Zaman 2014 Retrofitting and Rehabilitation of High Rise Fire Damaged Concrete Building

Retrofitting and Rehabilitation of High Rise Fire Damaged
Concrete Building
Master Thesis
Study Course Construction and Real Estate Management
Submitted on 15.09.2014
Haseeb Uz Zaman
541108
First Supervisor: Mika Lindholm

Second Supervisor: Dieter Bunte
Abstract
Study has been aimed to establish a structured solution for rehabilitation and
retrofitting of fire damaged concrete buildings. This study explains the rehab
process of fire damaged concrete buildings in three basic categories; condition
evaluation, decision making, rehabilitation & retrofitting. Evaluation method of
damaged building has been based upon understanding of material properties at
elevated temperatures, condition survey and condition assessment. Condition
survey includes visual inspection, hammering and chiselling techniques whereas
condition assessment includes both non-destructive and destructive tests that are
selected upon the basis of efficiency, economy, and performance. Feasibility
study is required to make right decisions for the rehab of fire damaged building.
Such a feasibility study should include all important aspects that will have an
impact in the future, therefore must be considered in decision making. A new
feasibility analysis model is developed as a part of research. It is expected to help
decision making process because of its sound conceptual foundation and
detailed structure. If feasibility study reveals rehabilitation and retrofitting
worthwhile then it can be effectively rehabilitated with the help of right techniques.
Rehabilitation of non-structural members/elements and retrofitting of structural
with the help of soda blasting, patch repair, FRP reinforcing, partial removal and
replacement, concrete jacketing, steel jacketing and few other retrofitting
techniques has been discussed. Respective pros and cons of these techniques
have been covered with special focus on sustainability, economy, efficiency and
limitations. These techniques can be used separately or in conjunction with other
techniques. As every locks has its own key similarly every case has its unique
solution therefore it can’t be said that which technique or set of technique is
universally superior to others. Generally speaking, partial removal and
replacement offers more advantages. It seems to have more ticks and less
crosses when compared to others.
Keywords: Fire, Damage, Evaluation, Decision, Analysis, Retrofitting,

Rehabilitation
Table of Contents
Table of Figures ……………………………………………………………….….… I
List of Tabulation …………………………………………………………………... II
List of Abbreviations ……………………………………………………….….….. III
1 Introduction ................................................................................................ 1
1.1 Background ............................................................................................... 1
1.2 Goals and bounds of the study ................................................................. 1
1.3 Research questions .................................................................................. 2
1.4 Research methodology ............................................................................. 3
2 Assessment of fire damaged building ...................................................... 4
2.1 Behaviour of materials during fire.............................................................. 4
2.1.1 Concrete ............................................................................................... 4
2.1.2 Steel...................................................................................................... 7
2.1.3 Other Materials ..................................................................................... 8
2.2 General assessment of building ................................................................ 9
2.2.1 Type of structure ................................................................................... 9
2.2.2 Scope of damage .................................................................................. 9
2.2.3 Size, duration and temperature of fire ................................................. 10
2.3 Condition assessment of non-structural members and utilities ............... 10
2.3.1 Visual Inspection ................................................................................. 11
2.4 Condition assessment of structural members ......................................... 12
2.4.1 Visual Inspection ................................................................................. 12
2.4.2 Field Testing ....................................................................................... 16
2.4.2.1 Schmidt/Rebound Hammer ........................................................... 17

2.4.2.2 Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity .............................................................. 18
2.4.2.3 Windsor-Probe or Penetration Resistance test ............................. 20
2.4.2.4 Core Sampling and Testing........................................................... 22
2.4.2.5 Deflection measurement with digital theodolite ............................. 24
2.4.3 Laboratory testing ............................................................................... 24
2.4.3.1 Petrography .................................................................................. 25
2.4.3.2 Tensile Test .................................................................................. 27
2.4.3.3 Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM) ........................................... 28
3 Rehabilitation and Retrofitting of fire damaged building...................... 31
3.1 Cleaning .................................................................................................. 31
3.2 Removal of smoke odour ........................................................................ 33
3.3 Rehabilitation of non-structural members and utilities ............................. 35
3.4 Retrofitting of structural members ........................................................... 37
3.4.1 Fibre Reinforced polymer (FRP) ......................................................... 38
3.4.2 Partial removal and replacement of concrete and reinforcement ........ 44
3.4.2.1 Removal of concrete ..................................................................... 45
3.4.2.2 Partial replacement of reinforcement bar/bars .............................. 47
3.4.2.3 Partial replacement of Concrete.................................................... 48
3.4.2.4 Advantages & disadvantages of partial removal & replacement ... 49
3.4.3 Concrete jacketing .............................................................................. 51
3.4.4 Steel Jacketing.................................................................................... 54
3.5 Other Methods of retrofitting and rehabilitation ....................................... 56
4 Feasibility study ....................................................................................... 60
4.1 Technical Aspect ..................................................................................... 61
4.1.1 Technical aspects of structural members ............................................ 61

4.1.1.1 Columns ........................................................................................ 62
4.1.1.2 Beams ........................................................................................... 64
4.1.1.3 Floor/Slab Panels.......................................................................... 65
4.1.2 Technical aspects of non-structural members..................................... 67
4.2 Financial Aspect ...................................................................................... 67
4.2.1 Preliminary requirements .................................................................... 68
4.2.2 Structure ............................................................................................. 68
4.2.3 Realization of all associated costs ...................................................... 69
4.2.4 Realization of incomes ........................................................................ 69
4.2.5 Analysis calculations by analysis tools ................................................ 70
4.2.5.1 Payback period ............................................................................. 70
4.2.5.2 Financial ratios .............................................................................. 71
4.2.5.3 Net Present value ......................................................................... 71
4.2.5.4 Internal rate of return .................................................................... 72
4.2.6 Risk analysis ....................................................................................... 73
4.2.6.1 Sensitivity analysis ........................................................................ 74
4.2.6.2 Scenario analysis ......................................................................... 74
5 Results, findings and problem Definition............................................... 76
5.1 Results .................................................................................................... 76
5.2 Findings and problem definition .............................................................. 78
6 Solution development .............................................................................. 80
6.1 Technical feasibility analysis tool ............................................................ 80
6.1.1 Degree of Complexity “C” ................................................................... 80
6.1.2 Life expectancy of solution “L” ............................................................ 81
6.1.3 Time required for proposed solution “T” .............................................. 82

6.1.4 Degree of damage “D” ........................................................................ 82
6.1.5 Parametric mathematical model.......................................................... 83
6.1.6 Example Calculation ........................................................................... 84
6.2 Financial feasibility analysis tool ............................................................. 88
6.2.1Depreciation ......................................................................................... 90
6.2.2 Maintenance and Operation ................................................................ 91
6.2.3 Interest ................................................................................................ 91
6.2.4 Tax ...................................................................................................... 92
6.2.5 Insurance ............................................................................................ 92
6.2.6 Special Costs ...................................................................................... 93
6.2.7 Annual Costs....................................................................................... 93
6.2.8. Annual income ................................................................................... 94
6.2.9 Working methodology and example .................................................... 94
6.3 Feasibility analysis tool ........................................................................... 97
7 Trial of feasibility analysis tool ............................................................... 99
8 Conclusion, scope, recommendation, critique & summary of study 108
8.1 Conclusion ............................................................................................ 108
8.2 Recommendations ................................................................................ 110
8.3 Scope .................................................................................................... 111
8.4 Critique .................................................................................................. 111
8.5 Thesis Summary ................................................................................... 111
9 List of Literature……………………………………………………………..118
I
Table of Figures
Figure 1: Pink texture of fire damaged concrete ............................................... 13
Figure 2: Schmidt hammer test on fire damaged concrete structure ................. 17
Figure 3: Penetration Resistance ...................................................................... 21
Figure 4: Core obtained by drilling .................................................................... 23
Figure 5: Colour of aggregate in Petrography test .......................................... 27
Figure 6: Universal testing Machine for tensile test........................................... 27
Figure 7: Soot cleaning from Ceiling ................................................................. 33
Figure 8: Thermal fogger (A), Ozone Machine (B), .......................................... 35
Figure 9: Air Scrubber ....................................................................................... 35
Figure 10: Soda-blasting ................................................................................... 37
Figure 11: FRP plate application beneath the beam ......................................... 40
Figure 12: FRP Wraps on side faces and bottom side ...................................... 40
Figure 13: FRP sheets wrapped around the Column ........................................ 41
Figure 14: FRP sheet wrapped on the tension side of fire damaged slab ......... 41
Figure 15: Hydro Blasting for concrete removal ................................................ 46
Figure 16: Shotcrete to replace removed damaged concrete ........................... 49
Figure 17: Concrete jacketing process before concreting ................................. 51
Figure 18: Steel jacketing process .................................................................... 54
Figure 19: Steel jacketing of column ................................................................. 55
Figure 20: Fire Damaged Concrete Column ..................................................... 62
Figure 21: Fire Damaged Slab .......................................................................... 65
Figure 22: KBP Coil Coaters ............................................................................. 84
Figure 23: Top view of damaged Valley- Ridge concrete roof ......................... 86
Figure 24: Beverly Centre Islamabad ................................................................ 99
Figure 25: Fire damaged Beverly Centre Islamabad....................................... 100
Figure 26: Burnt AC unit (left), Damages Electricity cables (right) .................. 100
II
List of Tabulation
Table 1: Mineralogical and strength changes in concrete at different

temperatures …………………………………………………………………………...6
Table 2: Non-structural members’ and utilities’ visual inspection report ............ 11
Table 3: Hammer sound test criteria for concrete’s strength ............................. 14
Table 4: Hammer and Chisel test criteria for concrete’s strength...................... 15
Table 5: Visual Inspection Guide for fire damaged R.C.C elements ................. 16
Table 6: Technical feasibility study of column retrofitting .................................. 63
Table 7: Technical feasibility study of Beam Retrofitting ................................... 65
Table 8: Technical feasibility study of Slab Retrofitting ..................................... 66

III
List of Abbreviations
AEW Annual Equivalent Worth

BS British Standard
C Celsius
DTA Differential Thermal Analysis
FFS Financial Feasibility Score

FRP Fibre Reinforced Polymer
GFRP Glass Fibre Reinforced Polymer
HVAC Heating Ventilation Air Conditioning
HS High Strength
IRR Internal Rate of Return
ISO International Organisation of Standardization
LCC Life Cycle Costing
MARR Maximum Attractive Rate of Return
NDT Non Destructive Testing
NPV Net Present Value

PP Profit Percentage
RCC Reinforced Cement Concrete
SEM Scanning Electron Microscopy

TGA Thermo Gravimetric Analysis
TR Technical Report
UPV Ultra Pulse Velocity
UTM Universal Testing Machine
1
1. Introduction
1.1. Background
Many books, journals and articles have been written over different aspects of fire
damage buildings e.g. evaluation of fire damaged buildings, NDTs for fire
damaged buildings, rehabilitation of fire damaged buildings, retrofitting of
structures subjected to high temperatures etc. Many Studies and researches
have been done on various aspects too. But still a crying need have been felt for
a structured study that takes care of matter right from the beginning (evaluation)
and encompass the whole process till the very end (rehabilitation and retrofitting
measures).
1.2. Goals and bounds of the study
This study is inspired to take care of whole process. The process starts from
evaluation of fire damaged buildings. Various techniques for evaluation of
concrete structures are available and commonly practiced but not every
technique is suitable for evaluation of fire damaged building. It has been set as a
goal to explore different methodologies and discuss most suitable and most
practiced ones in the text. Then to explain their limitations and shortcomings to
work out that which technique or combination of techniques can provide with the
true assessment of the fire damaged concrete building.
After evaluation, process proceeds to technical and financial analysis, which

leads to decision making. It is targeted to structure feasibility study that would
consist both financial and technical aspects. After decision to rehab the building
is made and considered as worthwhile then study will dictates different
rehabilitation and retrofitting measures that can be used to bring building back to
its normal functionality. It is targeted to analyse the measures on basis of
sustainability and future fire proofing as well along with their respective pros and
cons. So that suitable method can be used according to the situation and case
2
on hand. This study is limited for concrete buildings with focus on research
questions only.
1.3. Research questions
Research question presented in the conceptual formulation were in preliminary

stage and having few corners to be smoothed. Last question in the conceptual
formulation “How to manage site work (building damaged by fire)?” has been
omitted with agreement, as it is not consistent with the study goals and bounds.
Further, language and structure of few research question has been improved.
Question no 4 and 5 in conceptual formulation have been merged together and
little improvement is made by elaborating it in bit more detail. Similarly question
7 and 8 in conceptual formulation were not very clear, so they have also been
elaborated. Finally research questions are as follow
i. How to conduct condition survey and condition assessment?

ii. What tests and field inspections are required?
iii. What can be done with buildings that are damaged because of fire
(Demolitions, Re-use etc.)?
iv. Is it possible and feasible to retrofit the structural components and
rehabilitate the building concerning the damage they have endured
(Technical feasibility)?
v. Is it financially feasible to retrofit and rehab the fire-damaged building?
vi. How to rehab the building (non-structural components)? What possible
treatments are feasible in light of economy, sustainability, building
functionality etc.?
vii. How to retrofit structural components? What possible treatments are
feasible in light of economy, sustainability, fire protection, building
functionality etc.?
viii. What is the Scope of research findings/conclusions?
3
1.4. Research methodology
At first literature study has been done in which evaluation of fire damaged
buildings and rehabilitation & retrofitting were covered. The knowledge obtained
from literature study is then skimmed to include only targeted methodologies that
ticks certain criteria (as explained in section 1.2). Afterwards, development and
research work has started. In this phase, parametric mathematical model for
feasibility analysis had been developed based on technical and financial
feasibility. After it has been developed initially, then it has been tested.
Shortcomings have been identified and developed model is improved. This
becomes a loop of testing and improvement until satisfactory results are obtained.
After parametric mathematical model had been finally developed, it had been
tested on a real case (Beverly Centre Islamabad) to test its capacity and validity.
So conclusively, following research methods have been used
 Literature
 Internet sources
 Interviews
 Data collection
 Case studies
 Parametric mathematical modelling
 Empirical testing
4
2. Assessment of fire damaged building
After the incident of fire, the buildings are in bad condition. The severity of the
damage depends upon the duration, magnitude and temperature attained by fire.
After fire is extinguished, building has to be immediately investigated to decide
that; is it safe to enter the building and can building withstand after the fire load,
without being progressively collapsed. After structure of the building is secured,
it is ready to be properly assessed. The condition assessment requirements,
techniques (field tests, laboratory testing etc.), methodology for data
management of collected data1 will be discussed in this chapter.
2.1. Behaviour of materials during fire
Buildings are consisting of construction materials that vary in nature from one
another. The very nature of each material is specific to its physical properties,
chemical properties and behaviour of material, when exposed to fire. The most
important materials found in the concrete buildings is obviously concrete and
structural steel but even in them, we have variations depending upon the
manufacturing process and ingredient mix.
Other materials like glass, aluminium, thermal insulations, wood, plastics etc. are
also part of building. Investigate of the damage occurred to the building, requires
the understanding of these materials especially those which are part of the
structural elements. Now, we will discuss the behaviour of basic structural
materials (concrete and steel).
2.1.1. Concrete
Concrete is a very stable material in nature. It is inert, solid, with high compressive
strength and excellent surface hardness. The melting point of concrete is around
1 To be utilised for technical and financial feasibility.

5
1200 Celsius Centigrade (Concrete Society TR68, 2008). All these properties
makes it quite subtle when exposed to fire. EN 13501-12 classifies materials into
seven categories (A1, A2, B, C, D, E and F). A1 is considered as the best possible
material which is virtually inert to fire or fire resistant and concrete is assigned
under A1 category. Concrete doesn’t burn by itself because it is not a combustible
material hence doesn’t add up in the fire load. It doesn’t melts and doesn’t drips
materials at the temperature that normally occurs in fire. The inert property of
concrete is down to the ingredients in the concrete mix which gives it these inert
properties. Moreover concrete has poor thermal conductance and it transfers
heat at a very low rate.3
The rate of temperature increase through cross section is also slow. The
temperature of the material at the surface wouldn’t be that high after initial few
centimetres. According to a standard ISO 834/BS 476 fire test performed on a
concrete beam of cross section 160mm x 300mm showed that after exposure of
concrete from 3 sides for 1 hour, the surface temperature reached to 900 Celsius.
This decreases to only 600 Celsius after 16 mm and to 300 Celsius after 42mm.
So actually the temperature gradient decrease from 900 to 600 in depth of 16 mm
and from 600 to 300 in depth of 26mm.4
This behaviour of concrete makes it structurally sound enough even in intense

fires and structure avoids collapse. The strength remaining in the concrete after
it is cooled down depends upon number of factors like
 Temperature attained by concrete (not the temperature of air or the

temperature of flames)
 Duration of fire
 Aggregates present in concrete
 Concrete batch mix proportion and
 Load beard by structure during fire
2European standard for building materials classification for the reaction to fire behaviour of
building products.
3 The Concrete centre. 2008. Concrete and fire safety. Page no 4.
4 The Concrete centre. 2008. Concrete and fire safety. Page no 4.
6
All these factors effects the strength of concrete after the event of fire. Upto the
temperature of 300 Celsius, concrete more or less retains is strength and this is
also considered as the benchmark of safe temperature of concrete. Upto the
temperature of 500 Celsius a significant loss of strength happens but still holds
sufficient residual strength. Above 600 Celsius serious damages occurs.
Concrete Society document TR68, 2008 explains the behaviours of concrete at
different temperatures and shown in Table 1.5
Heating Mineralogical changes Strength changes

Temperature
(Celsius)
70-80 Dissociation of ettringite

105 Loss of physically bound that water in aggregate and Minor loss of
cement matrix commences, increasing capillary strength possible
porosity (<10%)
120-163 Decomposition of gypsum
250-350 Oxidation of iron compounds causing pink/red Significant loss of
discolouration of aggregate. Loss of bound water in strength
cement matrix and associated degradation becomes commences at
more prominent 300ºC
450-500 Dehydroxylation of portlandite. Aggregate calcines
and will eventually change colour to white/grey
573 5% increase in volume of quartz (αto βquartz Concrete not
transition) causing radial cracking around the quartz structurally useful
grains in the aggregate after heating in
temperatures in
600-800 Release of carbon dioxide from carbonates may cause
excess of 500–
a considerable contraction of the concrete (with
600ºC
severe micro-cracking of the cement matrix)
800-1200 Dissociation and extreme thermal stress cause
complete disintegration of calcareous constituents,
resulting in whitish grey concrete colour and severe
micro-cracking
1200 Concrete starts to melt
1300-1400 Concrete Melted
Table 1: Mineralogical and strength changes in concrete at different temperatures6
5Jeremy P Ingham. 2009. Forensic engineering of fire damaged concrete structures. Page no 2.
6Concrete Society. 2008. Technical Report No. 68 – “Assessment, Design and Repair of Fire-
damaged Concrete Structures”.
7
In event of fire, the structure should perform these following three limit state
functions.7
 The structure should retain its load bearing capacity

 The structure should protect inhabitants from harmful smoke and gases
 The structure should protect people from the heat of fire
Fire causes changes in pore pressure, temperature and moisture levels in

concrete and due to these changes concrete loses its strength but whatever the
scenario is, the structure must perform at these three fire limit states successfully.
To achieve that, concrete shouldn’t have following changes
 Loss of compressive, shear and bending strength

 Loss of bonding between steel and concrete
To avoid these two changes, following two factors have to be considered more
important than others in case of concrete.
 Overall dimension of concrete; so that the temperature shouldn’t be

allowed to elevate throughout the cross-section of concrete element (as
experienced in standard fire test that temperature gradient in concrete is
quite steep. Temperature drops from 600 Celsius to 300 Celsius in only 26
mm)
 Concrete cover; as steel is having stresses locked in it. These stresses will
be released if the steel will expand as it normally does on high
temperature. For structural conventional reinforcement this limiting
temperature is 500 Celsius centigrade and for pre stressed concrete this
limiting temperature is 350 Celsius centigrade. Therefore cover should be
thick enough that it will comprehensively reduce the temperature at the
depth where reinforcement bars are available.8
2.1.2. Steel
Steel experience damage and loss of strength when exposed to high

temperature. Steel has high thermal conductance which can be held responsible
7 Fire limit states described in British and Euro Code 2.

8 The Concrete centre. 2008. Concrete and fire safety. Page no 6-7.
8
for the spread of fire. The loss of strength in case of high temperature is generally
responsible for the extra deflections of R.C.C elements. Mostly after cooling
down, steel recovers its yield strength if it has experienced temperature less than
450 Celsius in case of cold rolled steel and 600 Celsius in case of hot rolled steel.
If the temperature is under these respective limits then steel can be re-used
comprehensively and structure can be retrofitted with various measures
available. But if temperature is exceeded in these respective kinds of reinforcing
steels then it will be a problem, as in that case replacement of reinforcement bars
or additional bars will be required (will be discussed in detail later). 9
Case for pre-stressed steel is more critical one than reinforcing steel as the nature
of the pre-stressed structure. Elongation of steel is done by hydraulic jack and
then concrete is casted over it. When steel has enough bonding with concrete
then steel wires are cut and released. They tends to squeeze inside but the
bonding with the concrete prohibits it, as a result of which the pre-stressing steel
inserts inwards/compression force on concrete. This compression force counter
acts the tensile load acting over it. If temperature will rise then pre-stressing steel
will lose the tensile force within itself which is causing the compression in
concrete and ultimately structure will lose its strength. From 200 to 400 Celsius,
reinforcements in pre stressing concrete structure lose considerable strength. At
400 Celsius, structure loses its 50% strength. In terms of re-use more important
factor is the tension available in pre stressed steel after the event of fire. If it still
has significant loss of tension then it may not carry its intended function.10
2.1.3. Other Materials
Other non-structural materials like glass, aluminium, wood and all such other
materials experience damages in event of fire and may contribute to the fire load
by themselves. These materials are not of much significant importance as they
can easily be replaced if damaged beyond repair. Materials may exhale harmful
fumes or gases or particles in air especially asbestos. If building has asbestos in
9 Jeremy P Ingham. 2009. Forensic engineering of fire damaged concrete structures. Page no 3.
10 Jeremy P Ingham. 2009. Forensic engineering of fire damaged concrete structures.Page no 3.
9
it and it caught fire then asbestos particles will be released in air although their
concentration will not be very high at least upto the level where it will be critically
dangerous but constant exposure to these particles will lead to serious health
risks. One of the prime responsibilities of the building disaster department is to
confirm or discard the presence of asbestos in the building. Once building is
regarded as asbestos free then experts and crew can enter the building for
examining it.
2.2. General assessment of building
After the event of fire, building is in poor condition. When authorities are done
with preliminary survey to decide that building is safe enough to enter then
assessment team can start the assessment of building but before that a general
analysis of building is required to know following facts and figures about the case.
2.2.1. Type of structure
Building type is an important measure to realise. Which elements are most

important ones for the stability of the overall structure and what load pattern is
existing in the building are important questions. It is of asset to understand the
building materials and usage of building as well. It is handy to understand the
type and structure itself from the plans and shop drawings of the building and
marks the most critical ones. This will make the further assessment process more
time saving and easy as well.
2.2.2. Scope of damage
It is better to visit the site and conduct complete condition assessment but
preliminary report from fire and police department can be studied to have a
general idea about the damages building has incurred. This will make an initial
image and inform about the building’s damage at a crude level. Answer to basic
10
questions like how much area or stories have been damaged and how much got
indirectly effected can be obtained from the Fire department/Police report.
2.2.3. Size, duration and temperature of fire
Duration, size and if possible then temperature of fire can also be determined
from the fire report and it will be a real assert for the upcoming stages of
assessment. Duration of fire is a very important factor in particular. Fire resistance
of the building is expressed in unit of time as it defines11
Fire resistance is a period of time for which an element of construction (beam,

column, floor, wall, etc.) will survive in a standard fire test carried out in an
approved furnace under specified condition of temperature, imposed load and
restraint
Hence duration of fire will give an idea what kind of damage building would have
undergone in the event. Interviews recorded from the inhabitants and witnesses
can give an idea about the fire path which also have impact on the damage
undergone and obviously on the duration of fire exposure.
Desk study before visiting the site and conducting general assessment is very
beneficial. It is always better to do homework before dealing with the case. It will
create an initial picture and equip the inspector with the valuable information
regarding structure, its properties and its materials.
2.3. Condition assessment of non-structural members and utilities
Non-structural members of the building like doors, windows, ventilators, partition

walls, façade, thermal insulations, floor coverings etc. bear heavy damages often
in case of fire. They just not get damaged but many times adds to the fire load of
11 IstructE – Introduction to the fire safety engineering of structures.

