Appendix A

(EB Manual Part II

Section 6
Instruction No. 4)

Guidelines for Structural Assessment

The guidelines aim at providing guidance to EBD staff in determining whether a UBW or a
parent structure is in imminent structural danger or potential structural danger condition. In
evaluating the Structural Performance Factor (Fsp) of the UBW, the assessment should be
based on reasonable assumptions and adequate structural data of the UBW obtained on site.
However, in some cases, structural assessment of the UBW is not feasible due to, but not
limited to the following constraints:-

(i) its structural layout and details together with connections cannot be readily
identified on site as they are often concealed and it is impractical to carry out any
detailed investigation of the UBW; or

(ii) its construction, material strengths and workmanship are substantially unknown
rendering reasonable assumptions unrealistic.

General Considerations

The following guidelines are given for reference where structural assessment of the UBW
and/or parent structure affected by the UBW could be carried out. They are not intended to be
exhaustive and only salient points are given:

2.1 Structural assessment of UBW, the parent structure affected by the UBW and
unauthorized change of use of buildings should be compatible with the requirements
of the Buildings Ordinance, the allied Regulations and the relevant local Codes of
Practice.

2.2 Whenever structural assessment is required on UBW or unauthorized change of use

of buildings, structural elements of the parent building have to be checked for the
increased loading to establish if any over-stress has occurred and subsequently to
determine the type of structural danger.

2.3 Assessment of the structural stability should be based on site inspection observations.
Detailed site inspection should be carried out prior to making a structural assessment.
A structural assessment data sheet (attached with this Appendix) should be used to
record all useful structural information as retrieved from 3/-file to facilitate the
structural assessment.

2.4 The superimposed live loads to be used in the checking should, in general, be based
on the design standard in the original design. If the usage has been deviated from the
original, the design live loads corresponding to its actual usage in compliance with
current B(C)R or Code of Practice should be used. The material stresses should be
based on the original material used (see para. 3.3) and the design formulae to be used
in the checking should be based on currently adopted design standards or Codes of
Practice.

2.5 In the absence of precise knowledge of the UBW, rational assumptions should be
made on the structural framing/system of the works for determining the load path
onto the parent structure.
Page 1 of 10
 Appendix A
(EB Manual Part II
Section 6
Instruction No. 4)

2.6 In assessing the structural safety of a parent structure or a UBW, it may be necessary to
carry out in-situ measurements and tests (such as by means of cover-meter) to verify
the dimensions of the elements, cover and spacing of steel reinforcements as built prior
to making structural assessment. More thorough inspection/tests should be considered
if cover-meter measurements are considered doubtful. (Open up a small section of a
structural member of the UBW or the parent structure may be an option but should be
endorsed by senior professional).

2.7 In assessing the effect of slab thickening for the case of unauthorized subdivision of
flats, a 30% to 50% reduction of dead weight for the portion of thickened slab may be
allowed due to its embedment of drain pipes and different types of construction
materials.

2.8 For structural steelwork, the Code of Practice for the Structural Use of Steel 2005 (CoP
2005) should be used to evaluate the ultimate resistance of the structural steel
members.

2.9 Structural steel not sure as class 1 or class 2 steel should be considered as class 3
uncertified steel as recommended in the CoP 2005. The design strength py of the
structural steel shall be taken as 170N/mm2.

2.10 For structural concrete, the Code of Practice for Structural use of Concrete 2004 (CoP
2004) should be used to evaluate the ultimate resistance of the reinforced concrete
members. The amendment and refinements to the Code as set out in PNAP 296
should also be referred to.

2.11 In assessing the Structural Performance Factor (Fsp) of the parent structure, the
following factors should be taken into account:

2.11.1 Thin cantilevered slab structures are particularly sensitive to workmanship,

hence the actual concrete cover, spacing of reinforcement and conditions for
this kind of high risk structures should be verified by in-situ tests wherever
the situation permits, prior to carrying out structural calculations for
determining the Fsp (See para. 2.6).

2.11.2 Workmanship faults such as abnormally thick screeding and cover and wide
reinforcement spacing are common in thin cantilevered slab construction and
the actual Fsp may be very much less than that originally designed.

2.11.3 The effect of deterioration of the structural member and loss of strength of
material should be considered in estimating the ultimate capacity of the
structural member.

