCTTURAL ELEMENTS CHOSEN

© Copyright AIM Consultantss Ltd 2014 All Riights Reserved. Page 3 of 34

Appendiix 1 : THE G NEP BUILDING ARC

SULTS OF STEEL TENSILE STR

© Copyright AIM Consultantss Ltd 2014 All Riights Reserved. Page 4 of 34

Total E & P Nigeria a Limited h

1. Viisual assesssment of th he existing building

“The COONSULTANT T shall carrry out a com

ommended methods are :

This asssessment shall enab ble the CONSULTA

© Copyright AIM Consultantss Ltd 2014 All Riights Reserved. Page 5 of 34

Structuraal performaance of the building hadh been a

© Copyright AIM Consultantss Ltd 2014 All Riights Reserved. Page 6 of 34

The buildding consid

The NEP P site is thhe former Russian embassy, lo ocated at 5-8

Existing buildings on the plot in

• First floor: Open space//Atrium/Offices

The futurre use of th

• Floor 1(Mezz zanine)-Sta

© Copyright AIM Consultantss Ltd 2014 All Riights Reserved. Page 7 of 34

© Copyright AIM Consultantss Ltd 2014 All Riights Reserved. Page 8 of 34

In generaal structuraal assessm ment is a process

The first step

e two main objectives

The main n task of assessmen

• losss of equiliibrium of tthe structure or partss of it as a rigid bo ody (e.g.

3.1.2 Cost Minimisation

The obje ective of assessmen nt within structure manageme ent is to provide

The asseessment res sults should

The asses ssment of existing

If structurres have faiiled assessment to an acceptable e capacity, the engineer can

• meeasurementt based asssessment

ategory fall those asssessment ro

(1) measu urement of load effectss

Measurem ment based d assessmeent routiness are in general not complex. An e

sed safety and service

ategory fall all those assessment routiness, where th

(1) acquissition of datta of loading

Model based safety and servicceability asssessment is of much significancce to the

© Copyright AIM Consultantss Ltd 2014 All Riights Reserved. Page 11 of 34

Most non--formal asssessment ta akes place within

As mentioned befo ore, assesssment pro ocedures vvary in so ophisticatio

The propposed asssessment levels used for the structural assessme