11
the building during the event. Ideally they are assessed during visual inspection.
There is no need to conduct excessive testing on these parts or utilities of the
building. Visual inspection of the building with a team of crafts men can determine
the condition of the utilities or non-structural members.
2.3.1. Visual Inspection
Eye of an experienced engineer is more valuable than any other tool in the
condition assessment of non-structural members or utilities. A team consisting of
experts/craftsmen in respective field can conduct this task. Table 2 will give a
comprehensive insight about the important things to be inspected during visual
inspection
Item Nature of Damage Description Recommen

damage rating dation
(FD, WD,
SD, ID, (1--5)13
BW)12
Windows
Doors
Detached Balconies
Roof Covering
(Shingles, Tiles etc.)
Partition Walls
Façade Elements
HVAC
Plumbing
Electrical wirings
Railings
Flooring material
Dropped ceiling
Light Fixtures
Alarm System
Mechanical equipment
Table 2: Non-structural members’ and utilities’ visual inspection report
12 FD= fire damage, SD= Smoke damage, WD= Water damage, ID= Internal damage, BW= Bio
waste like blood, carcases etc.
13 1= needs cleaning, 2= needs surface treatment (polishing shinning etc.), 3= needs minor repair,
4= needs major repair, 5= Replacement.

12
While assessing the condition of utilities and non-structural part of the building
nature of damage has to be determined to realise that what was the cause of
damage. Either it was because of fire or because of water or fire extinguishing
foam that fire brigade have used or damage has been done due to smoke etc.
Once cause of damage is recognised then extent of damage is assessed and
probably be given rating from 5 to 1. Five is the worst case scenario where only
replacement is the option. While giving utilities the damage rating then eye should
be kept upon the price factor.
2.4. Condition assessment of structural members
Condition assessment of structural members is very vital part of condition

assessment. Structures’ damage is bit technical to estimate and recognise.
Structural condition assessment is done by the help of various methods which
includes various laboratory testing, field inspection and field testing. During the
general assessment or desk study of the building the type of building and its
structure is studied. Afterwards a complete strategy is developed about the
structural assessment. It would be easier to approach each kind of structure
individually (e.g. columns, beams, roof, slab etc.), especially in visual inspection.
2.4.1. Visual Inspection
Visual inspection is a very powerful tool and one of the most common and oldest
available non-destructive testing techniques available. Visual inspection gives a
wealth of information about the structure and its condition but has certain
requirements and limitations. Visual inspection can only be governed by a
technically sound professional who has knowledge about structure, material
science and construction methodologies. Visual inspection only gives impression
of visible issues and hidden issues remain unnoticed. It also doesn’t give us any
quantitative information about the properties of the material. Due to these
13
limitations, often visual inspection is not sufficient and has to be supplemented

by other non-destructive and partially destructive testing techniques.14
Visual assessment of a fire damaged concrete structure is practiced to observe

the heat patterns, change in colour of concrete, spalling of concrete, cracking in
concrete, any visible deflection of structural members like load bearing walls,
beams, roof etc. Cracks in concrete due to deflection may be present in the
structure before the event of fire but still it is advisable to consider them during
inspection. Normally concrete is considered as fire resistant and non-combustible
material but if the temperature of concrete reaches upto 300 Celsius then
oxidation of iron compounds in the aggregates and cement paste occurs and it
gives a pink texture to the concrete. Pink colour of concrete refers to the damaged
concrete and indicates towards the fact that concrete can’t be used anymore. At
higher temperatures that usually doesn’t occur in building fires, concrete turns it’s
colour to whitish grey and then to yellowish-brown colour ultimately. So care has
to be taken while observing the damage of concrete with reference to its colour.15
Figure 1: Pink texture of fire damaged concrete16
Tapping with a hammer and chisel is also one of the oldest methods to inspect
the strength of concrete. This is not an exact methodology to estimate concrete
14 http://www.engineeringcivil.com/visual-inspection-of-concrete-structure.html accessed
10.07.2014.
15 http://www.structuremag.org/?p=4102 accessed 10.07.2014.
16 http://www.structuremag.org/?p=4102 accessed 10.07.2014.
14
strength yet in preliminary assessment, it proves to be a handy method to get

some idea of the damage immediately. This technique is highly subjective and
depends upon the personal competence. A test hammer of approximately 400 g
is hammered against the concrete at elbow height. The sound of the impact is
used to judge the condition of the concrete. A sharp metallic sound is the
indication of strong concrete while a dull thud is an indication of weak and
damaged concrete. At spalled surfaces hammer test can’t be used. The table 3
below give us the criteria for concrete’s strength17
Strength of concrete Results of Blow of hammer (0.4 kg) upon concrete

surface
(N/mm2)
Below 6.0 Sound-toneless deep

Dent at impact surface with crumbling edges
6.0 to 10.0 Sound-slightly toneless.
Dent at impact surface has smooth edges, concrete
crumbles
10.0 to 20.0 Sound-clear
At impact surface a whitish mark remains
Above 20.0 Sound-ringing metallic
At impact surface there is a mark-visible
Table 3: Hammer sound test criteria for concrete’s strength 18
Chisel and metallic pencils are also used for the evaluation of concrete’s strength
and the depth of damage that has occurred. In this case hammer is placed at the
right angle to the surface and then stroked form behind with the hammer. The
results of the practice gives the idea about the concrete’s strength and also shows
that upto which depth concrete has endured damage. Usually the damaged
concrete that already has plane of failure spalled away and exposes the
reinforcements. Chisel can also be used to scratch the surface and resultantly
can emit some light over the condition of the concrete. Table 4 gives us the criteria
for Concrete strength.19
10.07.2014.
10.07.2014.
10.07.2014.
15
Strength of concrete Results of Blow of hammer Results of Scratching by

(0.4kg) upon chisel placed chisel
(N/mm2)
at right angles to concrete
surface
Below 6.0 Chisel is easily driven into Concrete cuts easily and
concrete
crumbles
6.0 to 10.0 Chisel can be driven into Visible scratches 1-1.5 mm

concrete deeper than 5 mm
deep
10.0 to 20.0 Thin scales split off round the Visible scratches no deeper
mark than 1 mm
Above 20.0 Mark is not very deep Barely visible scratches
Table 4: Hammer and Chisel test criteria for concrete’s strength 20
For visual diagnosis of reinforced cement concrete structural element, following

table is assembled. On scale 1 to 5, structural elements can be categorised
depending upon various sorts of damages and degree of damage, it has endured.
Degree of Observations
Damage
Colour Finishes Spalling Cracks Deflections Reinfor-
cement
1 (cleaning Usual Unaltered None Hair line None Not

required) cracks observed exposed
2 (Surface Usual Surface Slight Cracks but None Not

treatment Peeling haven’t Observed exposed
required) reached
Reinforcement
3 (Minor Pinkish/ Significan Localized Minor None Barely

Repair t loss structural Observed exposed
Reddish
required) Cracks < 25%
20http://www.engineeringcivil.com/visual-inspection-of-concrete-structure.html accessed
10.07.14.
16
4 (Major Pinkish/ Total loss Extensive Major Minimum Signific-

Repair Whitish structural but yet not antly
Required) grey cracks significant exposed
>25%
but
<50%
5 Whitish Destroyed Total Disintegrated Visible Naked

(Replacemen Grey surface concrete significant or
t) lost deflection >50%
Table 5: Visual Inspection Guide for fire damaged R.C.C elements21
Visual inspection can give some idea about the structure and its residual strength
and has to be supplemented by other NDT and partially destructive tests to create
a clear picture of the situation. The results obtained by one
team/engineer/craftsman can differentiate from the other as these testing
techniques are highly subjective and depends upon personal competence.
2.4.2. Field Testing
After visual inspection, field tests have to be performed to get better

understanding about the structure and its residual strength. Various kind of field
tests are available most of them are non-destructive tests like Schmidt Hammer,
ultrasonic pulse velocity etc. Except these non-destructive tests, Core cutter test
is also very helpful to understand the structure and gives more accurate results
although it is considered as partial destructive test. Location of these field tests
have to be carefully decided by an engineer as it has a very obvious effect on the
results.
21Modified from (Concrete Society. 2008. Technical Report No. 68 – Assessment, Design and
Repair of Fire-damaged).
17
2.4.2.1. Schmidt/Rebound Hammer
A Rebound Hammer is a simple, handy tool used to measure the elastic

properties or compressive strength of concrete or rock, mainly surface hardness
and penetration resistance. When using it for fire damage structures it has its own
limitations and usefulness.22
Figure 2: Schmidt hammer test on fire damaged concrete structure 23
The Schmidt rebound hammer works on the principle that the rebound of an
elastic mass depends upon the hardness of the surface against which the mass
strikes. When the plunger of the rebound hammer is pressed against the surface
of the concrete, it will hit the concrete at a defined energy and the spring-
controlled mass rebounds. The extent of such a rebound depends upon the
surface hardness of the concrete. The surface hardness, and therefore the
rebound, is taken to be related to the compressive strength of the concrete. The
rebound value is read from a graduated scale and is designated as the rebound
number or rebound index. By reference to the conversion chart, the rebound
value can be used to determine the compressive strength. There is little apparent
theoretical relationship between the strength of concrete and the rebound number
of the hammer. However, within limits, empirical correlations have been
established between strength properties and the rebound number.24
22 Haseeb Uz Zaman, Tahir Saleem, Azhar Shehzad, Mohsin Ashfaq & Muhammad Bilal. 2011.
Comparison of compressive strength of concrete calculated by destructive and non-destructive
testing. Chapter 6.
23 http://www.theconcreteportal.com/nde.html accessed 11.07.2014.

testing. Chapter 6.
18
Schmidt hammer is really a useful handy technique but can’t be really relied upon.
It is a test which requires personal competence. The values of the test are quite
variable even when same test is performed on the same element at two different
places. Reason for that is the nature of the test. As described earlier that rebound
hammer calculates the surface hardness of the concrete which then we relate to
the compressive strength with empirical charts/graphs. So if there will be an
aggregate just beneath the surface of the test point then it will give high value
and if there is a plane of weakness (cement paste in the fire damaged concrete
is the weaker plane) then it will show less values. Moreover, the nature of the test
and its requirement to interpret hammer value to the compressive strength
summed up to deviation of 15% to 30%. Conditions of smooth surface and
repeated number of tests at the same points and no of points required for
successful testing make it very difficult to test the fire damaged concrete
structures where concrete spalling and disintegration is often the case.25
2.4.2.2. Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity
This is a commonly used non-destructive test. It is done to assess the quality and
compressive strength of concrete by ultrasonic pulse velocity method. The
method consists of measuring the time of travel of an ultrasonic pulse passing
through the concrete being tested. Comparatively higher velocity is obtained
when concrete quality is good in terms of density, uniformity and homogeneity
etc. To evaluate the compressive strength of concrete we use graphical
relationship between pulse velocity and compressive strength of concrete.26
The functioning principal of ultrasonic pulse velocity is entirely different from

Schmidt Hammer. A pulse of longitudinal vibrations is produced by an electro-
acoustical transducer, which is held in contact with one surface of the concrete
under test. When the pulse generated is transmitted into the concrete from the
transducer using a liquid coupling material such as grease or cellulose paste, it
25http://www.concrete.org.uk/fingertips_nuggets.asp?cmd=display&id=893 accessed 11.07.14.

26Haseeb Uz Zaman, Tahir Saleem, Azhar Shehzad, Mohsin Ashfaq & Muhammad Bilal. 2011.
testing. Chapter 7.
19
undergoes multiple reflections at the boundaries of the different material phases

within the concrete. A complex system of stress waves develops, which include
both longitudinal and shear waves, and propagates through the concrete. The
first waves to reach the receiving transducer are the longitudinal waves, which
are converted into an electrical signal by a second transducer. Electronic timing
circuits enable the transit time T of the pulse to be measured.27
Ultrasonic pulse velocity is a good technique for examining concrete but it has its
limitations as other non-destructive testing methods. This testing technique
measures the propagation time of waves through the concrete in reality and there
is no direct relation of wave propagation timing and concrete’s strength but some
indirect relations are used to get concrete’s strength. Hence, possibility of error
and deviation from result is there due to the conversions involved28. Moreover, it
indicates the level of cracking in the structure with the fluctuation of the
propagation time of wave within set distance not the concrete’s strength. Although
concrete’s strength is then calculated by indirect relations.29
Moreover specific care has to be taken while conducting ultrasonic pulse velocity
tests. Experienced testing staff are required as this test depends upon the
competence of the inspector’s technical skills of getting the results and then the
conversion of data to compressive strength. Several factors have their say in the
end results for example
 Temperature of concrete
If the temperature of concrete is between 0 degree to 40 degree Celsius, then we

can get right results otherwise if temperature is above 40 or below 0 then the
deviation will occur and respective corrections have to be implemented.
 Moisture level
testing. Chapter 7.
28 From pulse velocity to strength through graphs and formulas.

testing. Chapter 7.
20
If moisture level of concrete is more than usual then it will also cause deviation in
readings as waves propagates through water filled pockets in concrete faster than
the dry air filled concrete. Therefore, structure, that is not dried after it became
wet due to the water sprayed over it due to firefighting, cannot be accurately
assessed. Usually, there is a difference of 2% is there which can be adjusted.
 Surface of testing
Surface on which transducers are placed must be smooth and if it is not then it
must be prepared by grinding and then by applying wax to tightly put transducers
against the surface of concrete. As in case of fire damaged building where
excessive spalling is experienced, there this methodology can’t give the right
impression about the concrete. In these cases spalled layer of concrete can be
removed then tests can be performed.
 Effect of reinforcement
The propagation travelling time through the reinforcement bar is almost twice as
of concrete hence if the reinforcement bar is along the length of the testing points
then tests can’t be relied upon. This Puts a serious question marks on the
application and utility of test.
All these limitations of this testing technique doesn’t let this NDT technique to
qualify as a reliable testing technique for the evaluation of the fire damaged
concrete structure but still can give valuable input if properly conducted with care
to its sensitivities and results are properly adjusted for respective deviations.30
2.4.2.3. Windsor-Probe or Penetration Resistance test
Windsor probe or penetration resistance test is used as a non-destructive testing

technique for the evaluation of concrete’s compressive strength. The nature of
test doesn’t gives accurate evaluation of compressive strength because of the
properties and nature of the method. The equipment as shown in the figure below
consists of the gun-powder actuated driver and a steel alloy probe. The probe is
pushed into the concrete by the measured amount of energy supplied to it by the
explosion of gun powder in the cartridge. The depth upto which the probe
30 CPWD, India. 2002, Handbook of repair and rehabilitation of R.C.C buildings, page no III-20.
21
penetrates into the concrete is related to the strength of concrete by the help of
empirical relationship. The results are usually not much disturbed due to the
moisture content or concrete texture but care has to be taken in term of surface
preparation and minimum dimensions of the test subject. Limitations states that
minimum edge distance and member thickness should be 150 mm. Moreover the
presence of reinforcement direct under the probe or in the vicinity of 50 mm will
obviously be a problem and will give misleading reading hence have to be
avoided.31
Figure 3: Penetration Resistance32
The accuracy of the test depends upon the correlation used to relate probe
penetration with the compressive strength of concrete. The correlation is provided
by the manufacturer for specific type of aggregate and concrete mix used
because. It is sensitive to the aggregate hardness unlike crushing test of concrete
cubes. For concrete of same strength measured by crushing test of concrete
cubes, penetration resistance test can give different values of strength if one has
harder aggregate and the other one has softer. Hence the charts or correlation
provided is for a specific aggregate concrete because it is prepared by the tests
on concrete with specific aggregate in the laboratory.33
Windsor probe test can be employed for the evaluation of the fire damaged
concrete structure but again inherits the limitations associated to non-destructive
testing techniques. It is sensitive to the aggregate used in concrete hence
31 V.M. Malhotra, Nicholas J. Carino. 2004. Handbook on Nondestructive Testing of Concrete

Second Edition. Page no 2-4.
22
comprehensive information of the concrete mix and aggregate used in the

concrete of the structure must be available to get results with better accuracy.
Because only then that kind of concrete mix with same aggregate can be re-
casted in cubes and these cubes can be then used to formulate the correlation
between penetration of probe and the compressive strength of concrete. Another
way to use this testing technique is for the comparison of undamaged concrete
and fire damaged concrete of the same building. The penetration depth of probe
will be obviously different for damaged and undamaged concrete and as both
concrete are of the same structure and most probably will be having same
concrete mix and aggregate. Hence the information of the concrete is valuable
for employing penetration resistance test for accessing concrete compressive
strength. Penetration resistance test is not sensitive to the personal skills though
probe has to be at right angle to the testing surface and it is compulsory but
doesn’t require special skills to be carried out. Surface of the testing subject has
to be smooth for the test to be conducted. In case of fire damaged concrete which
has spalled has to be prepared for the test first. The general level of accuracy of
results in penetration resistance test is considered to be around 20% when
compared to the actual compressive strength obtained by crushing cube test.
Hence penetration resistance test can give valuable input but once again can’t
be completely relied upon especially if right correlation can’t be obtained and
structure is completely burnt out and no same concrete is available in the
structure for comparison purpose.34
2.4.2.4. Core Sampling and Testing
Core sampling and testing is one of the most trusted techniques used as non-
destructive testing technique. Actually it is partially destructive testing technique.
Core sampling and testing is pretty much reliable if properly conducted and
conditions fulfilled. In core sampling, the core is cut by rotary cutting tool with
industrial diamond bits at its tip. Concrete core is obtained and then taken to
laboratory for testing. Concrete cores size (diameter) is not specified but
minimum criteria is the diameter of the core must be 3.5 times the maximum size
23
of aggregate. The length to diameter ratio of the core that is used to measure
compressive strength must be between 1 to 2, most preferable between 1 to 1.2.
Before testing core can be trimmed to the length satisfying the above criteria of
length to diameter ratio with the help of diamond saw.35
Core cutter test is not limited to the measurement of compressive strength

measurement but also helpful in measuring the depth of concrete damaged due
to fire. It also reveals other construction flaws like honey combing due to poor
compaction that could possibly be there and would be responsible for poor
strengths calculated by NDTs instead of the damage endured by fire. These cores
obtained are also used in petrography (discussed later).
Figure 4: Core obtained by drilling36
Core obtained by drilling don’t have smooth ends moreover due to fire there may
be some spalling and rough texture so it is important to smooth these regularities
up and made end parallel and smooth. Usually it is done by capping. Material
used for capping is high aluminium cement or sulphur sand mix. During obtaining
core samples special care has to be taken into account so that there wouldn’t be
any damage to core (usually it happens). Then these cores are tested in
compressive strength measuring machine by loading them upto crushing hence
compressive strengths are measured.37
Core sampling and testing is a reliable technique to evaluate the condition of

concrete and acts as the final piece of the assessment by NDT puzzle. It is
36 http://www.cctia.org/FAQ_Files/10.001_Concrete_Core_Tests.html accessed 21.07.2014.
24
sensitive to some factors majorly the geometry and dimensions of the core and
lack of standardization. But the results are fairly accurate for normal and standard
core sizes in normal practice. Core’s compressive strength obtained from good
concrete and from damaged concrete from same structure or even different ones
can be compared in order to evaluate the damage done by fire.
2.4.2.5. Deflection measurement with digital theodolite
Fire cause sometimes permanent deformations within the reinforced concrete

elements. If the temperature of reinforcement reach above their specified limits
and then there is some permanent set in them after it is cooled down. Loss of
strength and cross sectional area causes extra deflections in flexural members
like beams and slab elements. Flexural members are deflected in nature to some
extent already under the sustained loads before the event of fire as well but the
deflections are not huge in general and mostly not even detectable. After serious
fire, significant deflections are observed mainly due to the elongation or other
kind of change in properties of reinforcements. These deflections can be
measured with the help of Digital Theodolite upto the precision of 1 sec. Hence
deflections of these flexural members are quite helpful for the understanding of
the condition of reinforcements in the R.C.C structural elements.38
2.4.3. Laboratory testing
Investigation of the fire damaged structure started by the means of desk study,
where general knowledge about fire and structure was studied. After desk study,
visual inspection is carried out to witness the damage and to have some idea
about the nature, and extent of damage. Visual inspection and inspection of
debris is concluded to understand the fire behaviour and properties like if
aluminium frames of windows are melted then it means that the temperature of
fire would be around 500 Celsius. After visual inspection of the building’s
38Ivan Detchev, Ayman Habib, Mamdouh El-Badry. 2011. Case study of beam deformation
monitoring using conventional close range photogrammetry. Page no 1.
25
structural and non-structural parts condition assessment with field and laboratory
testing can be conducted as damage is located during visual inspection part. The
field test mainly consisting of NDTs and partially destructive testing like core
sampling. These NDTs mainly gives quantitative idea about the residual
strengths of the structural members. The results obtained from NDTs can exhibit
accuracy upto 80% with 20% margin of disturbance (which is still a lot). If that is
what is required then further delicate laboratory testing techniques like
Petrography, Differential thermal analysis and Thermo gravimetric analysis
(TGA) and Fire modelling Techniques are not required. But if exact nature, extent
and depth of damage is required to be evaluated then following laboratory
techniques will do the rest of job. In case of fire damaged buildings, Petrography
test is the ideal test and give what is needed. Other Techniques like DTA and
TGA wouldn’t be discussed, as they are not usually required or feasible to be
carried out.
2.4.3.1. Petrography
Petrography test is like putting the structure under microscope, literally.

Petrography is actually a geological technique that is employed in civil
engineering in which small prepared samples of concrete are studied under
different microscopes (including polarized light, or petrographic microscopes and
scanning electron microscopes). In this test chemical and mineralogical studies
of concrete samples are conducted. 39
Petrographic test are conducted for understanding the cause of failure, condition
assessment of damaged structure due to known cause like fire or freeze thaw
cycles etc. Petrographic testing can define a range of parameters that can exactly
evaluate the fire damaged building. Some of the common parameters that can be
investigated by Petrography are as under40
 Grading, Type, condition, colour and shape of aggregate

 Nature of cement paste including the addition of admixture.
39 Laura J. Powers. 2002. Petrography as a Concrete Repair Tool. Page no 22.