2.11.4 The overall dimensions of critical structural members should be measured to

check against the approved plans for determining the actual screeding
thickness.

2.11.5 If spalling of reinforced concrete member occurred, the cover may be

measured, the degree of corrosion of the exposed reinforcement (based on
reduction of area) should be taken into account in estimating the ultimate
Page 2 of 10
 Appendix A
(EB Manual Part II
Section 6
Instruction No. 4)

capacity of the member.

2.11.6 If signs of serious structural distress are found in the parent structure, whether
the UBW or the change of use could be identified as attributed to overloading,
the UBW should be removed and/or the change of use curbed as a matter of
top priority if the uncertainty is considered hazardous.

Design Calculations

3.1 For structural concrete, CoP 2004 should be used to evaluate the ultimate resistance of
the reinforced concrete members. Tables A and B in para. 3.3 below provide the
recommended material ultimate stresses for concrete and reinforcement respectively to
be adopted in the formulae.

3.2 The Structural Performance Factor (Fsp) should be checked for all modes of failures
where appropriate e.g. bending, shear, axial, torsion etc. For reference purpose, the
design formulae for calculating ultimate moment resistance and ultimate shear
resistance of rectangular beams are abstracted below:
Design formulae for rectangular beams (Ref. CoP 2004 Clause 6.1.2.4 and 6.1.2.5 &
Amendment as in PNAP 296)

(i) Bending strength when compression reinforcement is not required

(i.e. K ≤ K’)

Mu = 0.87 fy z As and
z = d {0.5 + √ (0.25 – K/0.9)} but ≤ 0.95d

(ii) Bending strength when compression reinforcement is required

(i.e. K > K’)

Mu = 0.87 fy z As(Kb) + 0.87 fy (d – d’) As (Kb)’ and

z = d {0.5 + √ (0.25 – K’/0.9)}

if d’/x > 0.43 (for fy = 460 N/mm2), the stress of

compression reinforcement will be less than 0.87fy and
should be obtained from CoP 2004 (figure 3.9).

(iii) Fsp for bending

Fsp(bending) = Mu / Mf

Page 3 of 10
 Appendix A
(EB Manual Part II
Section 6
Instruction No. 4)

Legend:

Mu = design ultimate moment resistance

Mf = design bending moment due to factored loads
z = lever-arm
b = breadth of section
beff = effective flange width of a T or L beam
bc = effective width of a section in compression (either b or
beff)
d = effective depth of the tension reinforcement
d’ = effective depth of the compression reinforcement
fcu = characteristic compressive strength of concrete
(Table A in para. 3.3 )
fy = characteristic yield strength of reinforcement
(Table B in para. 3.3)
As = area of tension reinforcement
As(Kb) = area of tension reinforcement when K=K’
= K’ bcd2fcu/0.87fy z
As’ = area of compression reinforcement
As(Kb)’ = As’ or (As – As(Kb)) whichever is the lesser
K = Mf/bd2fcu

Where redistribution of moment ≤ 10%

K’ = 0.156 for fcu ≤ 45 N/mm2; or
0.120 for 45 < fcu ≤ 70 N/mm2; or
0.094 for 70 < fcu ≤ 100 N/mm2 and no moment
redistribution.

Where redistribution of moment > 10%

K’ = 0.402(ßb – 0.4) – 0.18(ßb – 0.4)2, for fcu ≤ 45 N/mm2 ; or
0.357(ßb– 0.5) – 0.143(ßb – 0.5)2, for 45< fcu ≤ 70 N/mm2.

ßb = moment at the section after redistribution

moment at the section before redistribution

Page 4 of 10
 Appendix A
(EB Manual Part II
Section 6
Instruction No. 4)

x = (d – z) / 0.45, for fcu ≤ 45 N/mm2; or

(d – z) / 0.40, for 45 < fcu ≤ 70 N/mm2; or
(d – z) / 0.36, for 70 < fcu ≤ 100 N/mm2.