40http://www.concrete.org.uk/fingertips_nuggets.asp?cmd=display&id=575 accessed 25.07.14.
26
 Presence of impurities and air voids in concrete

 Bond between aggregate and cement paste
 Information about the chemical attacks, sulphate attack, freeze thaw
cycles and Alkali-silica attack and carbonation depth.
 Depth of fire damage and temperature of fire41
Petrography is done on the samples that are obtained from the field by core
sampling at various depths. These samples are then treated with proper surface
treatments like polishing or thin sectioning to prepare them for testing. Thin
sections are prepared of the thickness one quarter of the hair to study it under
petrographic microscope. The sample must be extracted with care as it must
inhibit the characteristics of the damage that is needed to be studied. Moreover
information of the concrete mix is also helpful like water cement ratio, concrete
mix and minimum air content.
As here we are only interested in fire damaged buildings so limiting petrography’s

utility for fire damaged buildings. Petrography can investigate about the condition
and colour of aggregate. It can also investigate about the bonding between
aggregate and cement paste moreover can study the crack pattern in cement
paste. All these inherent properties of Petrography makes it a handy tool for the
investigation of fire damaged building. As it is an established fact that at high
temperature there are chemical and physical changes in the material ingredients
of concrete. Aggregate colour changes, changes in the crystals of materials,
crack pattern and bonding between aggregate and paste all occurs at high
temperatures. These changes can be identified by Petrography and then the data
obtained is used to do fire analysis and to determine the depth of damage as well
as the temperature of fire. The colour changes and pattern of cracking and crystal
pattern are observed to determine the temperature that concrete has attained.
Following figure sheds some light over the fact, that how Petrography can be
employed to determine the condition of the concrete and to understand the
temperature of concrete under the event of fire.
41 http://www.concrete.org.uk/fingertips_nuggets.asp?cmd=display&id=575 accessed 25.07.14.

27
Figure 5: Colour of aggregate in Petrography test 42 43
2.4.3.2. Tensile Test
After concrete, reinforcements are tested in order to identify their residual

strength and evaluate the extent of damage it has endured in the unfaithful event.
If concrete cover is not thick and spalling of cover has occurred then there are
fair chances that reinforcement bars will be damaged. To measure that tensile
test is performed on piece of reinforcement bar extracted from the fire damaged
structure. These reinforcement bars are first cleaned and made clear form any
concrete of cement attached to it then it is tested until failure in UTM.
Figure 6: Universal testing Machine for tensile test44
The samples are placed within the grips of the UTM and then they are loaded
under uniform tensile load until failure. The reinforcement bar piece will be
42 Laura J. Powers. 2002. Petrography as a Concrete Repair Tool. Page no 23

43 Colour of aggregate shows that the temperature attained by the concrete was from 570 to 1100
Celsius. This is the temperature at which colour changes from Pink to Brick red.
44 http://www.engineeringarchives.com/les_mom_tensiletest.html accessed 26.07.2014
28
elongated in the centre. In case of ductile failure it will show necking and in case
of brittle failure it will not show any necking as shown in the next figure. The data
is obtained and inform us about the ultimate load, ultimate stress, maximum
elongation and reduction in area. Form these data other important information
like yield strength and Young’s modulus can be obtained. Hence Tensile Test
gives us virtually all necessary information we require about the reinforcements
of the fire damaged concrete structure. The effectiveness of tensile test is more
important in the sense that it doesn’t calculate the strength by any indirect
measure but actually gives the original residual strength of the damaged
reinforcement bars.
2.4.3.3. Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM)
SEM test is conducted on the damaged reinforcement specimens to understand

the patterns of the material fibre, which gives valuable information about the
stress in the reinforcement bars. Especially in case of pre stress concrete
members, this technique is useful to understand the residual tensile stress in the
pre stressed reinforcement (HS strands). This is pretty helpful in term to
understand the overall stability and integrity of pre-stressed concrete elements.
Summary
Fire damages the building and the extent of damage depends upon
temperature and duration of fire, Conditions of fire (e.g. air ventilation), building
materials, location of fire (basement, top floor, etc.), quality of design and
construction and load sustained by building. After the fire, building structure
must be secured first and building must be cleared by respective authorities
for further investigation.
Building is consisted of various materials (concrete, steel, glass, aluminium,

other metals, timber etc.). Each material has its unique behaviour when
exposed to fire and elevated temperature, which depends upon their nature,
29
physical and chemical properties. Concrete is an inert material and virtually

incombustible. It is classified as A1 category material by European
classification system of building material. Concrete undergoes different
physical changes when its temperature rises. At 300 C, due to the oxidation
of aggregates present in the concrete, it changes its colour to pink. This is
considered as the indication that concrete has undergone significant loss of
strength. After fire, reinforcing steel retains its strength significantly upto 450
C in case of cold rolled steel and 600 C in case of hot rolled steel. Under these
limits it can be reused. Pre-stressing steel loses significant strength at 200 C
to 400 C. At 400 C, it loses 50% of its strength. Hence more sensitive to fire.
Before continuing to the building’s condition assessment, homework about the

case object has to be done which includes desk study of building structure,
type of building and construction materials, floor area damaged, scope of
damage, general information about the building, size and duration of fire etc.
Building documents like blue prints and fire report from fire or police
department can be used for the task. Condition survey (visual assessment) of
utilities and non-structural members can be quick and decisive as usually
building inspectors don’t need further testing to understand their condition.
Visual inspection of debris provides with important information about the fire.
For structural members both condition survey (visual inspection) and condition
assessment (field and laboratory tests) are required to exactly establish the
residual strength and stability of structure. Non-destructive testing is the main
technique employed in field testing. Schmidt hammer, ultra-sonic pulse
velocity, Windsor-probe test, Ground penetration radars, laser scanners and
thermography all are used. But according to their nature and feasibility usually
first three are practical for buildings. These all three tests don’t give accurate
idea about the concrete’s condition and structure’s health due to their nature
and technique.
Schmidt hammer doesn’t measure the compressive strength directly but infact
measures surface hardness, which is then used to estimate compressive
strength with the help of empirical correlations. Ultrasonic pulse velocity test
30
measures the velocity of pulse between set distance of two transducers. It

doesn’t measure the compressive strength directly either and obtains it by
correlation as well. Use of these techniques over spalled concrete surface
which is usually the case of fire damaged buildings is difficult and sometimes
not even practical. Windsor-probe test indicated about the residual strength of
concrete by penetrating probe into the concrete and measuring the length that
is left outside of concrete. It is very sensitive to the aggregates used in
concrete mix and requires aggregate information for relative precision. All
these NDTs for evaluation of concrete doesn’t give accurate results and hence
must be supported by core test which is comprehensively reliable but partially
destructive. If core sampling and testing is done with care and required
conditions are fulfilled then, it can give reliable information about concrete and
structure. Hence, if possible then, must be given first preference over all other
field tests for the evaluation of concrete and damage done. For assessing
condition of steel in flexural members digital theodolite is used to measure
deflections.
If field test, which usually are not very accurate, are not enough and higher
level of accuracy is required then laboratory tests like Petrography for
concrete and tensile test and Scanning electron microscopy for
reinforcements are done. Petrography is a complete test as it gives
approximately all kind of information that is required to access condition of
concrete in fire damaged concrete buildings. Techniques like DTA and TGA
are not required or even feasible sometimes after Petrography. So collectively
in authors opinion, core sampling and testing combined with Petrography are
sufficient to evaluate concrete in case of fire damaged concrete building. But
to jump for these testing techniques in every case of fire damage is not
advisable. For light to moderate damages simple visual inspection and NDT
testing may be sufficient enough.
31
3. Rehabilitation and Retrofitting of fire damaged building
After it is established that rehabilitation of the building and retrofitting of the

structure is feasible both on technical and financial grounds, rehab of the building
will be started. While discussing the rehabilitation and retrofitting of the building,
various options pops up. Each option has its own properties, feasibilities and
therefore shortcomings too. Similarly every case is a unique case as well and has
its own requirements. In some buildings. We have the luxury to consider different
solutions and select from them but sometimes this is not possible due to some
restricting factor like services of the building doesn’t permit that.
For fire damaged building not many options are available for retrofitting of
structure. Most conventional ones are strengthening of structural members with
fibre reinforced plastic and replacement of damaged concrete either with
shotcrete or in-situ placement of concrete. These are quite commonly practiced
and may not be very suitable in every case. Some new methods for retrofitting of
fire damaged structures will also be discussed that are not common for such
cases like steel jacketing, concrete jacketing or provision of extra members.
These measures are usually used for other purposes like protection against earth
quakes but if chosen after careful analysis then may prove to be beneficial in
comparison to other more conventional measures.
Different rehabilitation and retrofitting measures will be presented in this chapter

with their respective mechanism, feasibility, pros and cons etc. These measures
will then be assessed for various factors like sustainability, insurance factor,
safety etc. Hence at the end, it will provide help for designers to choose from the
solutions presented in the document according to the unique demands of the
building and specific goals of the project.
3.1. Cleaning
Just after the fire building is in filthy condition, depending upon the size, nature
and duration of fire. It is better to clean the building and secure the residual stuff
32
as soon as possible after building is cleared to be safe by the police or fire

department. It will minimize the impact of damage and make it easier and cost
efficient to recover the building and belongings. Water or fire extinguishing foam
is used to extinguish the fire. Therefore, the only worrying point is not fire and
smoke damage but possible water damage as well. This measure must be taken
preferably just after the fire even before assessment and evaluation and decision
making phase. This will not allow the soot and smoke deposits or penetrate inside
and further damage will be prevented as the acidic fumes and particles in smoke
and soot will not be granted enough time to inflict damage.45
In the beginning all water accumulated in the building must be removed by the
help of pumps and manual equipment. Fire extinguishing foam is removed as well
from the building. It is very important to dry the wet surface as it will otherwise
generates the problem of mold. High ventilation in the building is highly
recommended and if possible or required then dehumidifiers can be used.
Professional cleaners are required for cleaning job in case of heavy fires.46
Heavy soot47 will be deposited on the accessories and the building structure. It is
important to deal with it properly and remove it from the surface otherwise it will
deteriorate them and the smoke smell will become a permanent stay in the facility.
Inspection of building services like HVAC is important. All such building services
or property that has been damaged beyond repair should be identified in the
beginning and disposed properly. For the remaining belongings and building
structure can then be subjected to cleaning and repair works.
There are various techniques to deal with soot deposited on different surfaces.
For curtains and upholstery (furniture), it is preferred to use vacuum cleaners
before washing them. It is necessary to uplift soot with the nozzle of appropriates
vacuum cleaner before washing otherwise soot will penetrate into the fabric. Soot
have to be removed from the walls and ceiling as well with the help of chemical
45 Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences, University of Florida. 1998. The Disaster Handbook
National Edition. Section (13.17). Page no 1.

47 Soot is the oil that evaporates during the fire from the materials that are burnt.
33
sponge and if required then some counter chemicals can be used. If soot is not
properly removed from the surface of walls and ceiling then the smell of fire
wouldn’t go away.48
Figure 7: Soot cleaning from Ceiling49
3.2. Removal of smoke odour
Smoke penetrates the building in the event of fire. The smoke is very problematic
in case of fire. Smoke penetrates virtually through very other material present in
the building. It persists in the building if not properly removed. Records recovered
from 1906 San Francisco fire that are currently stored in National Achieves of
USA, still have very strong odour of smoke. It can give the idea that how critical
this problem is. To understand the gravity of the problem first it is necessary to
understand smoke and its composition. Smoke is the combination of gases, liquid
and solid fumes that emits from the fuel. They are considered as the unburnt part
of the fuel and they may contains toxic and carcinogenic particles. The size of
these particles is less than 10 microns in diameter, mostly they are less than 1
micron. Hence it is critical to get rid of smoke particles as they pose serious health
issue and sometimes acidic fumes that may contain corrodes and damages the
property and structure like wise.50
48 Department of Public health, Los Angeles County. 2013. How to clean up smoke and soot from
a fire. Page # 2.
49 http://www.ccwonline.com.au/prod437.htm accessed 11.08.2014.
50 http://chicora.org/fire.html accessed 11.08.2014.
34
Thermal insulation can significant capacity to store smoke particles and retain it
for long time. If there is any such insulation in contact with smoke then it’s better
to replace it otherwise dry cleaning and treatment with counter chemicals will take
care of the problem to some extent. Thermal insulations at attic are mostly
damaged in case of fire if there are any. It is better to replace the insulation with
new one. Smoke that has penetrated the ducts can be sealed on the walls of the
ducts with the help of chemical sealers as it is very difficult to access the inner
side of these ducts.51
For the rest of the building and its belongings thermal foggers, ozone machines
and air scrubbers are used. Aerosol sprays or deodorisers can’t cover the smoke
smell for long and sometimes they mix with the smoke and creates a new smell
that might be more irritating. Thermal foggers creates a fog from water based
masking agent. It super heats the masking agent that produces the fog. Fog then
travels through the building and its properties just like smoke and reaches where
smoke might have reached. Thermal foggers comprehensively deals with the
smoke but it has its disadvantages too. The material that has already been under
stress from fire and smoke is then again subjected to the high temperature fog to
ward off smell. It puts extra stress over the material of property.52
Ozone machines produces ozone in large quantities. Ozone roams through the
building and disinfect the building. The problem associated with ozone treatment
is serious though as ozone is a strong oxidizing agent and oxidize virtually all
organic matter. Due to ozone treatment, leather will be damaged. It embrittles
paper, inks and dyes will be faded, and if concrete spalling is extensive then it
will reacted to the exposed steel surface to make metallic oxide. Moreover ozone
causes irritation in eyes, lungs and skin. Hence its application is very limited and
should not be used everywhere as it virtually ages every material in household. 53
35
Figure 8: Thermal fogger (A), Ozone Machine (B) 54, 55
Air scrubbers are used to depollute the particles and fumes from the air. Smoke
particles that are suspended in the air or trapped in the corners will be removed
with the help of air scrubbers. Special air scrubbers are used for smoke damage
that cycles air 5 to 6 times in an hour. After repeated cycles the air is pollutant
free and smoke particles are arrested by it.56
Figure 9: Air Scrubber57
3.3. Rehabilitation of non-structural members and utilities
During fire, non-structural members and utilities undergoes more damage than
structural members. Thanks to the inherent properties of concrete and steel that
54http://www.agi.my/index.php/our-solutions/disaster-restoration/a-restoration-services-
include/stubborn-unpleasant-odor/thermal-and-mist-treatment-to-remove-all-types-of-malodor/
accessed 11.08.2014.
55 http://www.cleanfax.com/articles/105969-effective-thermal-fogging accessed 11.08.2014.
56 http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-an-air-scrubber.htm accessed 11.08.2014.
57 http://www.emssales.net/store/cart.php?m=product_detail&slug=predator-600-portable-air-
scrubber. (accessed 11.08.2014.)
36
makes them inert even on high temperature and provides necessary fire proof
properties up till sufficient temperature. Fire damage is quite serious in case of
materials made up of combustible material like plastics, fibre plastics, wood etc.
and these are the materials that are usually used for non-structural members and
utilities. Commonly, HVAC ducts are made from plastics and fibre plastics not
only get damaged but infact increases the fire load.
Utilities like HVAC, if decided to be repaired after feasibility studies then they
would be restored but usually that’s only the case of partial destruction. If they
have endured heavy damage then it is usually better to restore them. Special
attention can be provided towards the improvement of already existing systems.
Challenges sometimes are there from the provisions and code requirements.
Sometimes building design doesn’t support the changes and actual material for
replacement is not available in market or have to be exported from somewhere
else which cost too much time or money.
Non-structural members like façade, partition walls, suspended ceiling etc. bears
heavy damage as well and again their damage depends upon the material of their
composition. Glass façade usually gets heavy damage where it gets in contact
with the direct flames and usually glass is broken within 30 minutes. Glass façade
provides safety issues as they retains gases and smoke inside the building
because of lack of sufficient openings which markedly increases the causalities
in fire incident. Glass panels that are damaged has to be replaced with similar
ones and rest of the damaged glass tiles can be rehabilitated just by cleaning.
Other façade materials like metallic sheets, terracotta, marble tiles, brick tiles etc.
doesn’t suffer heavy damage and usually just few tiles that would be in direct
access of high temperatures are required to be replaced. Otherwise, cleaning job
will take care of the rest of the job. Sometimes it is required to use Soda-blasting
technique to remove the accumulated soot and smoke over the surface. Soda
blasting is a very handy technique in which Sodium bicarbonate particles that are
very fragile in nature are bombarded over the surface from an air pressured
nozzle just like paint job for vehicles. These small particles struck the surface and
explodes into smaller particles and takes the coating soot or rust or smoke with
37
them, leaving clear undamaged original surface beneath. Soda also spreads over
the surface and deodorize the surface from smoke smell.58
Figure 10: Soda-blasting59
Walls, like façade also depends upon the material of construction. In case of brick
of concrete walls, damage is not significant as both have good resistibility. The
damaged part of plaster or concrete can be removed and repair is provided with
new concrete and plaster but usually it is not required. Surface treatment of
roughness and spalled concrete is provided. Afterwards soda-blasting is done to
remove smoke and soot deposited on the surface. Partition walls are sometimes
need removal of partitioning boards and repair of wooden frame. If wooden frame
is deeply damaged then it is better to replace it. For plaster boards once again
soda blasting will provide fitting solution to get rid from fire stains and odour.
Same goes for suspended ceilings. Those panels that are too much damaged
are replaced otherwise they are cleaned with soda blasting.
3.4. Retrofitting of structural members
Structure is the skeleton of the building. It provides the integrity, strength and
stability to the building to perform its function. Structural safety is one of the
outmost important thing. During fire, building’s structure resists the fire and
counters it upto a certain point according to its fire rating. If structure is loaded
during fire as well then it reduces the material capacity of fire resistance. Under
58 http://www.escablast.com/store.asp?pid=35117 accessed 12.08.2014.

59 http://cleanerscoach.com/Media-Blasting.html accessed 12.08.2014.
38
fire structure shouldn’t fail, which would ultimately cause the demolition of the
whole building. Concrete structures have proven to be very stable in fire
especially when compared to wood and steel structures, all thanks to the superior
fire resistant properties of concrete. In the event of fire R.C.C members endured
damage due to high temperature but this is not the only worrying point when it
comes to retrofitting of structure. After fire , use of water to extinguish the fire or
fire retardant foam cause sudden cooling of structure that have been at very high
temperatures this causes permanent set of deformation, cracking and spalling.
Structural Retrofitting is the process of structural repair by which original strength

of structure is installed or increased so that it can fulfil its intended function
successfully and safely. Various methods of structural retrofitting has been under
practice but it lacks innovation as it is in whole construction industry. Recent most
innovation in retrofitting techniques is the use of fibre reinforced plastic dates
decades ago. Most conventional system of structural retrofitting will be discussed
in this section with their relative advantages, disadvantages, opportunities and
short comings.
3.4.1. Fibre Reinforced polymer (FRP)
Fibre reinforced polymer is a synthetic material in which polymer matrix is

reinforced with fibres. Most commonly used fibres are glass, carbon or aramid
though other fibres are also used in FRP. FRP is light in weight, exhibits high
strength and stiffness. It is non corrosive as well. These inherent properties of
FRP makes it a suitable candidates for repair work. It is possible to repair a
heavily damaged structure with fibre reinforced plastic. FRP is used in number of
forms for structural strengthening. FRP plates and thin sheets are commonly
practiced though new research is going on FRP bars that can replace steel bars
in structures. The efficiency of FRP repairs is based upon number of factors. At
first the properties of the FRP material are important. The kind of fibres which are
used in the polymer matrix defines the material properties and hence plays a
crucial role overall. FRP sheets are actually weak in shear in transverse direction
and the orientation of the fibre with respect to the element remains critical as well.
39
Hence FRP sheets are wrapped in such a way that the direction of the fibres is
perpendicular to the longitudinal axis of the element or to the axis along which
element requires flexural stiffness.60
Another factor that plays very important role in the overall success of repair and
instalment of strength and stiffness is the method of application. For different
members the method of application of FRP sheets or straps is different which will
be described in detail later in the topic. Last but not least epoxy resins that are
used as glue for the application of FRP wraps over the damaged structural
member is of prime importance. Some researches even states that it is the telling
factor for the successful restoration of the strength. Surface of damaged member
should be prepared before the application of the FRP straps. Any irregularity that
may cause rupture in the FRP sheets must be taken care of by grouting or resin
injections. Sharp edges of non-circular members must be rounded by grinding
machine. All these measures are important because FRP material is prone to
rupture and it dramatically changes the behaviour and scenario of strength re-
instalment. After preparing the surface of concrete epoxy resins are applied to
the surface and on the wraps as per requirements and then applied to the
structural members immediately and some pressure is applied over it to squeeze
out the extra strength from bonding. Hence application of FRP over the damaged
structure should be properly monitored for above mentioned factors.61
Various researches have been conducted to estimate the impact of FRP

treatment over the strength and over all structural revitalization. It has been
established through experimental research that FRP treatment increases both
compressive and flexural strength. It also provides extra confinement to the
elements which is handy for better shear resistance and stiffness. For M25 grade
concrete, increase in compressive strength is 67%, 129% and 150% for one, two
and three layers of GFRP sheet wrapped around concrete.62
60 Martin Alberto Masuelli. 2013. Introduction of Fibre-Reinforced Polymers – Polymers and

Composites: Concepts, Properties and Processes. Page no 29-31.

62 Ponmalar. 2012. Strength comparison of Fiber Reinforced Polymer (FRP) wrapped concrete
exposed to high temperature. Page no 150.

40
Beams are repaired by two ways. One is by applying FRP plates on the tension
side of the beam which is on the downwards side in the middle of supports.
Alternatively beams are wrapped on three sides by FRP wrapping sheet making
a U and additional protective layers are provided along the axis of beam as shown
in the figure below. For application of FRP material usually epoxy resins are used
but sometimes steel bolts are also provided but it should be monitored that they
don’t provide a weaker plane in cross section.63
Figure 11: FRP plate application beneath the beam64
Figure 12: FRP Wraps on side faces and bottom side65
For column repairs, FRP wrapping sheet material is used. The surface is
prepared and FRP sheet are wrapped around the column with epoxy resins. The

64 http://www.frpbeam.com/ accessed on 14.08.2014.
65http://www.bow-ingenieure.de/HTML_deutsch/03_projekte/30_projektseiten/1998-
078_CFK_Lamellen/1998-078_CFK_Lamellen_engl.htm accessed 15.08.2014.

41
FRP sheets are slightly overlapping with each other. Number of sheets used for
the repair is dependent upon the design and degree of damage member has
endured during the infortune event. The confinement provided by the FRP wraps
provides the stiffness and enhanced flexural strength along with better
compressive strength. There are two methods to apply the FRP wraps. Applying
wraps with pre tensioning and filling of grout between member and the FRP
wrapping sheet. Second method is to apply FRP wraps in passive mode in which
counter stress is produced for confinement when concrete column is subjected
to expansion under the action of loads. The direction of fibres in the FRP is kept
perpendicular to the longitudinal axis of column.66
Figure 13: FRP sheets wrapped around the Column67
For slab repairs, FRP sheets are pasted on the tension side of the slab so provide
extra flexural strength to the element. FRP wraps are also provided to increase
the shear capacity of the slabs where it has been damaged due to fire. FRP wraps
are applied to the slab elements just as for beams. Usually the FRP sheet are
wrapped with the help of epoxy resins, and mechanical fixings.
Figure 14: FRP sheet wrapped on the tension side of fire damaged slab 68
66 Martin Alberto Masuelli. 2013. Introduction of Fibre-Reinforced Polymers. Page no 29-31

67http://compositesmanufacturingmagazine.com/2010/08/pursuit-newfrp-protection-heats/
68 Fay Engineering. 2003. KBP Coil Coaters Fire Repair and Shear Strengthening. Ppt.
42
FRP reinforcing is a very useful technique for rehabilitation of fire damaged

building but choice of selecting FRP reinforcing material for retrofitting of
structural members totally dependent on its material properties. We will discuss
these properties one by one starting with pros and then coming towards cons.
 FRP material is atleast 5 to 6 times more costly than steel on cost/unit

weight or cost/unit length basis. But irrespective of the material cost
that is many folds higher than the steel reinforcement, overall cost of
the FRP is lesser than or atleast competitive to additional benefits.
Most prominent benefits are costs of handling, transportation and
labour. They are significantly lower than steel. Moreover, as described
earlier that FRP is a non-corrosive material hence doesn’t need repairs
as much it is required in case of steel. Though it require fire protection
because of its poor fire performance but still in life cycle costing.69
 FRP is highly durable material if properly handled. It is a non-corrosive

material hence not suspected to oxidation like steel.70
 The material is light in weight in comparison to the steel and hence

doesn’t add up excessive dead loads over the structure and easy to
handle which is quite useful feature of a repair material.71
 FRP exhibits excellent tensile strength which is its strongest assert.72
 FRP material is nonmagnetic in nature which can prove to be useful in

some applications but generally it doesn’t really matter.73
 FRP material doesn’t require special labour effort as it can be easily

moulded into shapes and can covers almost all geometries of buildings
without any formwork requirement. 74
69 Burgozne, Balafas. 2007. Why is FRP not a financial success?. Page no 1-9.
72 Burgozne, Balafas. 2007. Why is FRP not a financial success?. Page no 1-9.
43
 FRP material is light in weight that is one of its many qualities but this
is a double edge sword as it also not as good in stiffness as its
challenger steel. This lack of satisfactory stiffness is responsible for
heavy deflection which is not very appreciated. For example how many
of us would like to sit under a heavily deflected beam. So although FRP
proves to be a good repair material for fire damaged building but still it
doesn’t take cares of heavy deflection.
 FRP lacks shear strength or ability to resist shear stress in transverse

direction. This inherent disability is another shortcoming attached to
use this material for beams where we may possibility of dowel action.75
 FRP sheets are prone to wear and tear76. It can be ruptured due to any
sharp object pointing force through it that’s why corners of non-circular
column are rounded prior to the application FRP over them.
 The FRP sheets as damage repair solution does one serious

shortcoming. The failure action of FRP is brittle77. The mode of failure
makes it dangerous. The structural elements are designed to have
ductile failure by making it sure that concrete will fail at second and
reinforcement first. Steel reinforcement has ductile failure. This
assembly give the warning for the failure of structure. As concrete still
have some capacity but steel have already shown plastic behaviour.
Hence cracks will starts to appear on tension face. These cracks gives
time to the habitants to evacuate. But a fire damaged element that is
repaired with FRP will not have this luxury. As FRP will be completely
wrapping it from all three visible sides (in case of beam) hence no
cracks would be seen moreover FRP by itself has brittle mode of
failure. Hence the structural element repaired with FRP will exhibit
somehow brittle mode of failure which in turn means no significant
warning although abnormal deflections may give indication but yet not
sufficient.



44
 FRP shows poor performance when exposed to high temperature.78

This requires extra fire protection to the FRP reinforcing plus better fire
proofing for building as well.
 Environmental impact to FRP is a serious setback for this repair

method as sustainability is an important issue. FRP material is not a
green material as it depletes fossil fuels. Moreover acidification, air
pollution and smog is related to its production. Moreover, it can be
recycled to perform the same function as it is in case of timber or Steel.
Hence on surface material resources, production process, energy
requirements and environment pollution makes it a brown material or
unsustainable material but in depth life cycle analysis raise some hope.
Moreover whole demolition and reconstruction job is not sustainable
either so we may raise a case that FRP repair is atleast greener than
demolition and reconstruction. When we compare it with other measure
of retrofitting then its sustainability may raise serious question over its
superiority as a repair or retrofitting measure.79
3.4.2. Partial removal and replacement of concrete and reinforcement
During fire, both concrete and steel undergoes damage. Degree of damage is
assessed in condition assessment and survey. For retrofitting of the damaged
structure it is mandatory to have clear ideas about the structural condition and its
integrity because only then the methodology and requirement for this method can
be decided.
Basic idea behind this repair method is to remove the damaged concrete by some
suitable mean (hydro blasting, Jack hammer etc.) upto the depth of damage.
Then remove the part of reinforcement bar/bars that has/have been damaged (if
any). Then preparation of surface for repair application. Usually the surface is


45
prepared and good enough for repair application in case of concrete removal by
hydro blasting. After concrete removal and preparation of surface reinforcement
bars that have been removed are replaced by suitable means (overlapping or
welding etc.)80. Then concrete is replaced by in-situ casting with the help of form
work or by shotcrete such that it reinstate the original form and provides sufficient
strength for structural requirements. The whole process is explained in detail
below.
3.4.2.1. Removal of concrete
In petrography test, the depth of concrete damage is determined. Moreover Core

sampling provides information as well about the depth of damage. These two
measures dictates the damage depth as well as reveals any other inherent defect
that have been present in the structure e.g. carbonation of concrete or rusting of
steel bars etc. If the depth of damage is more than ¾ inch or 0.75 inch then hydro
blasting can be used for removal of damaged concrete. If structure is in
conjunction with some other structure as it is the case usually then care must be
taken. If depth is lesser than the above parameter then it is better to remove the
concrete with hammer and chisel. Damaged concrete is not difficult to be
removed hence it wouldn’t be that difficult and only that concrete will be removed
that doesn’t have enough strength or damaged. Jack hammers can be used as
well but it is not advisable for fire damaged structure that are already in pretty bad
condition. It may even damage the structure that is in still healthy condition.
Moreover it always develops micro cracking within the structure.81
Hydro demolition is a process in which concrete is removed by high water

pressure. This method is used to remove both sound and damaged concrete. In
repair work of fire damaged building this method is of prime importance as it can
remove concrete that is locally damaged or can remove the whole overlay or
concrete cover. It can easily remove concrete upto the depth it has experienced
damaged even in spaces where it is difficult to reach with jackhammer or hammer
80 In case where reinforcement bars have been damaged and needs replacement.
81 http://frbiz789.blog.com/2009/12/01/hydrodemolition/ accessed 15.08.2014.
46
and chisel. Serious precautions are required to use this method because water
gun that has such huge pressure that it can cut through concrete can easily cut
skin and bones. Hence serious precautions are required for this process. Hydro
demolition is conducted by two ways. Manual hydro demolition and robotic hydro
demolition. Hydro demolition is shown in the figure on the below.82
Figure 15: Hydro Blasting for concrete removal83
Advantages of hydro blasting or hydro demolition are as under
 Hydro blasting is very accurate method because various variable like

speed of jet, jet pressure, size of jet make possible to remove concrete
upto a specific depth. These properties gives it precision required for repair
jobs. As water jets removes damaged concrete easily due to crack and
faults hence it can remove only damaged concrete precisely leaving sound
concrete beneath.
 It eliminates the vibration and micro cracking in the sound concrete of the
structure and adjacent structure. This is important for repair jobs where
structure has already endured heavy damage and structural stability is
already in question.
 It remove any cement or concrete left over the reinforcement bars which
provides better bonding of bars with repair material
 It prepares the concrete surface for repair job, as it scarify the aggregate
and leaves a clean, rough surface of aggregate that is vital for repair
material to get bonding.
82 http://frbiz789.blog.com/2009/12/01/hydrodemolition/ accessed 15.08.2014.

83 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bZuks_1SdCI accessed 15.08.2014.
47
 It doesn’t damage the reinforcement bars but infact cleans the corrosive
chlorides from the surface.
 It is faster than mechanical measures for concrete removal.84
Disadvantages for hydroblasting are as under
 It requires serious safety measures to conduct this procedure as the jet

that can blast concrete can easily tear muscles or even bones. So special
suit and safety accessories are required
 As this method is quite sensitive and conducted by both manual and
robotic means, therefore experienced and expert staff is required to do the
job.85
3.4.2.2. Partial replacement of reinforcement bar/bars
If fire was intense and unluckily have damaged the steel bar/s of reinforcements
or if reinforcement bars were having previously lying shortcomings then they have
to be accessed by experts. If it is concluded that the cross section of the bar has
been seriously reduced and the steel bar can’t fulfil the intended purpose then it
has to be replaced. As the whole length of steel bar is not usually replaced in
repair jobs because it requires serious damage by fire to inflict any damage to
the reinforcement bars. If temperature of fire was high enough that it penetrated
the cover and temperature at high degrees sustained there for long enough then
reinforcement bars may endure damage. This doesn’t happen very often, and
even if it does then such damage is localized which demands partial removal or
replacement of steel/reinforcement bars before concrete repair is applied.
After damaged concrete is removed, it is important to cover healthy

reinforcements with some epoxy resin which will prevent corrosion of exposed
bars, facilitates bonding and remove existing salts over the surface (if any). It has
to be made sure that there are no left overs of concrete over the healthy bars.
84 http://www.metrocorp.com.au/services-item.php?id=4 accessed 15.08.2014.

85 http://www.metrocorp.com.au/services-item.php?id=4 accessed 15.08.2014.
48
Damaged reinforcement bars are then removed either by flame cutting or by

removal of splice wire. New reinforcement bar is provided with designed splice
length to ensure safe transfer of stress across the length of bar through the patch.
Splicing can be provided with welding or wire wrapping and knotting. The splice
must be grouted with high strength and little shrinkage grout consisting of epoxy
or Portland base.86
3.4.2.3. Partial replacement of Concrete
After reinforcement bars are covered with protective epoxy to protect from
corrosion and damaged reinforcement bars are replaced (if any), removed
damaged concrete is replaced with new one. In case reinforcement bars are
repaired, then new concrete should surround reinforcement bar from all around
to provide strong enough bong that can accommodate stress transfer between
concrete and steel. Thumb rule is to provide 1 inch new concrete around the bars.
Moreover to avoid premature corrosion of reinforcement bars, coat the new
concrete surface with same epoxy that has been used to coat reinforcement
bars.87
There are two basic methods to replace removed damaged concrete
 Shotcrete
 In-situ Replacement with formwork
Shotcrete is a very extensively used method in which concrete is replenished with

sprayed mixture (mortar or concrete) form the nozzle with high speed which
eliminates the need of compaction. The mixture that is supplied to the nozzle can
be in dry or wet form. In dry form water is added at the nozzle. In fire damaged
buildings, elements such as slab, can’t be easily repaired by in-situ concrete.
Shotcrete provides an easy solution as it doesn’t need any compaction or
formwork. A bonding agent is required to provide over the surface of old concrete
86 JPCL. 2011. Surface Preparation of Concrete Substrates. Page no 21.

87 JPCL. 2011. Surface Preparation of Concrete Substrates. Page no 21.
49
to ensure good bonding between old and new concrete and to avoid cold joint.
Following figure explains the phenomenon of shotcrete.88
Figure 16: Shotcrete to replace removed damaged concrete89
In-situ replacement can also be used for the replacement of damaged concrete
but it cannot always be used as in case of top surface repair as in case of slabs.
For vertical members like columns in situ concrete can be used but still in-situ
replacement is not beneficial more than shotcrete as it requires more labour,
formwork and effort. Special concrete mix is required for preventing cold joint that
exists between new and old concrete. Bonding agent has to be applied to the
surface as surface preparation measure same as in shotcrete. Shotcrete may
require a costly mix than conventional concrete but labour and other requirements
like vibration are not required which makes it more financially feasible. Moreover
shotcrete can be used almost for all kind of concrete repairs (vertical, horizontal
or overhead repairs).
3.4.2.4. Advantages and disadvantages of partial removal and

replacement
 Partial removal and replacement technique reinstate the form and shape
of damaged element. It also revitalise its structural strength to reasonable
88 http://www.shotcrete.org/pages/products-services/technical-questions-archive.htm accessed
16.08.2014.
89 http://www.sustainableconcrete.org/?q=node/171 accessed 16.08.2014.
50
mean. Hence structure can continue its normal function and load pattern
of building doesn’t change significantly.
 Material cost of this technique is way lesser than FRP reinforcement.
 One striking benefit of this technique that others don’t is that it not only
takes care of shortcomings due to fire damage but also covers the inherent
shortcoming to somewhat. If there had been some carbonation of concrete
or corrosion of steel then it will automatically takes care of it as well.
 It also provides excellent fire proofing abilities as after repair structural

element will be having more thicker and tight cover that is consisting of
concrete and epoxy resins. Collectively they provide excellent fire resisting
properties.
 Concrete is a green material as it doesn’t depletes fossil fuel and waste

too much energy in its manufacturing as it is in case of FRP. Hence it can
be credited as a sustainable repair technique.
 This repair technique offers high durability as element is revitalised by it

and can serve for long time.
 Due to the removal of the concrete the section of the element reduces
and it can be dangerous as element may be barely stable and during
chipping damaged concrete it may lose its stability and fails.
 Propping is required for partial removal and replacement technique to

carry or share the burden of element temporarily. If there is any heavy
object that is supported by the element and it can be removed then it has
to be relocated to avoid sustained load on the fresh replaced concrete
that is not in the condition to bear the burden at such early stage.
 For overhead repair such as ceilings, removal of concrete may prove to

be injurious as falling material can hurt the labour and skilled workers.
 Cold joint is always existing between old and new concrete. That would
automatically be the case on replacing new concrete hence for proper
bonding special surface preparing measures have to be used. Bonding
51
agent is usually required for surface treatment moreover epoxy resins are
required to add into concrete mix.
 Use of epoxy resins, propping, and lot of activities involved makes this
measure costly and not very financially feasible when we compare it with
other possible options like FRP.
3.4.3. Concrete jacketing
Concrete jacketing is the retrofitting technique for structural members. In fire

damaged building concrete jacketing can provide extra strength to damaged
structural member. It is done by removing the existing cover of the element and
providing a new concrete cover along with new reinforcement bars. It is not
always necessary to remove the existing cover sometimes if cover concrete is
not damaged significantly then it can be provided over the actual element. The
new applied concrete jackets the existing structural element and provides much
needed strength after the structure is damaged. Concrete jacketing can be done
on column and beams and slab systems as well.
Figure 17: Concrete jacketing process before concreting 90
Concrete jacketing has its unique demands in terms of designing. The newly
added width and depth of the member changes the behaviour or structural
90 http://www.corecut-jo.com/index.php?module=services&id=6 accessed 16. 08.2014.

52
member. It automatically got stiffer and now will attracts more loads. After
concrete jacketing the load pattern of the structure changes hence design has to
sound enough.91
Concrete jacketing is a successful process to reinstall the strength of member but

its success depends upon the monolithic behaviour of the element. The shear
force must transfer from old structure and concrete jacket. For attaining
monolithic behaviour surface treatment is very important. There are various
methods to roughen up the surface of the concrete in the market. Any of them
can be used to provide better bonding between old and new concrete. Epoxy
bonding agent are applied after roughening up which guarantees the bonding of
old and new concrete. This is critical to the load transfer behaviour of the
structure. Steel connector are also used to facilitate monolithic behaviour and
transfer of shear forces between old and new concrete.92
Concrete that is used for jacketing can be in-situ or shotcrete. Concrete jacket
must be atleast 100 mm thick and of higher compressive strength of the old
existing one. If it is not feasible then it should be atleast equal to the compressive
strength of the old concrete. If possible then all four sided jacket should be
provided to retain the symmetry, centre of gravity and neutral axis as before.
Reinforcement that are provided in the concrete jacketing process should be
carefully calculated and must pass all the checks of designing process.93
Advantages and disadvantages of Concrete jacketing process to retrofit the

structural members is as follow.
 Concrete jacketing changes the structural behaviour of the structure so

structure analysis has to be done in addition. The load pattern may
significantly changes hence only emphasising the need of re-evaluation.
91 Teran, Ruiz. 1992. Reinforced concrete jacketing of existing structures. Page no 5107.
92 http://www.corecut-jo.com/index.php?module=services&id=6 accessed 16. 08.2014.
93 Teran, Ruiz. 1992. Reinforced concrete jacketing of existing structures. Page no 5107.
53
 Change in dimension of the original member my shifts the centre of mass,

gravity and neutral axis. Un-symmtericity can be generated additionally.
These factors further complex the situation.
 Addition of jacketing reduces the available space and hence reduces the
net rentable area which is pretty loathsome factor for architects.
 Due to the increment of concrete jacket, dead mass is accumulated and

stiffness of the structure also increases. These factors increases the risk
of earth quake damage.
 Special experts are required to do the job as surface preparation is a

critical activity. Shear steel connector that are provided to attain monolithic
properties require significant technical competence.
 The whole process takes too much time and projects where time is of
essence, this technique provides no help.
 Due to the number of activities and requirement of process like skilled

workers, shuttering, curing of concrete etc. This technique proves to be
costly in comparison to both FRP and Partial removal and replacement of
concrete and reinforcement.
 If structural element is repair by concrete jacketing then it enhances the

flexural strength, shear capacity and axial capacity of the member. It may
strengthen the member even more than before fire damage.
 It also provides excellent fire proofing abilities as after repair structural

element will be having more thicker and tight cover that is consisting of
concrete and epoxy resins. Collectively they provide excellent fire resisting
properties.
 Concrete is a green material as it doesn’t depletes fossil fuel and waste

too much energy in its manufacturing as it is in case of FRP. Hence it can
be credited as a sustainable repair technique.

54
3.4.4. Steel Jacketing
Steel jacketing is the technique in which structural element is encased by steel

angles, channels and bands. This technique gives certain confinement to the
element and helps to increase its flexural strength. The steel encase is filled with
non-shrinkage grout. The figure bellows shows the complete process of steel
jacketing.
Figure 18: Steel jacketing process94
94 http://theconstructor.org/structural-engg/strengthening-of-r-c-columns/1935/ accessed
18.08.2014.
55
This method is used in structural repairs, where increasing size of element is not
permitted due to any reason. It could be rules and regulations or demand by the
owner to retain the net rentable floor area etc. As steel will be exposed to the
weathering agents hence it is mandatory to apply protective coating against rust.
In case of future fire, steel will be in direct contact with fire flames and as being
excellent conductor of heat it will not be only damaged by itself but can prove to
be a cause of fire spread. Figure below shows the concrete column repaired by
steel jacketing.
Figure 19: Steel jacketing of column95
Advantages and disadvantages of Steel jacketing re as follow
 If structural element is repair by steel jacketing then it enhances the

flexural strength, shear capacity and axial capacity of the member. It may
strengthen the member even more than before fire damage
 Steel is a green material as it doesn’t depletes fossil fuel and waste too
much energy in its manufacturing as it is in case of FRP. Hence it can be
credited as a sustainable repair technique.

 It is pretty fast as unlike concrete jacketing it doesn’t need long curing

times and number of activities are also reduced.
95 http://ramsetmbtmedan.blogspot.de/2012/09/jacketing-struktur.html accessed 18.08.2014.

56
 It revitalise the structural element yet doesn’t changes its form and
appearance. It also reinstate its structural strength to reasonable mean.
Hence structure can continue its normal function and load pattern of
building doesn’t change significantly.
 As steel is prone to corrosion and rusting therefore it can’t be used without

proper protection against rusting and corrosion. In marine environment, it
will have serious shortcoming.
 Steel could be exposed to serious temperature in future fires which may

leads to the structural failure as steel wouldn’t offer long enough resistance
against fire. Moreover it may spread fire to other floors as it has very good
thermal conductance. Hence it is mandatory to provide fire proofing over
the steel jacket.
 Cost of this retrofitting technique could be higher than other measures like
FRP especially because of handling costs.
 Experts and skilled labour is required to fulfil the job.
3.5. Other Methods of retrofitting and rehabilitation
For retrofitting of structure and providing more strength to the structure few other
methods are also practiced. It is not possible to discuss all in this text. So for the
sake of mentioning few common solutions to fire damaged structures are as
under.
If damage due to fire is not extensive and not concentrated on some defined
locations but infact equally damaged the structure. Resultantly strength has been
reduced but still structure seems to be sound enough. Above mentioned
techniques makes it too costly and unfeasible to retrofit. In such scenario overall
demand of the structure can be decreased. This measures may be not always
possible as it is not possible to shift some equipment installed or the purpose of
the facility can’t be altered. Still this is possible in some cases to go with this
57
solution. Another possibility in case of this technique is to replace the heavy

equipment or members of the structure or building with lighter ones. This will
reduce the weight of the building which ultimately makes it suitable again for
purpose.
Additional structural members can also be provided in case of rehabilitation of fire

damaged building. This may be done if structural element has undergone very
serious damage and it can’t be revitalised to its past strength. In that case new
structural members are provided. This method will actually change the structural
behaviour of the structure. Load path will definitely changes. This is a desperate
measure and only done if it is a must to retrofit and rehabilitate the damaged
building as it has significant importance. This technique is often done by pre-
fabricated element. For example providing a steel beam beneath a severely
damaged beam as a support to actual beam. Provision of some extra column as
it can be seen that beam has been damaged and undergone severe deflections.
Hence new columns will shorten the span and ask for less load sharing from each
part.
Cracks are often case of fire damage in R.C.C buildings. Fire can also create
radial cracks around the reinforcement bars. These kinds of cracks cause de-
bonding of steel and concrete. Such scenario will cause loss of load transfer
between two materials. Structural cracks can cause dowel action and prove to be
a mile stone of ultimate failure. To take care of these cracks epoxy injections are
used. The epoxy injections can also alone take care of the problem but if problem
is extensive then these measure can complement other measure like FRP
reinforcing or partial removal and replacement of concrete and reinforcement.
Etc. The efficiency of the measure is dependent on the skill of the workers and
staff. This comprehensively conceals the cracks and nip the evil in the bud.
58
Summary
Rehabilitation and retrofitting starts with cleaning of the property. After fire,
building has to be cleaned as soon as it is cleared to be entered. It will stop
further damage due to the water sprinkled to extinguish fire and due to the
deposition of smoke & soot. It is necessary to remove smoke and soot from
the surface of belongings and building likewise. Otherwise it will damage them
because of acidic fumes it may contain. Moreover, smoke smell will be difficult
to remove. To remove smoke smell thermal foggers and ozone machines can
be used but comes with their respective shortcomings. Air scrubber provides
better solution than former two. Smoke and soot that are deposited on the
surface of building and can’t be removed by ordinary methods can be removed
by soda blasting. It is a green practice to remove smoke and soot deposits
with soda blasting rather than harsh chemicals. Combustible non- structural
members and utilities are often in poor condition after fire. If they can be
repaired economically then it is better to repair them otherwise replace them.
Non-combustible non-structural members are not often damaged much.
Usually only cleaning with soda blasting is required.
FRP reinforcing sheets and plates are commonly used for various kind of
rehabilitation techniques including fire damaged repairs. FRP has many
inherent characteristics that make it very good repair material like excellent
tensile strength, durability, light weight, nonmagnetic behaviour and ease of
handling but also has serious shortfalls specially sustainability and future fire
resistance. It also allows excessive deflections in structural members that is
not very desirable. It is weak in shear resistance and suspected to damage if
not handled properly.
Partial removal and replacement of damaged concrete and steel is another

method of concrete structure retrofitting. It may not be wrong to say that it is
the most popular method of retrofitting. It can be used in combination with FRP
reinforcing. In this technique concrete is removed carefully that have been
damaged with the help of hydroblasting or else. Hydroblasting is good method
59
for this purpose as it also prepares the surface and rinse out any rust that may
be present over the reinforcement bars. Then surface is prepared and
concrete is provided again either by shotcrete or in-situ casting. This method
is old and tested method. It doesn’t change the dimensions of the structural
element and also take care of any inherent shortcomings that may present in
the element. It provides good fire protection and a sustainable retrofitting
technique. It requires propping sometimes to support the member until it is
fully repaired.
Concrete and steel jacketing are mainly repair or strengthening techniques for
seismic design or repairs. But can be deployed for fire retrofitting. Concrete
jacketing is done by jacketing a member with extra layer of concrete preferably
all around after removal of cover that has been damaged. Reinforcements are
also provided in concrete jacket. Success of the method depends upon the
monolithic behaviour of jacket and original structure and design competency.
It provides better fire resistance and also a green practice. Steel jacketing, is
the same philosophy but here we jacket with steel instead of concrete. It
doesn’t alter the dimensions of the member but at the same time it is
suspected to fire and rusting hence protective coating is a must.
Along with these retrofitting methodologies some other techniques can also
be practiced like reducing the load over structure by change of usage,
construction of some new structural members, provision of extra prefabricated
member beneath an already existing one and epoxy injections etc. All these
methods are not common ones but can be used alone or in combination with
other measures.
60
4. Feasibility study
Evaluation of the fire damaged building, put us in the position where it is possible
to understand the condition of the building. Decision regarding building has to be
made, that either, it should be reconstructed after demolition or rehabilitated and
retrofitted. To make such decisions comprehensive, elaborated and structured
feasibility study is required.
The decision making process is quite complex. Every case has its own
uniqueness and demands that differs from case to case. Fire damage is not
consistent. Sometimes fire stays long but doesn’t damage much while contrary
to this sometimes fires of medium tenure inflicts serious damage. Design of the
facility has a serious role to play in it. If design is comprehensive and fire has not
been able to stay for long time, then it inflicts small damage which can be
repaired. Unfortunately if structure has endured serious damage then decision
making is not such an easy job. Evaluation of the building and testing must be
practiced over it, to determine its residual strength. If building can be restored to
code acceptance level, after fire, then it is possible to restore it, but many time
code requirements and local laws makes it difficult.96
Many factors are involved in the decision making process. Economy and code
requirements are not the only factors that are considered. Life span of the
proposed solution is also important from sustainability and life cycle analysis
perspective. Repairs are greener than demolition and reconstruction97. In case of
commercial buildings, time for which building will be under construction or repair
also cause loss of business. If decision is controlled by some supreme factor like
building is of historical importance e.g. Reichstag or building facilitates business
or activates that can’t be compromised like national security e.g. Pentagon. Then
economic factor doesn’t count. But if there is no such supreme limitation as it is
in normal cases then independent feasibility study is required to attest the
economic and technical viability of the proposed solution. It can be rehabilitation
96 Michael Hayes. 2012. Rebuilding After a Fire. Page no 1-5.