(iv) Shear strength

vf = Vf
bvd
≤ 0.8 √ fcu or 7.0 N/mm2 whichever is the lesser (this
limit includes an allowance for γm of 1.25) and
Asv ≥ bvsv(vf – vc) / (0.87fyv)

Therefore,
vu = (0.87fyv/bv) (Asv/sv) + vc

(v) Fsp for shear

Fsp(shear) = Vu / Vf
= vu / vf

Legend:
Vu = design ultimate shear resistance
Vf = design shear force due to factored loads
vu = design ultimate resistance shear stress of section
vc = design ultimate resistance shear stress of concrete
(CoP 2004 & Amendment clause 6.1.2.5 and Table 6.3 refer)
vf = design shear stress at a section due to factored loads
bv = breadth of section
d = effective depth of the tension reinforcement
fyv = characteristic strength of links
(Table B in para. 3.3)
Asv = total cross-sectional area of links at the neutral axis
sv = spacing of links along the member

Page 5 of 10
 Appendix A
(EB Manual Part II
Section 6
Instruction No. 4)

STRUCTURAL ASSESSMENT
Data Sheet
File Reference :
Address :
3/– file No. :

The following information of the building are extracted from the corresponding 3/– file :

(A) Design Code Used :

L.C.C by Laws : 1915 Hong Kong Building (Construction) Regulations : 1956
(*) 1938 1964
1952 1975
1964 1976
Others :
(*) Also refer to Engineering Manual section 2.12.4 & 2.12.5 for loadings and stresses

(B) Concrete grade and allowable stresses:

Beam/Slab Column/Wall
Concrete grade
Compressive stress in bending
Direct compressive stress
Shear stress
Average bond stress
Local bond stress
(C) Steel reinforcement grade and allowable stresses:
Beam/Slab Column/Wall
Reinforcement/Structural Steel
Grade
Tensile
Compressive
Shear
(D) Concrete cover :
Cover
Slabs
Beams
Columns / Walls
Others

(E) Design superimposed live loads:

(F) FRP:

(G) Remarks:

Prepared by : (Name & Rank) (Signature) Date:

Page 6 of 10
 Appendix A
(EB Manual Part II
Section 6
Instruction No. 4)

3.3 Material Ultimate Stresses

Table A (Concrete)

(i) Ordinary and Quality A Concrete

B(C) Reg 1975 &1976,

Design Standard LCC 1952 & 1964 LCC 1938

Concrete Pcb lb/in2 fcu lb/in2 Pcb lb/in2 fcu lb/in2

Designation Stress (MPa) (MPa) (MPa) (MPa)
of concrete
Grade I (1:1:2) 970 (6.7) 2,990 (20) 975 (6.7) 2,925 (20)
Grade II (1:1½::3) 850 (5.9) 2,550 (17.5) 850 (5.9) 2,550 (17.5)
Grade III (1:2:4) 750 (5.2) 2,250 (15) 750 (5.2) 2,250 (15)
Grade 1A (1:1:2A) 1,500 (10.0) 4,500 (31) 1,250 (8.6) 3,750 (26)
Grade IIA (1:1½::3A) 1,250 (8.5) 3,750 (26) 1,100 (7.6) 3,300 (22.8)
Grade IIIA (1:2:4A) 1,000 (7.0) 3,000 (20) 950 (6.6) 2,850 (19.7)

(ii) Special and Designed Mix Concrete

fcu = Uw, works resistance to crushing of the concrete when tested within 28 days
after mixing.

Pcb = permissible stress in concrete due to bending

Table B (Reinforcement)

Designation Pst lb/in2 (MPa) fy lb/in2 (MPa)

Mild Steel 16,000 (110)
18,000 (125) 36,000 (250)
20,000 (140)
High Yield Steel 27,000 (185) 60,000 (410)
30,000 (210) 62,000 (425)
67,000 (460)

Pst = permissible stress in reinforcement due to tension

fy = yield stress of reinforcement

Page 7 of 10
 Appendix A
(EB Manual Part II
Section 6
Instruction No. 4)

Special Structural Aspects on Unauthorized Change of Use

4.1 Particular attention should be given to the possible increase in the required fire
resistance period (FRP) on unauthorized change of use. The structural aspect of FRP
includes inter alia, the minimum size of the structural members within the
compartment in question as well as the concrete covers to the reinforcement and
member size of these members. Any possible contravention to the B(C)R on FRP
requirements should be observed.

4.2 There will also be cases where further factors will be involved in the decision, e.g.
change to cold storage, where there is possible occurrence of temperature effects on the
structure.

Site Inspection

5.1 Site inspections are generally necessary to assess the structural stability of both the
UBW as well as that of the structural members of the parent building supporting the
former. Site inspections could assist in determining the structural framing system of the
UBW.

5.2 In the case of the unauthorized change of use of buildings, site inspections may also
assist to identify the actual loading intensity and location of the additional imposed
loads with respect to the supporting structural members.

5.3 During the course of site inspections the following guidelines should be followed as far
as practicable:

(a) take record photos of the UBW, load imposed on the UBW, and connections
of the UBW to the parent structures;

(b) take record photos of serious defects revealed during inspections;

(c) take site measurement of UBW and partition wall and other dimensions useful
for estimation of actual loading intensity;

(d) record details of all defects in the parent structure and the UBW;

(e) investigate the cause of defects in the parent structure and the UBW;

(f) check for signs of structural distress and signs of overloading;

(g) record details of all excessive deformation or vibration noted during

inspection;

(h) record the type of construction and current use of the UBW; and

(i) take measurements of member size.

Page 8 of 10
 Appendix A
(EB Manual Part II
Section 6
Instruction No. 4)

5.4 Where necessary, site inspections by BD staff or the appointed BD Consultant are also
required to supervise the reinstatement/remedial structural works (e.g. fixing of
reinforcement) carried out by the BD Contractor. In case such works are supervised by
AP/RSE, such visits may serve for confirmatory purpose.

Reinstatement Works on Structural Members Supervised by AP/RSE

6.1 Where reinstatement works of structural elements are involved, such as the
reinstatement of unauthorized openings in floor slabs or shear walls, supervision by an
AP and/or RSE is required and the remedial proposals, including working procedures,
etc. if relevant, should be submitted for agreement prior to commencement of remedial
works.

6.2 If the structural elements to be reinstated were originally designed by a RSE, the
appointment of a RSE will be necessary in line with B(A)R12. The exception is of
course in the case of very minor structural works, where an AP will suffice.

6.3 For extensive and important reinstatement works, the acceptance criteria on the
finished works will be identical to those for new works, i.e. concrete cube test results
and mill certificate of reinforcement, etc. are required to be submitted. Such
requirement would best be conveyed to the AP or RSE when the remedial proposals are
accepted.

6.4 Where the reinstatement works are of small scale and of minor importance, the
acceptance criteria in 6.3 may be suitably modified by agreement with the AP or RSE.

Reinstatement of Structural Members by BD Contractor

7.1 All works should be carried out in accordance with the current Works Contract and the
specifications made therein.

7.2 To avoid the complication of variation orders, concrete grades used in all reinstatement
works of structural members by the BD Contractor should be clearly specified on
drawing whenever possible but should not be inferior to the original design and must
be contained in the BD Works Contract and Specifications.

7.3 Where concrete cube tests are required, it should be explicitly stated on the drawing
and in general be complied with CS1: 1990. Results of the concrete cube tests should
be submitted.

7.4 Tests for steel reinforcement if required should be similarly stated on the drawing and
in general be complied with CS2: 1995. Mill certificate of reinforcement should be
submitted.

Page 9 of 10
 Appendix A
(EB Manual Part II
Section 6
Instruction No. 4)

Investigation of Existing UBW by AP/RSE

8.1 In some cases, action on UBW may be deferred if their structural adequacy and
stability are justified by AP/RSE.

8.2 AP/RSE is then required to submit a structural assessment report to the satisfaction of
the BA and to provide minor strengthening measures if found necessary and senior
professional’s advice should be sought.

8.3 AP/RSE should be required to justify on site the correctness of the information used in
the checking calculation and plans. For reinforced concrete members, coring is
usually accepted as the only means to verify the in-situ concrete strength and it also
helps to find out the thickness of slabs and screen/retaining walls. All non-destructive
testings would only be considered as an appropriate indication of the concrete quality
for correlation of core test results. Size and spacing of steel reinforcement are usually
determined by opening up a portion of the member and the reinforcement spacing of
the remaining portion can be checked by the use of a cover-meter.

8.4 Foundations of UBW are usually of shallow types and should also be required to be
exposed at representative locations and to dig some trial pits adjacent to them to show
the condition of the underlying ground bearing stratum.

8.5 Whenever possible, EBD staff should witness all coring and site testing and inspect all
open-up members.

8.6 Loading test will not be accepted as the sole means to justify the structural adequacy
and stability of the UBW.

– End –

(Rev. 11/08)

Page 10 of 10