97http://www2.buildinggreen.com/article/retrofits-usually-greener-new-construction-study-says
61
and retrofitting or demolition and reconstruction. Same feasibility study are

sometimes also required to compare two proposed solutions of same class. For
example should the structure be retrofitted by FRP reinforcing or partial removal
and replacement technique? Which one is technically and financially more
superior? Here in this chapter we will discuss financial and technical aspects of
feasibility study.
4.1. Technical Aspect
There are various prospects of technical feasibility. Technical feasibility of

building’s retrofitting and rehabilitation dictates that is it feasible to repair and re-
establish the building and can structure be repaired to the point after damage that
it can serve its intended purpose or it should be demolished and reconstructed.
There are many aspects to look after in technical feasibility study of repair and
retrofitting of structure. Each case of building rehab is a unique case, so to cover
all the aspects is not possible. These aspects vary from case to case and from
element to element.
4.1.1. Technical aspects of structural members
In technical feasibility of structural elements, we at first number every structural

member according to a nomenclature. For example, columns can be represented
by CL and then be followed by a number which can indicate the floor and then it
is followed by column number. So for 3rd column at ground floor it would be CL
0,3. Hence a representation system will dictate that which columns are damaged
(which is important for partially damaged building). After proper representation of
damaged elements, technical feasibility of structural members is carried out with
the help of results obtained from condition assessment and desk study. Each kind
of element has its own behaviour and it is better to deal with each type of element
separately.
62
4.1.1.1. Columns
Columns are the vertical load bearing members and lowest in the super structure
of the building. Columns usually bear heavy damage in case of fire as they would
be fully exposed to the fire. Under fire and sustained load it is extremely important
for columns to carry on their purpose otherwise structure will collapse. Columns
usually outperform their duties and don’t collapse until the reinforcement fails and
damage is usually limited to the damage upto the cover.
Various tests as described in condition assessment of fire damaged buildings can

be performed to identify the extent of damage. Windsor probe test results can’t
be discussed as they vary from concrete to concrete. Concrete mix and
aggregate type are two important factors in the results values. Similarly it is
unlikely, to standardise the results of core sampling and testing on the basis of
which damage classification can be performed. This is mainly because of their
length to diameter ratio varies which usually fluctuates between 1 to 2 for
compressive testing. As core testing and tensile testing directly gives us the
values of the compressive strength of concrete and tensile strength of steel hence
they can be directly compared with the design strength of respective materials in
the structure or compared with the results obtained from undamaged respective
material.
Figure 20: Fire Damaged Concrete Column98
98 http://www.barberhoffman.com/portfolio/project-detail.aspx?PortfolioID=113 accessed
30.07.2014.
63
Table 6: Technical feasibility study of column retrofitting
Degr Item Description of RHT99 UPV100 Petrography Cover Main

ee of # damage (Rebo (Pulse Results Damag Reinfor-
Dam und Velocity Temp101 (C) e Depth cement
age Value) km/sec) (mm) condition102
1 CL Structurally > 40 > 4.6 < 70 None Unaltered

sound/undamaged,
(n,n)
Some surface
damage due to
smoke, water, bio
waste etc.
2 CL Little damage to > 40 70 to 300 None Unaltered
plaster finish , 3.7 to
(n,n)
Concrete remain 4.6
undamaged
3 CL Substantial loss of 40 to 300 to 600 < 26 <25%
plaster finish, 30 exposed,
(n,n)
Concrete turns none buckled
pink, minor spalling,
3.0 to
serious micro
3.7
cracking,
Reinforcement is
undamaged if cover
is <26 mm
4 CL Plaster is totally 30 to 600 to 900 < 42 <50%
destroyed, 20 exposed, not
(n,n)
Concrete is buff more than
coloured (whitish one bar
grey), Concrete buckled
cover is locally 2.1 to
removed revealing 3.0
reinforcement bars,
Reinforcement bars
are locally
damaged but still
re-useable
5 CL Seriously damaged, < 20 > 900 Total >50%
More or less total loss of exposed,
(n,n)
removal of concrete cover more than
cover, concrete one bar
confined within buckled
reinforcement may < 2.1
be damaged too,
Reinforcement bars
bear serious
damage, may be
buckled. Distorted.
99 Rebound Hammer Test.

100 Ultrasonic Pulse velocity.
101 Temperature at the surface of concrete in Celsius.
102 http://www.gbg.co.uk/?page=strfirevissurv accessed 29.07.2014.
64
4.1.1.2. Beams
Beams are the horizontal members of the structure that bears shear and flexural
load to provide the clear space underneath. In the event of fire, beam has to
remain structurally sound and perform its functions. Beams are usually
significantly deflected, in case of serious fires under the sustained and fire loads.
Damaged beams can be repaired and it turns out to be first preference after
damage but they can be replaced as well. Replacement of concrete beam is
usually done by steel beam but sometimes concrete beams are also placed just
under the existing beam. Various tests are performed over beams as described
in 4.1.1.1 “Column”
Degr Item Description of RHT104 UPV105 Petrogr Cover Main

103
ee of # damage (Rebo (Pulse aphy Dama Reinfor-
Dam und Velocity Results ge cement
106
age Value) km/sec) Temp Depth condition107
(C) (mm)
1 BM Structural > 40 > 4.6 < 70 None Unaltered

soundness is intact,
(n,n)
Some surface
damage due to
smoke, water, bio
waste etc.
2 BM Surface crazing > 40 70 to None Unaltered
and minor spalling , 300
(n,n) 3.7 to
Concrete remain
4.6
undamaged,
Smoke deposited
3 BM Significant spalling 40 to 300 to < 26 <25%
along adjacent 30 600 exposed,
(n,n)
planes exposing none buckled
main reinforcement
of outer surface of 3.0 to
corner bars, 3.7
Concrete turns
pink, serious micro
cracking,
Reinforcement is
103 SD0107. Repair of Fire Damaged Structures. Ppt. slide no 14.

65
undamaged if cover
is <26 mm
4 BM Concrete is buff 30 to 600 to < 42 <50%
coloured (whitish 20 900 exposed, not
(n,n)
grey), Serious more than
spalling reveals one bar
2.1 to
reinforcement bars, buckled
3.0
Deflections are
minor, wide
structural cracks
appeared.
5 BM Seriously damaged, < 20 > 900 Total >50%
Heavily deflected loss of exposed,
(n,n)
and fractured, More cover more than
or less total one bar
< 2.1
removal of concrete buckled
cover, Main
Reinforcement bars
buckled.
Table 7: Technical feasibility study of Beam Retrofitting
4.1.1.3. Floor/Slab Panels
Slab panels provide the solid surface at an elevated ground. It is shallow in depth
while relative in length and width. It is a horizontal structural element which is
usually designed for flexural and shear loads. Sometimes point loads are also
considered. Same as column and beam, various tests are performed over it as
explained in 4.1.2. These floor or slab panels are mostly prefabricated and hollow
with pre-stressing. Due to these characteristics it is not as resilient to fire as
columns or beams usually are. Moreover the temperature in fire is maximum at
the top of the flames. Hence these members are directly in max temperature
zone. These panels can be effectively repaired and retrofitted unless pre stressed
steel has endured serious damage and the slab panel is completely un-functional.
Technical assessment of damage of slab element is as follow.
Figure 21: Fire Damaged Slab108
108 http://caltransd7info.blogspot.de/2011_12_01_archive.html accessed 31.07.2014

66
Degr Item Description of RHT110 UPV111 Petrogra Cover Main

ee of # damage109 (Rebou (Pulse phy Damag Reinfor-
Dam nd Velocity Results e cement
age Value) km/sec) Temp112 Depth condition
113
(C) (mm)
1 SL Haven’t endured any > 40 > 4.6 < 70 None Unaltered

(n,n) structural damage, Some
surface damage due to
smoke, water, bio waste
etc.
2 SL Smoke deposited, > 40 70 to 300 None Unaltered
(n,n) Suspended ceiling is
seriously damaged, few
3.7 to 4.6
surface spalls on
concrete with few surface
cracks
3 SL Spalling is more intense 40 to 300 to < 26 <10%
(n,n) especially on concrete 30 600 exposed,
ribs (if any) or under the none
pre-stressed steel buckled, all
exposing some adhering
reinforcement locally. 3.0 to 3.7
Concrete turns pink,
serious micro cracking,
Reinforcement is
undamaged if cover is
>26 mm
4 SL Concrete ribs are 30 to 600 to < 42 <20%
(n,n) substantially spalled and 20 900 exposed,
reinforcements are generally
majorly exposed but still adhering
adhering, Concrete is 2.1 to 3.0
buff coloured (whitish
grey), Deflections are
minor, Structural cracks
apparent.
5 SL Main Reinforcement bars < 20 > 900 Total >20%
(n,n) separated, damage is loss of exposed,
serious, Heavily deflected cover mostly
< 2.1
and fractured, More or bars are
less total removal of separated
concrete cover.
Table 8: Technical feasibility study of Slab Retrofitting
109 SD0107. Repair of Fire Damaged Structures. Ppt. slide no 14.

67
4.1.2. Technical aspects of non-structural members
Non-structural members like partition walls, plumbing, HVAC, thermal insulations,

openings (windows, doors etc.) they can be easily assessed by visual inspection
and damage class can be confirmed. It is unusual to conduct test and detailed
diagnostic measures over it. The degree of damage for non-structural members
and utilities are assessed by visual inspection as described in 2.3.1 (Table 2).
System of representation of various kind of elements and utilities are represented
can be represented by same nomenclature as described in 2.1. For example door
no 5 on 2nd floor can be represented as DR 2,5.
4.2. Financial Aspect
Enterprises and companies has only 3 goals in corporate world “Money, Money
and Money”. This phrase may be an exaggeration of reality but reflects the
importance of financial factor in any business decision making process. When
real estate business is under the lime light, importance of financial factor only
magnifies. Therefore, decision making regarding fire damaged building, either it
should be demolished and reconstructed or rehabilitated and retrofitted, very
much depends upon the financial factor. Though it is not the only important factor
but one of the most important factors.
Feasibility studies is done to outline the financial circumstances attached to the

respective proposals. Many financial feasibility analysis tools are available and
have been practiced for the general financial calculations e.g. net present value,
Payback period etc. They are more or less universal tools that are used for all
kind of financial feasibility studies either it is for a new development or sustainable
repair etc. They are quite useful as well. In financial analysis one thing is quite
common. There are lot of assumptions involved and time required to estimate
these assumptions should be proportional. There are obviously factor that are
more sensitive than others therefore more time should be logically spent on their
extraction than others. Moreover the knowledge is quite short in the beginning
but it increase as the project gets closer to reality. Therefore it is required to
68
update the financial feasibility analysis as more accurate and precise data is
obtained.114
4.2.1. Preliminary requirements
There are certain factors that must be considered before financial analysis is
conducted. They are given below115
 Analyse the nature and scope of proposal.

 Evaluation of funds available and capacity of generating investment either
by bank or investor.
 Decision over format of data that has to be collected (either it should be
cash flow or accounting).
 Limitation of the financial tools that are used for analysis must be identified.
Otherwise results will be misleading and would be like cutting an apple
with a hammer or trying to open a walnut with a knife.
 Confidence in obtaining meaningful precise data about the proposal.
4.2.2. Structure
Structure of financial feasibility consists of following sequential parts116
i. Realization of all associated costs

ii. Realization of all associated incomes
iii. Analysis calculations by analysis tools
iv. Risk Analysis
v. Decisions based upon analysis.
Structure of financial analysis describes the format of work. It must be decided in

the beginning of analysis.
114 Matson. 2000. U.S. Department of Agriculture; Rural Business-Cooperative Service, Service.
Report 58: Vital Steps, A Cooperative Feasibility Study Guide. Page no 1-4.
115 Helfert. 2001. Financial analysis tools and techniques: a guide for managers 1st edition.
116 Zizzo. 2014. Life cycle costing: Financial costing. Page no 6.
69
4.2.3. Realization of all associated costs
In this step, all costs that may play their part in the appraisal of proposal must be
included. There will be many different kinds of cost associated to the financial
calculations. It depends upon the approach selected for the cost calculation and
the time span for calculations. In general costs are divided into four basic
categories for financial analysis namely; construction costs, maintenance costs,
operational costs and end of life costs. This is the costing model that is used in
Life cycle costing approach. Now it depends upon the scope of the financial
analysis and the analysis tool that is used for the calculation of costs. Life cycle
approach is not compatible with all analysis tools and independently it can’t
decide for the better proposal. It is better integrated with the NPV analysis
method. LCC can be regarded as NPV of costs as NPV takes cash flow in present
value similarly LCC takes only all costs in present value.117
For fire damaged buildings’ financial analysis, it is not very feasible to calculate
costs by LCC technique because there are certain conditions to be fulfilled for
using this technique for comparison purpose. Most important of them is function
equivalence. LCC costing for repair may or may not have function equivalence of
reconstructed building. So if this condition is unfulfilled then LCC methodology
can’t be used. For financial analysis of fire damage buildings detail investigation
must be conducted to calculate all the cost that are incurring over the reference
life span of the building with relative accuracy. Special focus must be planted over
financing, maintenance and operational costs.
4.2.4. Realization of incomes
Incomes that are going to be obtained from the proposed investment over the
duration of reference life should be identified and analysed. It would be good
practice to check assumption with market analysis. Assumptions made in income
calculation must be comprehensively described and justified. Special care is
117 Zizzo. 2014. Life cycle calculation methodology. Page no 4-53.

70
required to deal with the assumed data. As it will decide for the course of
projected profit or loss.
4.2.5. Analysis calculations by analysis tools
There are different analysis tools present for use. They can help in calculating
financial feasibility of different proposals. There are lot of analysis tools that
differentiate from one another on the basis of their methodology short comings
and working principal. Financial feasibility can be calculated on the basis of
accounting profits/losses (from actual business financial statements) or by
projected cash flows. Projected cash flows is the better option as it accounts time
value of money and can be used for both new businesses which has no financial
statements yet. Moreover it has a standardised method for calculating values
whereas accounting profits can be calculated in several different ways e.g.
inventory listing, depreciation methods etc. Few methods of financial analysis will
be presented in this study.118
4.2.5.1. Payback period
Payback period is pretty basic method for financial feasibility analysis. It

determines that when the costs and incomes will break even i.e. how much time
it will take for the investments to pay back themselves. This method has very
obvious shortcomings. It doesn’t account for time value of money. Though it can
be taken care by discounted pay back method but still it doesn’t fulfil the
requirements for a good financial analysis. The reason is that it only informs us
that till when investments will be returned in units of time but doesn’t give any
information about the profits. Because break even period is not the economic life
of the building. Building will continue to serve afterwards. Hence two different
proposals can’t be compared with this method truly.
118 Björnsdóttir. 2010. Financial feasibility assessments: Building and Using Assessment Models
for Financial Feasibility Analysis of Investment Projects. Page no 1-18.
71
4.2.5.2. Financial ratios
There are different financial ratios that can help in analysing the financial
feasibility of investment. They can’t be used independently for calculating
financial feasibility but can be really supportive in giving perspective analysis
about investments. Financial ratios can be used for the analysis on accounting
value bases. From financial statements, values are used to calculate these ratio.
Projected value can also be used to better understand the impact of decisions.
There are different kinds of financial ratios that are used as given below
 Liquidity ratios
 Asset management ratios
 Profitability ratios
 Market trend ratios
 Debt management ratios.119
4.2.5.3. Net Present value
Net present value is the difference of present values of all project costs and
incomes. Costs of the project that are intended to be included happens at different
time. Similarly income or return from the investment also happen at different time.
NPV discounts the future cash flows to present value to include time value of
money which gives rational meanings to the analysis. In the end, sum is obtained
for the inputs and outputs to calculate NPV of investment. Critical factor in
determining NPV is discount rate. It is explained by Park (2002) as “MARR”
minimum attractive rate of return. It is the rate which is achievable by the investor
if he invests his money to an alternative investment i.e. rate of interest from bank
or other alternate investment120. Moreover, planning horizon or reference life of
the project is estimated. This has a telling effect over the calculation results. So
must be estimated with care. At the end of reference life, we get NPV of the
119 Park. 2002. Contemporary Engineering Economics. 3rd edition. Page no 288- 291.
120 Park. 2002. Contemporary Engineering Economics. 3rd edition. Page no 288- 291.
72
investment.121 Decisions are made upon its basis as shown along with the
formula used for the calculation of NPV.
 NPV(i) = 0, Investment breaks even

 NPV(i) < 0, Reject the investment
 NPV(i) > 0, Accept the investment
Here i= MARR.
For comparing two investment proposals, the proposal with higher NPV should
be selected. But for the purpose, Zizzo (2014) said that same interest rate or “i”
and reference period/life should be selected for which sometimes small changes
have to be made. Formula for calculating NPV as described by Park (2002) is
given below122.
(Park, 2002)
This method is not really feasible for comparisons of two different proposals that
are not of equal life time (n) as it is a common case when dealing with fire
damaged buildings.
4.2.5.4. Internal rate of return
Internal rate of return is the interest rate at which Net present value is equal to
zero. This interest rate set a criteria for the investors to make decision that either
they should accept it or reject it, consistent with net present value analysis. For
121 Zizzo. 2014. Life cycle costing: Financial costing. Page no 24-28.
122 Park. 2002. Contemporary Engineering Economics. 3rd edition. Page no 289.
73
simple financial calculations where we have only 1 change in sign with respect to
cash flow. In those cases i* is same as IRR. In complex cases, story may be
different. IRR is equal to i* (rate of return) when following mathematical
expression gives zero value. The following formula is given by Park (2002).123
(Park. 2002)
Investor are usually more interested in getting profit rather than breaking even.
Their target is established by MARR. So MARR and IRR can be used to make
decision about investment based on following criteria
 IRR = MARR; Break even so decision is indifferent

 IRR < MARR; Reject
 IRR > MARR; Accept
There are certain draw backs attached to the IRR method. First and foremost it
is not consistent. It may give more than one IRR if there is a complex scenario
i.e. if there is more than one sign change in the cash flow. NPV is generally
considered as better method than IRR but the importance of IRR can’t be ignored
as in some cases it may prove to be better than NPV.124
4.2.6. Risk analysis
As the input data collected for the purpose of financial analysis is based upon
projections and many assumptions are involved in it as well. Therefore there is
always a risk of uncertainty, wrong estimation or change in assumed values
though they are taken with great care and responsibility. To deal with this issue
risk analysis is done by following techniques
123 Park. 2002. Contemporary Engineering Economics. 3rd edition. Page no 410.
124 Lee. 2009. Financial Analysis, Planning And Forecasting: Theory and Application, 2nd edition.
74
4.2.6.1. Sensitivity analysis
Sensitivity analysis gives the investor an insight about the risks that are
associated with the change in input values. It is conducted by changing the input
value one at a time to understand its effect on the output. In this way the most
sensitive input variable is identified. The most sensitive input variable is then
estimated with even more accuracy to mitigate the risks and to get better analysis.
It also tells the investor that which parameter can have a significant effect on the
project. Best practice for sensitivity analysis is to plot graph of different sensitivity
analysis for different parameters.125
4.2.6.2. Scenario analysis
Scenario analysis is used to define the best and worst case scenarios compared
to the base case. Base case is the analysis made by analysis methods explained
above. Then it includes the change in the values of key variables and the range
over which they can possibly fluctuate. Extreme cases are identified in case of
each variable or parameter. Worst scenario of each parameter is accumulated
and same goes for best scenario of each parameter to determine worst and best
case scenario. One drawback of this system is that it only gives information about
extreme case and doesn’t inform about the case that will lie in between them. 126
Summary
Feasibility study is required to estimate the viability of the proposal presented

as a solution for fire damaged buildings. Any feasibility analysis for fire
damaged buildings must include both technical and financial aspects.
75
Technical feasibility plays half role to decide that either fire damaged concrete
building should be rehabilitated or demolished and reconstructed. For the
task, first the results obtained from condition assessment are assembled and
analysed to assign the degree of damage, building has endured. To
assemble, analyse and getting meaning full information from the data
obtained evaluation tables in 4.1.1 are developed. This meaning full
information will be then analysed to develop the technical aspect of feasibility
study.
Financial feasibility makes the second half of the feasibility analysis that
makes the basis of decision making. Financial feasibility calculation for
demolition and reconstruction or retrofitting and rehabilitation are similar to the
financial feasibility calculations of new development. Before conducting
financial feasibility analysis, preliminary assessments regarding the limitations
of respective proposal and understanding of its scope will definitely help a lot.
It will set the tone of the financial analysis. Financial feasibility starts with the
calculation of costs. LCC technique can’t be used for comparison as it doesn’t
fulfil the functional equivalence criteria of compared proposals. Various
analysis methods are available to choose for financial analysis like payback
period, NPV, IRR etc. Only the mentioned methods have been discussed
along with their respective pros and cons. After analysis, the risk analysis has
to be conducted to determine the most sensitive parameters in the cash flow.
So that they can be more accurately calculated and right amount of effort is
provided to all variables according to their significance. Best and worst case
scenarios are also identified to understand the positions in which investor can
possibly be. On the collective basis of technical and financial analysis decision
must be made.
76
5. Results, findings and problem Definition
Results of studies that have been done until now presents following results,
findings and problems.
5.1. Results
Concrete buildings are damaged under the event of fire. The damage is not only
caused by fire. Smoke, soot and water (fire extinguisher) contribute in overall
damage. Degree of damage depends upon many factors like temperature and
duration of fire, design of building etc. Nobody, should enter the building unless
structure is secured (if not) and building got clearance from respective authorities.
Water should be dried out at first which would otherwise cause further damage
and accelerates deterioration. Concrete buildings are naturally much tolerant to
fire, thanks to the fire proofing properties of concrete. In concrete buildings,
mostly fire damage is retained by concrete cover and steel is escaped from
damage. Desk study has to be done before evaluation of building, to understand
salient features of building and fire.
Condition survey is conducted on the building (for both structural and no structural
members) to have basic understanding about degree of damage. It is done by
means of visual inspection, hammer tapping and chiselling. Condition
Assessment is conducted on structural members to precisely access their
condition and to determine actual degree of damage endured. Mostly NDTs are
practiced to find out the residual strength and stability of structure. Non-
destructive test like Schmidt hammer, UPV test and penetration resistance test
gives good idea about the structure’s residual strength, if they are conducted
properly. They can’t be totally relied upon owing to their inherent shortcomings
as none of them directly calculates the strength of concrete or steel. Instead, all
NDTs uses indirect correlations to evaluate the certain criteria which is not
necessarily be strength. To sum it up, NDTs results have 65% to 85% accuracy.
They can serve up the purpose for some case (especially those buildings which
are not much damaged) but can’t be considered as authority. Cases, where better
77
accuracy is required, core sampling & testing and petrography test should be
conducted for evaluation of concrete. For steel, tensile test and SEM microscopy
can provide accurate evaluation. Combination of core sampling & testing,
petrography and tensile test is enough to thoroughly understand the condition of
conventional R.C.C buildings. If pre-stressing is involved then SEM microscopy
may be added. These tests are bit costly in market hence they should be used
as per requirement if necessary.
Condition survey and condition assessment evaluates the condition of building.

After evaluation it is required to decide about the fate of building. Generally, rehab
is more sustainable and economical option but this can’t be true for all cases.
Moreover, no certain work or proof is there to establish the statement as a fact.
To determine that whether building should be demolished and reconstructed or
rehabilitated and retrofitted, comprehensive feasibility study (technical &
financial) should be conducted. For technical aspect of feasibility study, data
obtained from condition survey and condition assessment is of vital importance.
That data is random and scattered so it must be properly structured and then
analysed to help in carrying out technical feasibility studies. Financial aspect is
very vital as well. In most of the business cases, it is the most important factor.
Various financial analysis methods are used to understand the viability of
investments. Risk analysis must be done in order to take sound investment
decisions.
Retrofitting and rehabilitation starts with cleaning activity, after it is established as

a better option by feasibility study. Smoke and soot should be cleaned from the
surface of building and belongings which would otherwise deteriorates them and
smoke odour will be a permanent stay. Thermal foggers, ozone machines and air
scrubbers are used to take care of smoke odour. Air scrubber is the safest option
among them. Combustible non-structural members /parts of the building are often
in poor condition beyond repair so would be replaced. Generally, non-structural
members and utilities that are not much damaged needs surface treatments only.
Soda blasting is good, sustainable, economical and effective technique for
surface treatment. Patching and varnishing can also be done if required. HVAC,
electrical wirings and other utilities can be repaired if damages are limited
78
otherwise have to be replaced partially or completely. Structural members can be

retrofitted by FRP reinforcing, partial removal and replacement of damaged
concrete and steel, concrete or steel jacketing and epoxy injections. FRP
reinforcing technique is a good measure with many excellent advantages like
performance, light weight etc. but falls short on the criteria of future fire proofing
and sustainability. Partial removal and replacement is a sound technique for
retrofitting and most popular one. It is a sustainable method with good fire
proofing qualities but it might prove to be bit more costly than FRP reinforcing.
Partial removal can put extra stress on adjoining members hence needs
propping. Concrete jacketing is used basically for earthquake retrofitting but can
be used for fire damaged concrete buildings in certain cases. It is fire proof and
sustainable technique but may alter the structural behaviour of structure. It
changes the dimension of members. Steel jacketing is more suitable than
concrete jacketing for the fire retrofitting and it also doesn’t change the
dimensions of members significantly. It is sustainable but needs protection from
fire and rusting with a protective coating. Epoxy injections are used to fill cracks
and to make up for the loss of bonding between steel and concrete.
5.2. Findings and problem definition
Literature study was quite helpful in context of building evaluation after fire
damage. It helped understanding the condition assessment and condition survey.
Comprehensive articles, journals, books and internet sources are available over
the context of condition assessment and condition survey. It comprehensively
covers evaluation techniques presented in the thesis.
Retrofitting and rehabilitation measures are again comprehensively covered in

literature. There have been more than sufficient knowledge available for the
selected techniques of structural and no-structural rehabilitation and retrofitting
of fire damaged concrete buildings. FRP, partial removal and replacement and
other techniques have been observed in various case studies. Partial removal
and replacement technique has been bit more favoured but it is justified by its
characteristics like sustainability, fire proofing, excellent performance, retaining
79
the strength and physique of structure. So industry practice seems rational and
result oriented.
The biggest concern is over decision making process. Literature study doesn’t
provide with any suitable structure for feasibility study that is specialised for
decision making in case of fire rehabilitation. Financial feasibility studies has been
available in abundance but they are general purpose financial studies. Same
financial feasibility analysis method are used for nearly all investment cases but
as fire damage buildings are not ordinary case. Here we need comparison
between proposed solutions with certain conditions. Limitations of conventional
analysis methods like NPV, IRR, payback period is not always suitable especially
in complex cases because of these limits. Whereas literature for structured
technical feasibility have not been found. Probable reason for that is, there are
lot of factors and variables involved in any such studies as every case is a unique
case. Hence serious efforts are required to establish a structure and technique
for such feasibility study which can help in taking confident decisions. Whether
building should be rehabilitated and retrofitted or demolished and reconstructed?
How to determine overall feasibility involving both technical and financial
feasibilities? Can comparison between two rehab techniques be made? All these
questions are important questions while making decisions and need to be
properly answered.
Literature study provides fair knowledge over the process of dealing with fire
damaged concrete buildings but it has some issues. It lacks some knowledge that
is required for complete understanding of the decision making process.
Solutions to fix the problem:
To develop a feasibility analysis tool that can give guidance in decision making
process (described in section 4.). It should include both financial and technical
feasibility. So that the final recommendation it will give, must have weighted
contribution of all significant factors involved.
80
6. Solution development
Technical and financial feasibility tools would be separately developed and then
merged to give birth to overall feasibility analysis tool. This technique is adopted
to attain accuracy, which would be hammered otherwise, with the involvement of
too many variable at once. The tool that is developed here is a basically a
parametric mathematical model. At first, it account for technical analysis only.
Later, it got contribution from financial analysis and becomes overall feasibility
analysis tool. It is developed at first on its unique philosophy of accounting various
parameter that are most significant for feasibility study according to their
importance in respective case. Afterwards, they have been tested and here starts
the loop of testing and improvement, until it got its current shape.
6.1. Technical feasibility analysis tool
Damage of structural and non-structural members are identified from the analysis
of data assembled in tables presented in 4.1.1 and 4.1.2. After damage is
identified, it’s time to conduct technical feasibility study. Technical feasibility
analysis is governed to decide that whether it is recommendable to rehab the
building instead of demolishing and reconstructing on technical ground.
Structure’s condition and its chances of getting its old strength back completely
or upto the extent where it can perform its intended function are studied. Upon
these facts and figures, it is decided on technical ground that whether it is
worthwhile to rehab the building or to demolition and reconstruction, is the better
answer to the problem. Factors that are important and considered in the technical
feasibility analysis are described below
6.1.1. Degree of Complexity “C”
As described earlier that every case is a unique case and holds its own demands
and requirements. It has its own structure, degree of damage etc. Similarly
complexity is very much oriented upon the nature of element and the structural
system. For example. Normally, it is easier to replace damaged column with a
81
new one than it is to replace beam. Reason behind this is that, in frame structure,
beams are sandwiched between slab (on upper side) and columns (on lower
side). So if beam is to be replaced then it will have an obvious effect on more
adjoining members. While in case of columns it is only in contact with beam or
slab directly and disturb less adjoining members. So effect on adjoining
member, plays its part and considered as one of the most important factor in
order to decide degree of complexity. Method of repair or replacement is
another important factor. The technique that is used to replace or repair the
element is vital. For example to repair a beam, it might not require the vertical
temporary support from beneath by formwork (propping) but for beam
replacement propping or may be hydraulic jack support or any other kind of strong
support is required that can replace the function of beam for time being. If another
beam is provided beneath the already existing beam then formwork requirements
will provide the complexity. For replacement of concrete beam with steel one may
require special measures to lift it. Hence method of repair or replacement add to
the complexity level. Design requirements also adds up in the complexity level.
As described every case is a unique case, so degree of complexity differs from
case to case. It also differs for repair and replacement in same case as well.
Degree of complexity is assigned in a numeral figure from 1 to 5. One being the
lowest and 5 being the highest degree of complexity. The assignment of degree
is based upon the opinion of technical staff, engineer and analyst. Moreover case
specific analytical approach can be used for assigning the degree of complexity.
For example, for replacement job of roof and non-structural members it can be
assigned as 1, for load bearing walls it can fluctuates between 1 to 2, for columns
2 to 3 and for beams and slabs from 3 to 5127.
6.1.2. Life expectancy of solution “L”
Life expectancy is number of year the proposed solution (repair or

reconstruction) will last. Its unit is “year”. The repair will revitalize the structure or
other utility and how will it impact the overall life of the building. Both, overall
remaining expected life of the building and expected life of the solution are
127These figures are highly subjective and based upon the opinion of the author. These figures
are for normal cases excluding the effect of any special condition/situation that might be present.
82
considered. For technical feasibility analysis, the lesser figure in expected life of
the building and the expected life of the solution is taken as life expectancy “L”.
The reason behind that is to make sure that proposed solution will serve for its
expected life “L”. For example if the remaining expected life of building is 30 years
and expected life of reconstructed new beam is 50 years then we will consider 30
years in analysis because it will only be able to serve us for next 30 years after
which building will complete its expected life and will be demolished. In which
case, the new beam wouldn’t be able to serve upto its expected life (50 years).
6.1.3. Time required for proposed solution “T”
Time is another important factor. T is the number of days required for the
proposed solution (repair or reconstruction) to be executed. Time is money. In
case of loans and investments made by investors it is more pressing issue.
Moreover the building services and the purpose of the building sometimes make
it more critical and important e.g. state department building, parliament house of
state or house of commerce etc. Time unit can be months if the proposal duration
is too long and undermines the other factors involved. This may happen in huge
projects where multi complex buildings have to be rehabilitated. Normally in
cases of elements repair or reconstruction, number of days are considered as
units. Anyways, for each case analyst can select suitable time unit as per his own
approach but same unit should be used for both repair and reconstruction
comparison analysis.
6.1.4. Degree of damage “D”
Enough debate had already been done on this factor especially in 4.1.1 and 4.1.2.
Degree of damage is the extent of damage that the element of the building has
endured. It is decided by the proper technique described before. It varies from 1
to 5. Five (5) being the worst case scenario. In case of whole building analysis,
degree of damage will be assigned to the overall building based upon the overall
damage its elements have endured. Such figure of degree of damage may be
allotted to the whole building after a systematic approach by team of experts.
83
6.1.5. Parametric mathematical model
For deciding that whether replacement is a better option or rehab on technical

ground (excluding the financial factor), following mathematical model will prove
to be a handy tool. Above described factors C, D, T and L are considered in it.
Now as stated several times that every case is a unique case and exhibits unique
properties and have certain requirements. Moreover expectations varies from
case to case and so does goals and aims. Some cases demands durability for
which Life expectancy of solution “L” becomes the most important factor of all ,
others may consider time for building to continue its normal function as most
striking factor of all e.g. in case of city’s main train station or airport building etc.
Therefore, each case is unique and importance of factors (C, D, T, L) is unique
too. Hence an importance factor “I” is multiplied with those factors to decide the
contribution of each factor into results of mathematical model analysis and
ultimately the decision making process. Importance factor “I” has unique value
for each factor (C, D, T, L) such that their collection sum is equal to 1. It follows
the following condition
I = I 1 + I2 + I 3 + I4 = 1
For comparison and decision making following mathematical model is used. For
both rehab and repair same mathematical model is used. Degree of damage will
remain same for rehab and repair. Other factors like Life expectancy, Complexity
and Time for proposed solution will differ depending upon respective solutions.
As the result, of the solution of this model, a figure will be obtained called
Feasibility Index (F.I). For both rehab and reconstruction, F.I will be obtained and
one with lower F.I will be the preferred option. One more thing to notice is C, D
and T are making positive contribution while L is making negative contribution in
the model given below. Reason for that is, higher value of D, C and T will have
opposite effect than higher value of L. higher value of C, D and T is a negative
thing while more life is a positive thing. As they are having opposite effects,
therefore they are making opposite contribution to the sum and this is also the
reason for selecting the measure with lesser accumulated/sum value. It will be
84
more clarified in 6.2, where this mathematical model will be tested on a case
study
F.I = (C × I1) + (T × I2) + (D × I3) – (L × I4)
6.1.6. Example Calculation
To understand the working and methodology of the mathematical model

developed for technical feasibility and we will use a case study presented by Fay
Engineer. The basic information about the case is as follow.
Coal Coating Manufacturing Facility that has been built in 1956. Single floor
building has area of 59,032 sq. ft. Roof structure has been damaged. Details
about roof are128
Figure 22: KBP Coil Coaters129
 Valley-Ridge geometry mild reinforced cast-in-place concrete folded plate

roof structure
 Valley to ridge height = 8 ft. and 8 in.
 Longitudinal span = 85 ft. with 9 ft. Cantilever
 Reinforcement = Grade 40
 Slab thickness = 3.5 ft.
Details of damage to roof structure are as follow
(http://www.fayengineering.com/articles/repair-fire-damaged-building-case-study accessed
5.8.14).
5.8.14).
85
Not whole roof structure was damage. Some valleys observed worst damage.
Three Valleys with total area of 66ft. × 85 ft. beard most severe damage. The
feature of damaged area are
 For Concrete
 Visual Inspection:
Colour is Buff to pink, Cracks along the reinforcement bars, Crazing is apparent
on surface, Concrete spalls are apparent as well.
Degree of damage verdict (Table 5) = 3 to 4
 Core sampling and testing:
Reduction in modulus of elasticity of concrete = 25 %
Reduction in compressive strength of concrete = slight loss in comparison of

undamaged concrete
Degree of damage verdict = 3
 Rebound hammer results:
Shows different values of rebound number ranging from 28 to 37
Degree of damage verdict (Table 8) = 3 to 4
Petrographic Analysis Results:
Shows Depth of damage upto 1.25 ft. or approx. 32 in. with surface temperature
is concluded to be reached upto 1100 F or approx. 593 C. Radical cracks are
around reinforcing bars. Loss of bond between reinforcement and concrete is
around 30% to 50%
Degree of damage verdict (Table 1, 5, 8) = 3 to 4
 For Reinforcement Steel

 Loss of strength= None
 Plastic Deformation= None
Final Judgement over the structure’s integrity is found to be within 50 to 75 %

within current code requirement. After observing all test results and giving more
86
weightage to more accurate tests such as petrography and core sampling and
testing plus the healthy condition of steel, degree of damage is estimated to be
3. Only worrying point is the loss of bondage between concrete and steel ranging
from 30 % to 50%. But it is not detrimental as it can be cured with bonding agents.
Also considering the area of roof damaged in case of fire also has its impact in
the final decision of degree of damage.130
Figure 23: Top view of damaged Valley- Ridge concrete roof 131
Complexity of repair is minimal as it wouldn’t ask for heavy machinery to operate

and wouldn’t have any significant effect on adjoining members, hence allotting
degree of complexity as 1 for repair. For partial removal of slab and then providing
with a new slab will cause lot of problems. Slab has to be removed and re-casted.
It will require very heavy machineries and expert crew which can use most
advance technologies to deliver the results. Even if slab is re-casted into this ridge
valley geometry successfully it will cause the problem of cold joint between new
and old concrete. And most probably new steel column supports have to be
provided beneath this new slab. Hence degree of complexity for partial demolition
and partial reconstruction would be at-least 4. Hence verdict is
Complexity for repair = 1
Complexity for partial demolition and reconstruction = 4
5.8.14).
5.8.14).
87
Life expectancy for new slab would be at-least 50 years. Whereas for repaired
slab with Glass Fibre Epoxy Composite Reinforcing, epoxy injections for epoxy
inject cracks and Shot Crete would be around 20 years.
Life expectancy for repair = 20 years
Life expectancy for Partial demolition and reconstruction = 50 years.
Time required for partial demolition and reconstruction depends upon no of daily
site hours, efficiency of labour and management. Considering normal
circumstances, it can be estimated to be around 100 to 150 days. In actual repair
project, it took almost 4 months but considering this time to be bit too much and
with proper management it could be done easily done within half of the period.
Hence
Time required for repair = 60 days
Time required for partial demolition and reconstruction = 120 days
Importance factor will be considered as 0.25 for all four factors to obsolete its
effect, because data regarding the importance of factors is missing. Hence
considering all four factors as equally important. But in cases, the importance
factor can be divided according to the wishes of the decision makers depending
upon the circumstances and goals. Now calculating F.I
 For Rehabilitation and retrofitting

(F.I)R&R = (C × I1) + (T × I2) + (D × I3) – (L × I4)
(F.I)R&R = (1 × 0.25) + (60 × 0.25) + (3 × 0.25) – (20 × 0.25)
(F.I)R&R = 11
 For partial demolition and reconstruction

(F.I)D&R = (C × I1) + (T × I2) + (D × I3) – (L × I4)
(F.I)D&R = (4 × 0.25) + (120 × 0.25) + (3 × 0.25) – (50 × 0.25)
(F.I)D&R = 19.25
 Conclusion
As (F.I)R&R < (F.I)D&R

88
Hence Rehabilitation and retrofitting is more suitable than demolition and

reconstruction, based on technical ground only, in this case.
Now, let’s consider a phase where durability of the solution is the most important
factor and complexity, Time required for proposal to execute and degree of
damage are not that important and have equal weightage in sight of owners. Then
I4 = 0.7 ; I3 = 0.1 ; I2 = 0.1 ; I1 = 0.1
 For Rehabilitation and retrofitting

(F.I)R&R = (C × I1) + (T × I2) + (D × I3) – (L × I4)
(F.I)R&R = (1 × 0.1) + (60 × 0.1) + (3 × 0.1) – (20 × 0.7)
(F.I)R&R = -7.6
 For partial demolition and reconstruction
(F.I)D&R = (C × I1) + (T × I2) + (D × I3) – (L × I4)
(F.I)D&R = (4 × 0.1) + (120 × 0.1) + (3 × 0.1) – (50 × 0.7)
(F.I)D&R = -22.3
 Conclusion
As (F.I)D&R < (F.I)R&R
Hence, demolition and reconstruction is more suitable than Rehabilitation and

retrofitting based on technical ground only in this case. Reason is the shift of goal.
In this case durability becomes more important than others hence putting the
case in favour of demolition and reconstruction.
6.2. Financial feasibility analysis tool
Debate over financial feasibility study has been much covered in literature theory.
But as a matter of fact none of the conventional analysis methods like payback
period, NPV and IRR actually sits well with the mathematical model presented
before in 6.1. There are obvious limitations of these analysis tools/methods that
makes it unfeasible for the financial feasibility analysis. Moreover, these
shortcomings will reflect heavily in the mathematical model results as well if they
will reside in financial analysis. There is a need for a financial analysis tool that
can accurately compare complex and inconsistent proposals. Reason for that is
89
the proposed solution we have for redevelopment (rehab or reconstruction) of fire

damaged building are not having consistent parameters. Their respective life
spans and may differ. Similarly, their imposed tax rate may also vary.
After consulting the limitations of many financial analysis methods for investment
feasibility, it has been identified that Annual equivalent worth method can
somehow do the job if properly modified for including financial factor in parametric
mathematical model. It doesn’t have the limitation of same time period as required
by NPV. It is more easily understandable as it excludes the time factor from the
group of time, money and risk. This simplicity and accuracy is exactly what is
required to be consistent with the mathematical model. AEW method is also
consistent with NPV method. After all these advantages and suitability for
financial evaluation of proposals concerning fire damaged buildings, still
modifications are required. So the financial analysis tool used here has the same
philosophy as AEW but has its own structure for better compatibility with
parametric mathematical model and inclusion of risk factor in it. The financial
analysis tool is described in detail below.
There are many factors which have their say in technical feasibility. Similarly in
financial feasibility there are many factors which contributes their share and must
be included. Principal five factors on expense side that have their say in financial
feasibility are
1. Depreciation (which is based upon the useful life of the building)

2. Interest rates
3. Taxes
4. Insurance costs
5. Maintenance and operation costs
All these expenses are accumulated over the years and not always linear as well.
But for ease, they are considered to be linear (constant average is used). An
additional principal factor for rehab is fixed cost which may be present in some
cases. It will be explained later. As finances will be provided as an investment
therefore return of investment is also expected. Income factor is then included in
90
the financial feasibility analysis to calculate the difference between income and
investment that will eventually establish the profit or loss. Each factor included
many perspectives of financial considerations and collectively decides for the
financial feasibility of the proposal. Both rehab and reconstruction proposal are
financially analysed on annual basis and the better option with greater financial
benefit is identified.
6.2.1. Depreciation
The total cost of construction or rehabilitation is regarded as capital cost and as

this cash is fixed in shape of a fixed asset (building) hence not in circulation
anymore. The asset will be depreciated with the passage of time. This is all but
natural process. The value to fixed asset decreases over the years. The factor
which decides the annual rate of depreciation is the life of the building.
There are different lives of the building depending upon the definition. Life of the
building that is used in here is the useful life of the building. It is the life for which
building remain economical and physically sound to carry out its intended
function. The depreciation of assert is zero percent in the beginning means
building investment hold its full capacity without losing a penny due to
depreciation. In the end of useful life the depreciation is 100% which means
building investment is totally diminished. Useful life is also known as write-off life.
It is not the actual life of building but more like an analytical tool. It is an assumed
figure in the financial calculation. Realistic approach must be used to determine
this life. Following consideration must be considered while allotting useful life to
the building as well.
 It must be lesser than physical and economic life of the building

 In case of mortgage, it must not be lesser than loan period.
It is described in units of years. In other words, it is the number of years over

which the initial investment is spread out. Depreciation is presented in units of
91
percentage. The percentage value of depreciation is measured by the following

formula
Rate of depreciation = 100 / Useful life of building
For a reconstructed building whose useful life is determined to be 30 years, now

rate of depreciation would be 100/30 = 3.33%. This is the case of demolition and
reconstruction. For rehabilitation and retrofitting, the useful life would start from
the point of rehabilitation and reconstruction. For example, a ten year old building
is damaged by fire, due to the investment on rehab, building’s write-off life or
useful life of building is determined to be 12 years. It means that for next 12 years
building will serve its function economically and fulfil above mentioned criteria.
6.2.2. Maintenance and Operation
Maintenance and operation are the running costs of the facility. Every now and
then building has to undergo routine maintenance and minor repair to keep it
functionally astute and to safe guard its expected life. Maintenance costs are
important factors and can’t be ignored. Although maintenance and operation
costs are not uniform over the life span of the building. In some years it is less
and in others higher. But usually they are taken as uniform average over the life
span of building and vary from 1% to 3 % of total construction cost132&133. Some
unusual cases of big repairs are not part of this percentage figure.
6.2.3. Interest
Interests are applicable on every investment. If money is loaned from the bank
then interest has to be paid. If own investment is used still cost of interests are
incurred because investor is missing the money that he may earn by investing
the money in the bank and can have immediate return on investment without
132 Joel Levitt. Evaluating Real Costs for Building Maintenance Management. Page no 1-2.
133 http://realestate.msn.com/article.aspx?cp-documentid=25490855 accessed 20.08.2014.
92
moving a muscle. Interest cost are there and it is quite tricky to calculate interest
cost incurred in the total expenses. It vary from one scenario to another scenario.
A scenario is, where building is rehabilitated and the other is where building is
reconstructed after demolition. Plus what is going to happen with the building
afterwards. Will it be sold or used or rented out. Moreover what are the conditions
of mortgage if loan is issued form the bank. Should the investor pay fix amount
over a decided period of time or compounded interest will be returned back.
Therefore interest cost have to be independently calculated but should be
included in investment calculation to reflect the true picture of the investment.
Interest is applied over average capital cost134 or interest rate can be halved and
then applied over the full capital cost. Interest is applied for the duration of
useful/write-off life of the building.
6.2.4. Tax
Tax are applied in some cases. Specially the cases where demolition and
reconstruction is involved. Tax rules differs from area to area and need to be
accessed by fiscal experts to determine that how much taxes will apply on the
proposal (if any). Cases where taxes are not involved and doesn’t accumulate in
the expenses, there they are taken as zero.
6.2.5. Insurance
Buildings are insured against damages for example fire damage insurance or
flood insurance. In those cases where owner doesn’t go for any kind of insurance,
still these insurance cost have to be included in the annual costs as risks of future
hazards can’t be ruled out and this cost will act as risk management. Although, in
certain cases and in certain areas it is mandatory to have insurance against fire
and such hazards. So simply this factor can’t be ignored and should be counted
in financial analysis. Usually insurance costs vary depending upon the design
and material of construction and other such contributing factors. Usually, in
134Capital cost loaned from the bank is paid off gradually hence the interest-able amount is full in
the beginning and zero at the end.
93
general, insurance rates fluctuates from 0.5 % to 1 % of total construction cost in

rural areas and 1% to 2% of total construction cost in urban areas135. For some
special cases like flood prone or wild fire prone or earthquake prone areas or
areas prone to other natural hazards, insurance rates are much higher. Building
condition has a significant role to play in it. So this figure may jump from this
general valuation of insurance costs.
6.2.6. Special Costs
Costs of all above described factors are the principal costs. Except these costs
sometimes there are some special costs. Although, it would be a rare incident but
if there is some special cost are involved then they have to be added on expense
side. If there are no such costs then it would be regarded as zero.
6.2.7. Annual Costs
All the above mentioned costs collectively decides for the annual costs of the
proposal which comes out in shape of percentage of total cost incurred for the
specific proposal. For example if there is a building that has been damaged by
fire and total cost (capital cost) of demolition and reconstruction is 10000 Euros.
The useful/write-off life of building after reconstruction is considered as 25 years.
The rate of depreciation would be 100/25 = 4%. Interest rate applied over the
average capital cost or half interest rate applied over full capital cost gives same
results. Therefore to make it compatible with other cost factors that are applied
over capital cost, we will take half interest rate 5/2 = 2.5%. Considering there are
1% maintenance and repair charges, 0 % taxes and 1 % insurance cost.
Therefore annual cost would be as given on the next page.
135
http://thelawdictionary.org/article/what-is-the-average-annual-cost-of-homeowners-insurance-
and-property-taxes-for-florida-residents/ accessed 20.08.2014.
94
Depreciation Rate 4%
Tax Rate 0%
Insurance 1%
Interest rate (avg.) 2.5%
Operation and Maintenance rate 1%
Total annual cost (% of capital cost) 8.5%
6.2.8. Annual income
Total expenses are determined and have to be compared with the total income
of the proposal that is under observation. Annual Income represents the total
income generated from the facility after investment on yearly basis. In cases,
where building is rented out, calculating annual income is pretty much straight
forward business. In these cases simple total monthly rental income after taxes
is multiplied with 12 to get the final annual rental income but that’s not always that
simple and straight forward. In case, where owner has decided to sale out the
building after it is being rehabilitated and retrofitted from fire damage gives a twist
to the situation. In such cases, total annual income is calculated by dividing the
total selling price after taxes and commission by the useful or write-off life of the
facility (same as used for calculating depreciation). The total annual income
mechanism would be elaborated later.
6.2.9. Working methodology and example
After total annual cost in term of percentage of capital cost is determined and total
annual income is determined. Difference between them can be easily calculated
to determine annual profit or loss. But that’s not it. Debate over more sensible
investment or decision making should include risk factor as well. General rule of
thumb is more risk means more profit. A sensible investor doesn’t accept greater
risk if he can’t see greater profit. Now how much one can gamble? And the
95
comparison between rehab and reconstruction upon basis of financial feasibility

preferably should involve risk factor as well. Profit percentage obtained from both
options can be corrected for risks involved. For example. If capital cost for
reconstruction after demolition is 1,000,000 Euros and total annual cost is 8.5%
(as shown in section 6.2.7). The total annual income from rent is 90,000 Euros.
Then profit percentage would be
Total annual cost = 8.5% of 1,000,000 = 85,000 €
Total annual income = 90,000 €
Annual Profit = 5,000 €
Percentage profit (P.P) = 5,000/85,000 = 5.88 %
Now, consider the second option of rehabilitation and reconstruction. The total
cost over rehabilitation and reconstruction is calculated to be 400000 €. Almost
one third of what has been proposed to spent on demolition and reconstruction.
But, the useful life or write off life for retrofitting is determined to be max 10 years.
So depreciation rate would be 100/10 = 10. Moreover, insurance rate will be more
for rehabilitated and retrofitted building than the insurance rate of new
construction with better fire design. Conclusively. Annual costs would be as follow
Tax Rate 0%
Insurance 2%
Interest rate (avg.) 2.5%
Total annual cost (% of capital cost) 15.5%
Total rental income can’t be expected to be as high as it would be in demolition

and re-construction. Here let’s assume that rental income would be 75000 €
Total annual cost = 15.5% of 400,000 = 62,000 €
Total annual income = 75,000 €

96
Annual Profit = 13,000 €
Percentage profit (P.P) = 13,000/62,000 = 20.97 %
Hence in this case profit percentage indicates that retrofitting is a better option.
But it is not as simple as it seems. In real world we have risks that have their
telling factor in decision making. So risk factor should be considered in financial
feasibility analysis. Investments in which pay back periods are longer, risk is
usually higher than the investments where pay back periods are shorter. Many
risks are covered upto an extent by insurance but still there are many risks that
are not even covered by insurance. In above case, if retrofitting measure that was
possible is not very reliable and there is high risk attached to its seismic
performance then situation may differ. To normalise the profit percentage with
inclusion of risk degree of risk can be introduced in financial feasibility analysis.
Risk factor (R.F) may range from 1 to 5 with 5 being the case with minimum risk
and 1 being the maximum risk.
R.F = 1 to 5 (1 = maximum risk; 5= minimum risk).
Risk factor (R.F) is multiplied with percentage profit (P.P) to obtain financial
feasibility Score (F.F.S). The proposed solution with more value of F.F.S will be
financially more feasible.
F.F.S = R.F × P.P
Now again consider the case showed in example. The retrofitting option that was
the only way to retrofit and rehabilitate the building, carry risks of again serious
damage to structure in case of any seismic activity. Unluckily the building is
located in high seismic zone. Therefore risk factor is fixed as 1. While in case of
demolition and reconstruction new design takes care of seismic issue and assure
good performance over any such event thus the risk factor is decided to be 4.
Now calculating financial feasibility score for both cases
For Retrofitting (F.F.S)R&R = 1×20.97 = 20.97
For demolition and reconstruction (F.F.S)D&R = 4×5.88 = 23.52

97
Hence, final results shows that demolition and reconstruction seems to be more
viable option in F.F.S. but this is highly subjective. Some investors like risk and
are glad to take them while others don’t. So to include Risk factor in financial
feasibility factor in analysis is totally upto the choice of the decision makers or
analysts.
6.3. Feasibility analysis tool
After technical and financial feasibility analysis, we are at the point where we can
determine the overall feasibility of each proposal presented on the desk. With the
addition of financial feasibility in the parametric mathematical model of technical
feasibility, we can determine total or overall or simple feasibility analysis.
Financial feasibility score (F.F.S) or Profit percentage (P.P) can be used in
mathematical model to include financial factor in analysis. The final shape of
mathematical model would be as follow
F.I = (C × I1) + (T × I2) + (D × I3) – (L × I4) – (F.F.S × I5)
Or
F.I = (C × I1) + (T × I2) + (D × I3) – (L × I4) – (P.P × I5)
Whereas;
F.I = Feasibility index
C = Degree of Complexity
T = Time required for proposed solution
D = Degree of damage
L = Life expectancy of proposed solution
F.F.S = Financial feasibility score
P.P = Profit percentage
I = Importance factor
I = I1 + I2 + I3 + I4  I5= 1
98
Resultant of mathematical model is calculated and the proposed solution with

lesser value would be regarded as more feasible solution.
Summary
Feasibility analysis tool that is developed as the part of solution development

addresses the issue concerning decision making process. As it brings lot of
ease and inherent characteristic to cover almost all factors that must be
considered in decision making. But it can’t be granted with final authority as it
has been very much in development phase. Its Alpha version is ready to be
tested as Beta version. Repeated and rigorous testing with improvement is
required to make it better and more efficient in a cyclic manner. Yet, this model
is good enough to give a clear enough idea about the feasibility of proposals
presented on the desk. As it has a philosophy to quantify parameters that
usually can’t be quantified and then it uses those figures to draw a
comparison. The philosophy integrated in the feasibility analysis tool for
comparison between rehab or demolition and reconstruction cover almost all
corners. It is because it dictates a system that starts with proper condition
survey and condition assessment (deciding “D”), then it progresses towards
technical and financial assessment of proposed solutions (deciding “C, T, L”
& “F.F.S, P.P”) for the case on hand. Then it includes the impact of factors
that has its say in the decision, by the help of importance factors and allots
them their respective share in decision making which is often quite vague and
unclear.
99
7. Trial of feasibility analysis tool
The case used here for elaborating the validity of mathematical model and its
understanding, is located in Islamabad, capital city of Pakistan. The building is a
commercial shopping mall with some office space as well. Building originally got
damaged by fire and then rehabilitated. We will test our mathematical model over
it. As this building has been retrofitted and rehabilitated instead of demolition and
reconstruction therefore we already know the right choice. If our model favours
the same solution and consider it a better option, then it can be interpreted that
model works fine and can be used for feasibility study or comparison studies. The
data about the case is as follow.
Name of the building: Beverly centre Islamabad
Location: Jinnah Avenue, Sector F-6, Islamabad.
Overall area: 365,904 square feet (approx.)
Floor: Basement+5 Floors (total 6 floors)
Figure 24: Beverly Centre Islamabad136
A fire broke out on Sunday, 16 January, 2011 at about 2030 hrs on the Eastern
side of 4th floor. The fire spread up to 5th floor when it was extinguished after
approximately 9 hrs at 0545 hours on 17 Jan 2011 as per the statements of the
136Courtesy of Syed Ameer ul Hassan. Sub Divisional Officer in Communication and Works
department. Govt. of Punjab. Pakistan.
100
eye witnesses interviewed and fire department report. As a result top two floor of
building has undergone heavy damage. Approximately most of the building
interior in top two floors was damaged and un-useable. HVAC had undergone
critical damage as well. Structure somehow has retained its integrity as luckily
building lies in high seismic zone so design was having extra capacity. Moreover
columns were jacketed with concrete to give it some extra strength and seismic
capacity as well. This concrete jacket worked as extra cove and protected the
structural member too.
Figure 25: Fire damaged Beverly Centre Islamabad137
The structure has been evaluated at first with different testing techniques and
found out to have its structural strength more or less intact while most of the
building equipment and HVAC got damaged.
Figure 26: Burnt AC unit (left), Damages Electricity cables (right)138
Results of diagnosis of Beverly centre dictates following facts
 The Beverly Centre did not undergo major structural damage due to the
fire, erupted on top two floors.
137 Courtesy of Syed Ameer ul Hassan. Sub Divisional Officer in Communication and Works

101
 Fire affects mainly consist of calcinations of concrete blocks used for floor
system construction between the ribs and the concrete cover for the ribs,
solid slabs, columns and shear walls.
 The bottom steel reinforcement in the ribs does not have adequate bond
with concrete at a number of locations due to improper detailing and poor
concrete quality.
 A few concrete blocks between the ribs fell down during the fire action.
However blocks neither fell nor cracked during the load test which
indicates adequate integrity of these blocks with the floor structure.139
Hence, Degree of Damage (D) = 3
To demolish top two floors and then to rebuild it takes time. According to current
practices the time estimates for reconstruction is about 5 months or 150 days.
Lack of the possibility to use heavy machinery in the highly commercial area
makes demolition and reconstruction slower. Whereas, retrofitting the structure
and rehabilitating of building has been scheduled for 70 days 140. One factor for
slow repair was also the working hours of the site. Hence
Time (T) for Rehabilitation and Retrofitting = 70 days
Time (T) for Demolition and Reconstruction = 150 days
To demolition the whole upper two floors of the building and then provide with a
new one doesn’t impose any certain complexity. It would be pretty much straight
forward and standard process. Whereas retrofitting a fire damaged structure that
has been retrofitted for seismic activates is not as simple as it seems. But yet
there has not been any striking or challenging situation except in designing for
following measure that have been taken to rehab the top two floors of the building.
These remedial measures are given below.

102
 Remove the concrete blocks, provided in between the ribs of the floor
system
 Loose concrete around the rib bottom reinforcement should be removed
 The ribs should be properly concreted with shotcrete, using dry or wet
procedure
 The seismic retrofitting, as already designed, should be redone making
sure that appropriate quality assurance procedures are followed
 The upper two stories are considered softer as compared with the other
floors. Solid partition walls may be provided between the columns to
enhance the lateral stiffness of the structure
 The foundation structure is relatively flexible and needs to be stiffened for
the seismic performance requirements.
Hence, For Rehabilitation and Retrofitting Degree of Complexity (C) = 3
For Demolition and Reconstruction Degree of Complexity (C) = 2
Expected life of new floors that has been built after demolition must have
considerable more life than reconstructed or patched one, especially, in the area
which is active in terms of seismic activities. Moreover it is a commercial building
so expected life for both proposals are as under.
For Rehabilitation and Retrofitting Life expectancy (L) = 10 years
For Demolition and Reconstruction Life expectancy (L) = 25 years
Calculation of financial feasibility are bit tricky considering some assumptions.

For rehabilitation of building and retrofitting of structure data is available but not
for reconstruction and demolition141. So market rates and local rates of the area
have been used for calculation.
141 Because actual measure to bring building back to its functional state was Rehabilitation and
retrofitting.
103
 For Retrofitting and Rehabilitation
Tax Rate 2%
Insurance 2%
Interest rate (avg.) 4%
Total annual cost (% of capital cost) 19%
Write-off life is considered same as life expectancy, so depreciation rate would

be 10%. Normal interest rate is 8% in commercial mortgage hence we use half
(4%) of it but on full investment (reason explained in section 6.2.3).
Total cost of rehabilitation and reconstruction = 100,912,000 PKR142
Total cost of rehabilitation and reconstruction = 763906.13 € 143
Total annual cost = 0.19 × 763906.13 € = 145142.165 € = 145142 €
Total annual income = 6 €/year/sq. ft. × 0.55 × 121968 sq. ft. = 402494 €
Here 6 € is the yearly rental rate for one square foot. 121968 is the total floor area
of top two floors. 0.55 is the percentage of total rentable space on 3 rd and 4th
floor144. It is calculated as explained on next page
Average monthly rent of the space on 4th and 5th floor fluctuates between 50 to
82 PKR per square feet per month depending on market and location factors 145.
So taking the mean value of 66 PKR per square feet per month.
So, monthly per square feet rate of rent = 66 PKR
142 Actual cost.

143 Conversion rate is Forex exchange rate 08.09.2014 (17:32 GMT1). 1 Euro = 132.1 PKR.
144 Actual space that can be rented. Total space on 2 floor excluding construction, stair, cases,
lobbies etc.
145 Current market Rates 22.08.2014.
104
Annual per square feet rate of rent= 66 × 12 PKR =792.6 PKR =6.001146 € or 6 €
Total area of 6 floors = 365904 sq. ft.
Area of 2 floors = 365904/3 = 121968 sq. ft.
Difference between total annual cost and income = 402494  145142 =257352 €
Profit Percentage (P.P)R&R = 257352 / 145142 = 177.3% 147
Risk is higher in Retrofitting and reconstruction as there is a possibility of some

unidentified errors or damages that remain untreated. Moreover, errors in design
that is complex in nature or errors in workmanship can have its impact. Plus the
structure is situated in high seismic zone. Bigger shocks comes few and far but
smaller shocks are matter of routine. These smaller shocks are not only
responsible for shorter life expectancy but high risk too. As insurance service
doesn’t cover for wars, civil disobedience, protest damages or damages due to
movement of earth e.g. landslides, earthquake sink holes etc. This case is
subjected to serious earthquake risk in retrofitted condition if an earth quake of
Richter scale 6.5 or higher will come. Hence value of risk factor could be 2
(R.F)R&R = 2
So, (F.F.S)R&R = (R.F)R&R × (P.P)R&R
(F.F.S)R&R = 2 × 177.3
(F.F.S)R&R = 354.6
 For Demolition and Reconstruction
Tax Rate 2%
Insurance 1%
Interest rate (avg.) 4%
146 Conversion rate is Forex exchange rate 08.09.2014 (17:32 GMT1). 1 Euro = 132.1 PKR
147 It is not actual profit percentage (see 2nd paragraph of Summary (financial feasibility)).
105
Total annual cost (% of capital cost) 12%
Write-off life is considered same as life expectancy, so depreciation rate would

be 4%. Normal interest rate is 8% in commercial mortgage hence we use half
(4%) of it but on full investment (reason explained in section 7.3). Insurance rate
will be lesser because of better design against fire and earthquakes.
Total cost of Demolition and Reconstruction = 121968 sq. ft. × 4000 sq. ft.
= 487872000 PKR148
Here 121968 is the total floor space of 2 floors and 4000 is the construction cost
of 1 sq. ft.
Total cost of Demolition and Reconstruction = 3693202 € 149
Total annual cost = 12% × 3693191 = 443184.25 €
Total annual income = 7.5 €/year/sq. ft. × 0.6 × 121968 sq. ft. = 548856 €
Here 7.5 € is the yearly rental rate for one square foot. 121968 is the total floor
area of top two floors. 0.6 is the percentage of total rentable space on 3 rd and 4th
floor150. Efficiency of design can improve from 0.55 to 0.6 in new design with use
of slender structural members and eliminating the need of jacketing.
Difference between total annual cost and income = 548856  443184.25 =

105672 €
Profit Percentage (P.P)D&R = 105672 / 443184.25 = 23.84% 151
As new design can improve the risks attached to the building as explained earlier
hence maximum protection can be insured. But still building lies in active seismic
zone therefore
(R.F)D&R = 4
So, (F.F.S)D&R = (R.F)D&R × (P.P)D&R
148 Market price ranges from 2500 to 5000 PKR per sq. ft. in the area for commercial construction.
149 Conversion rate is Forex exchange rate 08.09.2014 (17:32 GMT1). 1 Euro = 132.1 PKR.
150 Actual space that can be rented.Total space on 2 floor excluding
construction,stair,cases,lobbies etc.
151 It is not actual profit percentage.
106
(F.F.S)D&R = 4 × 23.84
(F.F.S)D&R = 95.38
Now,
F.I = (C × I1) + (T × I2) + (D × I3) – (L × I4) – (F.F.S × I5)
Importance factors are assigned according to the demands of the building, as it

is a commercial building hence finance will get maximum share. Second most
important factor would be life expectancy from investor or owner point of view.
Time required for the building to come back to its original condition will obviously
be important too as it’s a loss to the business concerning 4th and 5th floor and also
to the floors beneath. Complexity might not be that much important factors for
owner who has maximum involvement in decision making. Moreover in this case,
there are no such serious complications neither in rehab nor in reconstruction.
Degree of damage is not serious but intermediate and manageable so from
technical point of view it’s not that problematic. Plus from owner or investor’s point
of view, it has less importance too. As far as building can be restored to its
functional level, owner will be satisfied with this. Hence following distribution of
importance factor is rational.
I1 = 0.03; I2 = 0.2; I3 = 0.07; I4 = 0.25; I5 = 0.45
Now putting all these values in mathematical model will give F.I values.
 For Rehabilitation and Retrofitting
F.I = (C × I1) + (T × I2) + (D × I3) – (L × I4) – (F.F.S × I5)

F.I = (3 × 0.03) + (70 × 0.2) + (3 × 0.07) – (10 × 0.25) – (354.6 × 0.45)
(F.I)R&R = 147.77
 For Demolition and Reconstruction
F.I = (C × I1) + (T × I2) + (D × I3) – (L × I4) – (F.F.S × I5)

F.I = (2 × 0.03) + (150 × 0.2) + (3 × 0.07) – (25 × 0.25) – (95.38 × 0.45)
107
(F.I)D&R = 18.9
As, (F.I)R&R < (F.I)D&R
Hence Rehabilitation and retrofitting is a better option
According to the feasibility analysis done by our model, Rehabilitation and

retrofitting is better option than demolition and reconstruction. Actual case has
been rehabilitated and retrofitted as well, therefore validity of the model is proved.
This case may not be a very complex case. In tight cases, this mathematical
model can really prove to be a handy tool if accurate data is provided and
importance factors are rightly accessed.
108
8. Conclusion, scope, recommendation, critique & summary of study
8.1. Conclusion
Risk of fire is always there for all kind of buildings. Concrete buildings are no
exception to it. Though concrete buildings are more resilient to fire than others
but a serious fire can inflict damage which depends upon salient features of fire
and building. After fire is extinguished and structure is secured, condition survey
and condition assessment is done over it. Condition survey is done by a team of
experts. Visual inspection, hammering and chiselling techniques are used for
condition survey. It gives basic idea about the building condition. Afterwards
condition assessment is done, if it is felt to be required. In condition assessment,
different tests are conducted and their values are recorded, to access the true
condition of building. Different non-destructive testing and destructive testing
techniques are used like Schmidt hammer test, UPV test, penetration resistance
test, core sampling and testing, petrography, deflection test, tensile test and SEM
microscopy. There are lot of other testing techniques available to serve the cause
but these techniques are selected after careful selection on the bases of purpose,
economy, availability, accuracy, efficiency and damage to the building and
environment. Use of NDTs for evaluation of concrete strength is beneficial but
comes with accuracy of 65% to 85% (if properly conducted). More accurate and
detailed techniques like core sampling, tensile test and petrography are bit costly.
So only to be used when necessary.
To determine that whether building should be demolished and reconstructed or

rehabilitated and retrofitted, comprehensive feasibility study (technical & financial
aspects) should be conducted. Technical aspect is determined from the data
obtained from evaluation of fire damaged building whereas financial aspect is
based upon financial analysis tools and risk analysis. The financial analysis tools
available for the financial analysis of proposed solutions are the same which are
used for feasibility study of every other investment. But these financial tools have
their limitations and are not completely compatible for the purpose. Hence a need
has been there for a financial analysis tool that can be specifically used for fire
damaged buildings. A feasibility analysis tool has been developed as part of
109
master thesis. It is expected to bring lot of ease in decision making process

because of its detailed structure. But decision shouldn’t be made solely on its
bases as it is not a war hardened horse yet. Repeated and rigorous testing with
improvement is required to make it better and more efficient in a cyclic manner.
Yet, this model is good enough to give a clear enough idea about the feasibility
of proposals presented on the desk. It has a philosophy to quantify parameters
that usually can’t be quantified and then it uses those quantified values in
feasibility analysis tool as inputs. The philosophy integrated in the feasibility
analysis tool for comparison between proposals (e.g. rehab or reconstruction)
covers all important factors. It is because it dictates a system that starts with
condition survey and condition assessment (deciding degree of damage “D”),
then it progresses towards technical and financial assessment of proposed
solutions (deciding “C, T, L” & “F.F.S, P.P”)152 for the case on hand. Then it
includes the impact of factors by the help of importance factors and allots them
their respective share in decision making which is often quite vague and unclear.
Financial part of this newly developed feasibility analysis tool has the same
philosophy as AEW (annual equivalent worth) method but has its own structure
for better compatibility and inclusion of risk factor in it.

in poor condition and beyond repair so would be replaced. Generally, non-
structural members and utilities that are not much damaged needs surface
treatments only. Soda blasting is good, sustainable, economical and effective
technique for surface treatment. Patching and varnishing can also be done if
required. HVAC, electrical wirings and other utilities can be repaired if damages
are limited otherwise have to be replaced partially or completely. Structural
members can be retrofitted by FRP reinforcing, partial removal and replacement
152C: degree of complexity, L: life expectancy, T: time required, F.F.S: financial feasibility score,
P.P: profit percentage
110
of damaged concrete and steel, concrete or steel jacketing and epoxy injections.
FRP reinforcing technique is a good measure with many excellent advantages
like performance, light weight etc. but falls short on the criteria of future fire
proofing and sustainability. Partial removal and replacement is a sound technique
for retrofitting and most popular one. It is a sustainable method with good fire
proofing qualities but it might prove to be bit more costly than FRP. Partial
removal can put extra stress on adjoining members hence needs propping.
Concrete jacketing is used basically for earthquake retrofitting but can be used
for fire damaged concrete buildings in certain cases. It is a fire proof and
sustainable technique but may alter the structural behaviour of structure and
dimension of members. Steel jacketing is more suitable than concrete jacketing
for the purpose and it also doesn’t change the dimensions of members
significantly. It is sustainable but needs protection from fire and rusting with a
protective coating. Epoxy injections are used to fill cracks and to make up for the
loss of bonding between steel and concrete.
8.2. Recommendations
 Feasibility analysis tool should be used as a supplementary tool in decision

making process, as it is still in development phase.
 Data required as the input in feasibility analysis tool should be carefully
and thoughtfully collected. If assumptions are made then special care
should be taken for more sensitive parameters indicated by sensitivity
analysis. For each assumption three or more possible values should be
chosen to realise their impact.
 Importance factor must be decided by round table talk in which all project
players and experts must participate. Again for evaluation of different
scenarios two or three different values can be tested. This practice will
provide decision makers with the broader vision.
 More research is required on topic of feasibility analysis. This analysis tool
provide a good foundation for feasibility study of proposals. In future,
further work can be done to improve its accuracy and effectiveness
111
8.3. Scope
The study provides with a system to take care of fire damaged concrete buildings.
It encompasses evaluation, decision making (feasibility study) and rehabilitation
of fire damaged concrete buildings. Findings of the thesis can be helpful for
insurance companies, professionals of construction industry, banks/investors and
especially fire rehabilitation companies. The study can contribute to the research
that may be done in future on the topic.
8.4. Critique
The study covers the whole process of dealing with fire damaged concrete
building and able to equip its readers with good understanding. It develops a new
tool for feasibility analysis that includes both technical and financial aspects.
Hence, it will help its users in decision making, especially in those border line
case which are complex. Study introduces a total new analysis tool for feasibility
assessment of proposed solution for fire damaged concrete buildings but it is
without any proven record as it is the case of all new tools. Hence can’t be readily
used as independent decision making tool. Further improvement in structure and
philosophy will improve its capacity and efficiency.
8.5. Thesis Summary
Concrete buildings are damaged in the event of fire. Although, damage

experienced by concrete buildings is much less severe than buildings having
steel and wood as basic materials of construction. Yet severe fires can also cause
serious damages in concrete buildings. The damage is not only caused by fire.
Smoke, soot and water (fire extinguisher) all contribute their share. This study
presents a structured solution to deal with fire damaged concrete buildings. Study
categorizes the fire damage rehabilitation process of concrete buildings into three
categories: evaluation (consists of understanding of material behaviour, condition
survey and condition assessment), feasibility study (consists of technical and
financial analysis), rehabilitation and retrofitting (consists of cleaning, soda
112
blasting, surface treatments, FRP reinforcing, Partial removal and replacement,

concrete jacketing, steel jacketing, epoxy injections and others).
In chapter 2, evaluation aspects of fire damaged concrete buildings are

discussed. First two research questions have been answered in it.
 How to conduct condition survey and condition assessment?

 What tests and field inspections are required?
It explains that damage endured to concrete buildings depends upon many

factors like design of building, scope of fire, temperature and duration of fire, etc.
Nobody, should enter the building unless structure is secured and building got
clearance from respective authorities. Concrete buildings are naturally much
tolerant to fire, thanks to the fire proofing properties of concrete. In concrete
buildings, mostly fire damage is retained by concrete cover and steel is escaped
from damage. Desk study has to be done before evaluation of building, to
understand salient features of building and fire. Condition survey is conducted on
the building (for both structural and no structural members) to have basic
understanding about degree of damage. It is done by means of visual inspection,
hammer tapping and chiselling. Condition Assessment is conducted on structural
members to precisely access their condition and to determine actual degree of
damage endured. Mostly NDTs are practiced to find out the residual strength and
stability of structure. Non-destructive test like Schmidt hammer, UPV test and
penetration resistance test gives good idea about the structure’s residual
strength, if they are conducted properly. They can’t be totally relied upon owing
to their inherent shortcomings as none of them directly calculates the strength of
concrete or steel. Instead, all NDTs uses indirect correlations to evaluate the
certain criteria which is not necessarily be strength. To sum it up, NDTs results
have 65% to 85% accuracy. They can serve up the purpose for some cases
(especially those buildings which are not much damaged) but can’t be considered
as authority. Cases, where better accuracy is required, core sampling & testing
and petrography test should be conducted for evaluation of concrete. For steel,
tensile test and SEM microscopy can provide accurate evaluation. Combination
of core sampling & testing, petrography and tensile test is enough to thoroughly
understand the condition of conventional R.C.C buildings. If pre-stressing is
113
involved then SEM microscopy may be added. The prices of these tests are
higher in market than other conventional tests. Therefore should be conducted in
case of necessity.
Chapter no 3, describes the measures that are required for retrofitting and
rehabilitation of fire damaged buildings including both structural and non-
structural parts. This chapter answers research question number 6 and 7, which
are given below.
 How to rehab the building (non-structural components)? What possible

treatments are feasible in light of economy, sustainability, building
functionality etc.?
 How to retrofit structural components? What possible treatments are
feasible in light of economy, sustainability, fire protection, building
functionality etc.?

in poor condition beyond repair so would be replaced. Generally, non-structural
members and utilities that are not much damaged needs surface treatments only.
Soda blasting is good, sustainable, economical and effective technique for
surface treatment. Patching and varnishing can also be done if required. HVAC,
electrical wirings and other utilities can be repaired if damages are limited
otherwise have to be replaced partially or completely. Structural members can be
retrofitted by FRP reinforcing, partial removal and replacement of damaged
concrete and steel, concrete or steel jacketing and epoxy injections. FRP
reinforcing technique is a good measure with many excellent advantages like
performance, light weight etc. but falls short on the criteria of future fire proofing
and sustainability. Partial removal and replacement is a sound technique for
retrofitting and most popular one. It is a sustainable method with good fire
proofing qualities but it might prove to be bit more costly than FRP reinforcing.
114
Partial removal can put extra stress on adjoining members hence needs
propping. Concrete jacketing is used basically for earthquake retrofitting but can
be used for fire damaged concrete buildings in certain cases. It is fire proof and
sustainable technique but may alter the structural behaviour of structure. It
changes the dimension of members. Steel jacketing is more suitable than
concrete jacketing for the fire retrofitting and it also doesn’t change the
dimensions of members significantly. It is sustainable but needs protection from
fire and rusting with a protective coating. Epoxy injections are used to fill cracks
and to make up for the loss of bonding between steel and concrete.
Chapter 5 describes the results and findings of the literature study done in chapter
2, 3 and 4. Literature study have been evaluated in this chapter. Problems that
were associated with literature study and the area of knowledge that has been
lacking in literature have been identified. Once problem is identified, its solution
has been proposed. There are no research question that have been answered in
this chapter.
Chapter 4, 6 and 7 deals with feasibility study of different solutions that can be
realised for the damaged concrete building to bring it back to its functional
capacity. In feasibility study, both financial and technical aspects have been
considered. This part of thesis answers research questions number 3, 4 and 5 as
given below.
 What can be done with buildings that are damaged because of fire
(Demolitions, Re-use etc.)?
 Is it possible and feasible to retrofit the structural components and
rehabilitate the building, concerning the damage they have endured
(Technical feasibility)?
 Is it financially feasible to retrofit and rehab the fire-damaged building?
Chapter 4 describes that condition survey and condition assessment evaluates

the condition of building. After evaluation it is required to decide about the fate of
the concrete building. Both reconstruction and rehabilitation are possible in
normal cases. To determine that whether building should be demolished and
reconstructed or rehabilitated and retrofitted, comprehensive feasibility study
115
(technical & financial) should be conducted. For technical aspect of feasibility

study, data obtained from condition survey and condition assessment is vital.
Collected data is random and scattered so it must be properly structured and then
analysed to help in carrying out technical feasibility studies. Financial aspect is
very vital as well. In most of the business cases, it is the most important factor.
Various financial analysis methods are used to understand the viability of
investments i.e. payback period, IRR, NPV, MIRR etc. All these analysis methods
are general purpose methods for calculating financial feasibility for all sorts of
investments. But fire damage buildings are not ordinary case, here we need
comparison between proposed solutions with certain eccentricities i.e. the time
period of both investments (proposed solutions) may not be same, interest rate
of investments may not be same as well etc. Due to limitations of conventional
analysis methods like NPV, IRR, and payback period these methods are not
always suitable for financial analysis especially in complex cases with
inconsistencies. Risk analysis must be done in order to take into account the
sensitivity of variables involved in financial analysis. So that more efforts can be
concentrated over their estimation or procurement. Best and worst case
scenarios are also determined by risk analysis.
Chapter 6 explains that feasibility analysis tool that is developed as the part of
solution development addresses the issue concerning feasibility study. As it
brings lot of ease and inherent characteristic to cover almost all factors that must
be considered in decision making. But it can’t be granted with final authority as it
has been very much in development phase. Its Alpha version is ready to be tested
as Beta version. Repeated and rigorous testing with improvements is required to
make it better and more efficient in a cyclic manner. Yet, this model is good
enough to give a clear enough idea about the feasibility of proposals presented
on the desk. As it has a philosophy to quantify parameters that usually can’t be
quantified and then it uses those figures to draw a comparison. The philosophy
integrated in the feasibility analysis tool for comparison between rehab or
reconstruction cover almost all corners. It is because it dictates a system that
starts with proper condition survey and condition assessment (deciding “D”), then
it progresses towards technical and financial assessment of proposed solutions
(deciding “C, T, L” & “F.F.S, P.P”) for the case on hand. Then it includes the
116
impact of factors that has its say in the decision, by the help of importance factors
and allots them their respective share in decision making which is often quite
vague and unclear.
Financial part of feasibility analysis tool has the same conceptual methodology
as AEW (annual equivalent worth). AEW method doesn’t have the limitation of
same time period as required by NPV. It is more easily understandable as it
excludes the time factor from the group of time, money and risk. This simplicity
and accuracy is exactly what is required to be consistent with the mathematical
model. Although, AEW method is suitable for financial evaluation of proposals
concerning fire damaged buildings, but can’t be used as it is. Modifications has
been required to tailor fit it for financial analysis (of fire damaged building’s)
needs. Therefore, financial part of feasibility analysis tool has been developed in
such a way that it works on the principals of AEW but it has its own structure for
the sake of better consistency with the feasibility analysis tool. It also included
the risk factor to provide a combined assessment of investment including both
profit and risks involved. The feasibility analysis tool (parametric mathematical
model) is given below
F.I = (C × I1) + (T × I2) + (D × I3) – (L × I4) – (F.F.S × I5)
Whereas, F.I = Feasibility index, C = Degree of Complexity, T = Time required for

proposed solution, D = Degree of damage, L = Life expectancy of proposed
solution, F.F.S = Financial feasibility score, P.P = Profit percentage, I =
Importance factor (I = I1 + I2 + I3 + I4  I5= 1). The parametric mathematical model
includes technical aspect in term of D, C, T and L, whereas financial aspect is
included in terms of F.F.S. Hence financial analysis tool compares the proposed
solutions on both technical and financial grounds.
Chapter 7, introduces a real life case study to test and to understand, the working
method of feasibility analysis tool (parametric mathematical model). The case
used here is commercial building known as “Beverly centre Islamabad” located
in Islamabad, capital city of Pakistan. The building is a commercial shopping mall
with some office space as well. It got damaged by fire and then rehabilitated.
Mathematical model have been tested over it. As this building has been retrofitted
117
and rehabilitated instead of demolition and reconstruction therefore feasible

solution has already been known. Efforts have been inducted to determine values
of variables required for the feasibility analysis tool and more or less have been
obtained. For few variables, estimations have been made. If, model declares the
same solution more feasible, then it can be interpreted that model works fine and
can be used for feasibility or comparison studies. Feasibility analysis has been
conducted and it supported the same real life solution (Retrofitting and
rehabilitation). Hence, argument of feasibility analysis tool’s performance and
validity has been supported.
Chapter 8 includes conclusion, recommendations, scope of thesis, critique and

thesis summary. It answers last research question
 What is the Scope of research findings/conclusions?

118
9. List of Literature
AGI:
http://www.agi.my/index.php/our-solutions/disaster-restoration/a-
restoration-services-include/stubborn-unpleasant-odor/thermal-and-mist-
treatment-to-remove-all-types-of-malodor/ (accessed 11.08.2014.)
Barber hoffman:
http://www.barberhoffman.com/portfolio/project-
detail.aspx?PortfolioID=113 (accessed 30.07.2014.)
Björnsdóttir:
Financial feasibility assessments: Building and Using Assessment Models

for Financial Feasibility Analysis of Investment Projects. 2010
Building green:
http://www2.buildinggreen.com/article/retrofits-usually-greener-new-
construction-study-says (accessed 10.08.2014.)
Burgozne, Balafas:
Why is FRP not a financial success?. 2007
Caltransd7info Blog Spot. De:
http://caltransd7info.blogspot.de/2011_12_01_archive.html (accessed
31.07.2014)
CCTIA:
http://www.cctia.org/FAQ_Files/10.001_Concrete_Core_Tests.html
(accessed 21.07.2014.)
Ccw Online:
http://www.ccwonline.com.au/prod437.htm (accessed 11.08.2014.)
Chicora:
http://chicora.org/fire.html (accessed 11.08.2014.)
Clean Fax:
http://www.cleanfax.com/articles/105969-effective-thermal-fogging
(accessed 11.08.2014.)
119
Cleaners Coach:
http://cleanerscoach.com/Media-Blasting.html (accessed 12.08.2014.)
Composites Manufacturing Magazine:
http://compositesmanufacturingmagazine.com/2010/08/pursuit-newfrp-
protection-heats/ (accessed 15.08.2014.)
Concrete UK:
http://www.concrete.org.uk/fingertips_nuggets.asp?cmd=display&id=893
(accessed 11.07.14.)
Corecut-jo:
http://www.corecut-jo.com/index.php?module=services&id=6 (accessed
16. 08.2014.)
CPWD, India:
Handbook of repair and rehabilitation of R.C.C buildings. 2002
Concrete Society:
Assessment, Design and Repair of Fire-damaged Concrete Structures.

Technical Report No. 68. 2008
Department of Public health, Los Angeles County:
How to clean up smoke and soot from a fire. 2013
EMS Sales:
http://www.emssales.net/store/cart.php?m=product_detail&slug=predator
-600-portable-air-scrubber. (accessed 11.08.2014.)
Engineering Civil:
http://www.engineeringcivil.com/visual-inspection-of-concrete-
structure.html (accessed 10.07.2014.)
Engingeering Arhives:
http://www.engineeringarchives.com/les_mom_tensiletest.html (accessed
26.07.2014)
ESCA Blast:
http://www.escablast.com/store.asp?pid=35117 (accessed 12.08.2014.)

120
Fay Engineering:
KBP Coil Coaters Fire Repair and Shear Strengthening. 2003
Frbiz789:
http://frbiz789.blog.com/2009/12/01/hydrodemolition/(accessed
15.08.2014.)
Gbg. UK:
http://www.gbg.co.uk/?page=strfirevissurv (accessed 29.07.2014)
Haseeb Uz Zaman, Tahir Saleem, Azhar Shehzad, Mohsin Ashfaq & Muhammad
Bilal:
Comparison of compressive strength of concrete calculated by destructive

and non-destructive testing. 2011
Helfert:
Financial analysis tools and techniques: a guide for managers 1st edition.
2001.
IstructE:
Introduction to the fire safety engineering of structures.2007
Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences, University of Florida:
The Disaster Handbook National Edition. 1998.
Ivan Detchev, Ayman Habib, Mamdouh El-Badry:
Case study of beam deformation monitoring using conventional close

range photogrammetry.2011
Jeremy P Ingham:
Forensic engineering of fire damaged concrete structures. 2009
Joel Levitt:
Evaluating Real Costs for Building Maintenance Management. 2003
JPCL:
Surface Preparation of Concrete Substrates. 2011

121
Laura J. Powers:
Petrography as a Concrete Repair Tool. 2002
Lee:
Financial Analysis, Planning And Forecasting: Theory and Application,

2nd edition. 2009
Matson:
U.S. Department of Agriculture; Rural Business-Cooperative Service,

Service. Report 58: Vital Steps, A Cooperative Feasibility Study Guide.
2000
Martin Alberto Masuelli:
Introduction of Fibre-Reinforced Polymers – Polymers and Composites:

Concepts, Properties and Processes. 2013
Metrocorp:
http://www.metrocorp.com.au/services-item.php?id=4(accessed
15.08.2014.)
Michael Hayes:
Rebuilding After a Fire. 2012
Park:
Contemporary Engineering Economics. 3rd edition. 2002
Ponmalar:
Strength comparison of Fibre Reinforced Polymer (FRP) wrapped

concrete exposed to high temperature. 2012
Ramsetmbtmedan:
http://ramsetmbtmedan.blogspot.de/2012/09/jacketing-struktur.html
(accessed 18.08.2014.)
Real estate Msn:
http://realestate.msn.com/article.aspx?cp-documentid=25490855
(accessed 20.08.2014)
122
Shotcrete:
http://www.shotcrete.org/pages/products-services/technical-questions-
archive.htm (accessed 16.08.2014.)
Structure Mag:
http://www.structuremag.org/?p=4102 (accessed 10.07.2014.)
Sustainable Concrete:
http://www.sustainableconcrete.org/?q=node/171 (accessed 16.08.2014)
Syed Ameer ul Hassan:
Sub Divisional Officer in Communication and Works department. Govt. of

Punjab. Pakistan.
Teran, Ruiz:
Reinforced concrete jacketing of existing structures. 1992
The Concrete centre:
Concrete and fire safety. 2008
The Concrete Portal:
http://www.theconcreteportal.com/nde.html (accessed 11.07.2014.)
The Constructor:
http://theconstructor.org/structural-engg/strengthening-of-r-c-
columns/1935/ (accessed 18.08.2014.)
The Law Dictionary:
http://thelawdictionary.org/article/what-is-the-average-annual-cost-of-
homeowners-insurance-and-property-taxes-for-florida-residents/
(accessed 20.08.2014.)
V.M. Malhotra, Nicholas J. Carino:
Handbook on Non-destructive Testing of Concrete Second Edition. 2004.
Wise Geek:
http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-an-air-scrubber.htm (accessed
11.08.2014.)
123
Youtube:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bZuks_1SdCI (accessed 15.08.2014.)
Zizzo:
Life cycle costing: Financial costing. 2014.

124
Statutory Declaration
I herewith formally declare that I have written the submitted master thesis
independently. I did not use any outside support except for the quoted literature
and other sources mentioned in the paper.
I clearly marked and separately listed all of the literature and all of the other
sources which I employed when producing this academic work, either literally or
in content.
I am aware that the violation of this regulation will lead to failure of the thesis.
Haseeb Uz Zaman___________ ________________________
Student´s name Student´s signature
541108_________________ Berlin,15.09.2014_________
Matriculation number Berlin, date

Zaman 2014 Retrofitting and Rehabilitation of High Rise Fire Damaged Concrete Building

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

Zaman 2014 Retrofitting and Rehabilitation of High Rise Fire Damaged Concrete Building

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Retrofitting and Rehabilitation of High Rise Fire Damaged

First Supervisor: Mika Lindholm

Keywords: Fire, Damage, Evaluation, Decision, Analysis, Retrofitting,

Table of Figures ……………………………………………………………….….… I

List of Tabulation …………………………………………………………………... II

List of Abbreviations ……………………………………………………….….….. III

1.1 Background ............................................................................................... 1

1.2 Goals and bounds of the study ................................................................. 1

1.3 Research questions .................................................................................. 2

1.4 Research methodology ............................................................................. 3

2 Assessment of fire damaged building ...................................................... 4

2.1 Behaviour of materials during fire.............................................................. 4

2.1.1 Concrete ............................................................................................... 4

2.1.3 Other Materials ..................................................................................... 8

2.2 General assessment of building ................................................................ 9

2.2.1 Type of structure ................................................................................... 9

2.2.2 Scope of damage .................................................................................. 9

2.2.3 Size, duration and temperature of fire ................................................. 10

2.3 Condition assessment of non-structural members and utilities ............... 10

2.3.1 Visual Inspection ................................................................................. 11

2.4 Condition assessment of structural members ......................................... 12

2.4.1 Visual Inspection ................................................................................. 12

2.4.2 Field Testing ....................................................................................... 16

2.4.2.1 Schmidt/Rebound Hammer ........................................................... 17

2.4.2.3 Windsor-Probe or Penetration Resistance test ............................. 20

2.4.2.4 Core Sampling and Testing........................................................... 22

2.4.2.5 Deflection measurement with digital theodolite ............................. 24

2.4.3 Laboratory testing ............................................................................... 24

2.4.3.1 Petrography .................................................................................. 25

2.4.3.2 Tensile Test .................................................................................. 27

2.4.3.3 Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM) ........................................... 28

3 Rehabilitation and Retrofitting of fire damaged building...................... 31

3.1 Cleaning .................................................................................................. 31

3.2 Removal of smoke odour ........................................................................ 33

3.3 Rehabilitation of non-structural members and utilities ............................. 35

3.4 Retrofitting of structural members ........................................................... 37

3.4.1 Fibre Reinforced polymer (FRP) ......................................................... 38

3.4.2 Partial removal and replacement of concrete and reinforcement ........ 44

3.4.2.1 Removal of concrete ..................................................................... 45

3.4.2.2 Partial replacement of reinforcement bar/bars .............................. 47

3.4.2.3 Partial replacement of Concrete.................................................... 48

3.4.2.4 Advantages & disadvantages of partial removal & replacement ... 49

3.4.3 Concrete jacketing .............................................................................. 51

3.4.4 Steel Jacketing.................................................................................... 54

3.5 Other Methods of retrofitting and rehabilitation ....................................... 56

4 Feasibility study ....................................................................................... 60

4.1 Technical Aspect ..................................................................................... 61

4.1.1 Technical aspects of structural members ............................................ 61

4.1.1.2 Beams ........................................................................................... 64

4.1.1.3 Floor/Slab Panels.......................................................................... 65

4.1.2 Technical aspects of non-structural members..................................... 67

4.2 Financial Aspect ...................................................................................... 67

4.2.1 Preliminary requirements .................................................................... 68

4.2.2 Structure ............................................................................................. 68

4.2.3 Realization of all associated costs ...................................................... 69

4.2.4 Realization of incomes ........................................................................ 69

4.2.5 Analysis calculations by analysis tools ................................................ 70

4.2.5.1 Payback period ............................................................................. 70

4.2.5.2 Financial ratios .............................................................................. 71

4.2.5.3 Net Present value ......................................................................... 71

4.2.5.4 Internal rate of return .................................................................... 72

4.2.6 Risk analysis ....................................................................................... 73

4.2.6.1 Sensitivity analysis ........................................................................ 74

4.2.6.2 Scenario analysis ......................................................................... 74