Sustainable Structural Engineering

Sustainable Structural Engineering
Sustainable Structural Engineering Structural Engineering Documents
Sustainability is the defining challenge for engineers in the

twenty-first century. In addition to safe, economic, and effi-
14
cient structures, a new criterion, sustainable, must be met.
Furthermore, this new design paradigm–addressing social,
economic, and environmental aspects–requires prompt action.
In particular, mitigation of climate change requires sustainable
solutions for new as well as existing structures. Taking from
both practice and research, this book provides engineers with
applicable, timely, and innovative information on the state-of-
the-art in sustainable structural design.
Sustainable Structural
This Structural Engineering Document addresses safety and
regulations, integration concepts, and a sustainable approach
to structural design. Life-cycle assessment is presented as a
Engineering
critical tool to quantify design options, and the importance of
existing structures–in particular cultural heritage structures–is
critically reviewed. Consideration is also given to bridge design
14
and maintenance, structural reassessment, and disaster risk
reduction. Finally, the importance of environmentally friendly
concrete is examined. Consequently, structural engineers are John E. Anderson
shown to have the technical proficiency, as well as ethical
imperative, to lead in designing a sustainable future. Christian Bucher
Bruno Briseghella
Xin Ruan
Structural Engineering Documents

Tobia Zordan
International Association for Bridge and Structural Engineering (IABSE)
SED14_Cover.indd 1 20/08/15 12:51 PM

Copyright © 2015 by
International Association for Bridge and Structural Engineering
All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced in any form or by any means, electronic
or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or by any information storage and retrieval
system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
ISBN 978-3-85748-141-3
Publisher:
IABSE
c/o ETH Zürich
CH-8093 Zürich, Switzerland
Phone: Int. + 41-44-633 2647

Fax: Int. + 41-44-633 1241
E-mail: secretariat@iabse.org
Web: www.iabse.org
sed_title-page.indd 2 20/08/15 4:58 PM

Preface
From resource consumption and water use to waste generation and greenhouse gas emissions,
the built environment is critical for a sustainable future. While the challenges of sustainability
have been known for decades, urgency of action is driven by the findings of the United Nations
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Consequently, structural engineers face a new
design paradigm: safe, economic, reliable, and sustainable.
Sustainable development is defined by the Brundtland Report as “development that meets the
needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own
needs.” The three pillars of sustainability—environment, social, and economic—must be taken
into account for engineering projects to achieve sustainability. This Structural Engineering Doc-
ument presents the latest research and practical applications of sustainable structural engineer-
ing from around the world.
In the opening chapter, Kanda details the role of the structural engineer in sustainable design
with a focus on safety. This is followed by Limsuwan’s chapter on an integration concept of
sustainability engineering. Zordan then outlines a sustainable approach to structural design.
Lourenço, Branco, and Coelho illustrate the importance of existing structures in their chapter
on cultural heritage and structural systems. Anderson and Yang discuss life-cycle assessment
as a crucial analysis tool to evaluate environmental sustainability criteria. Matos, Neves, and
Gonçalves subsequently present the importance of asset management for aging infrastructure.
Martin and Kirk provide a crucial review of sustainability in bridge design and maintenance.
Bucher and Brehm then present structural reassessment for the lifetime extension of structures.
The importance of disaster risk reduction as a sustainability strategy is presented by Grundy.
Finally, de Brito and Silva review green materials for concrete production.
Sustainability is a broad and complex topic. Through this Structural Engineering Document we
aim to provide practicing engineers and researchers with insights, tools, and recommendations
to advance sustainable structural design.
John E. Anderson, Christian Bucher, Bruno Briseghella, Xin Ruan, and Tobia Zordan
August, 2015
sed_Preface.indd 1 11/08/15 8:48 PM

sed_Preface.indd 2 11/08/15 8:48 PM
Table of Contents
1 Safety and Sustainability—the Structural Engineer’s Role

(Jun Kanda) 1
1.1 Introduction 1
1.2 Major elements for architecture 2
1.3 Environmental impacts 3
1.4 Role of regulations 4
1.5 Transparency and accountability 5
1.6 Further considerations 7
References 7
2 Integration Concept of Sustainable Engineering

(Ekasit Limsuwan) 9
2.1 Introduction 9
2.1.1 Sustainable development 9
2.1.2 Sustainable engineering 10
2.1.3 Integration concept on sustainability engineering 10
2.2 Integration concept in the building process 11
2.2.1 Emerging strategy 11
2.2.2 Planning and development 12
2.2.3 Design 13
2.2.4 Construction 13
2.2.5 Operation and maintenance 14
2.3 Implementation solution 14
2.3.1 Public consciousness 14
2.3.2 Laws and regulations 15
2.3.3 Professional practices 16
2.4 Examples of implementation solution 17
2.4.1 Thailand sufficiency economy 17
2.4.2 PTT sustainable development 18
2.4.3 SCG sustainable development 20
2.5 Conclusion and recommendation 21
References 22
sed_toc.indd 1 20/08/15 12:24 PM

3 A Sustainable Approach to Structural Design
(Tobia Zordan) 25
3.1 Introduction 25
3.2 Ecological footprint and appropriate carrying capacity 26
3.3 Some considerations on sustainability in integrated life-cycle structural engineering:
conception and uncertainties in design approach 29
3.4 Complexity versus complicacy within a sustainable conceptual design 32
3.5 Structural art: a ruled freedom 35
3.6 Sustainable conceptual design of structures 39
3.6.1 Design for structural efficiency 39
3.6.2 Choice of a suitable static scheme 39
3.6.3 Structural optimization 41
3.6.4 Design for durability, minimal maintenance, and life-cycle costs 42
3.6.4.1 Integral abutment concept 43
3.6.5 Design for value protection 46
3.6.5.1 Seismic isolation of existing buildings 48
3.7 Conclusion 49
References 50
4 Sustainability and Cultural Heritage Buildings

(Paulo B. Lourenço, Jorge M. Branco and Ana Coelho) 53
4.1 Introduction 53
4.2 Definitions 55
4.2.1 Cultural heritage conservation specificities 55
4.2.2 Rehabilitation and sustainability 57
4.3 Traditional materials and sustainability 58
4.3.1 Masonry 59
4.3.2 Wood 60
4.4 Methodology for intervention in heritage structures 61
4.4.1 Principles 61
4.4.2 Guidelines 62
4.5 Application of life-cycle assessment tools to existing buildings 63
4.6 Cultural heritage buildings and sustainability 64
4.6.1 Environmental impacts 64
4.6.2 Economic impacts 65
4.6.3 Social impacts 65
4.7 Conclusion 66
References 66
5 Measuring Sustainability and Life-Cycle Assessment

(John E. Anderson and Frances Yang) 69
5.1 Introduction 69
5.1.1 Sustainability goals 70
5.2 Life-cycle assessment 71
5.2.1 Metrics 75
5.2.2 Methodology 75
5.2.3 Life-cycle inventory databases 76
5.2.4 Software tools 77
5.3 Life-cycle assessment case studies of structures 77
5.3.1 Comparing case studies 83
5.3.2 Limitations of life-cycle assessment 84
sed_toc.indd 2 20/08/15 12:24 PM

5.4 Green design rating systems 84
5.4.1 Buildings 84
5.4.2 Infrastructure and bridges 86
5.4.3 Cities and the urban scale 87
5.5 Emerging trends 87
5.6 Conclusion 88
References 88
6 Asset Management
(José C. Matos, Luís Neves, and Bruno Gonçalves) 93
6.1 Introduction 93
6.2 WLC: a tool for asset management 94
6.3 Whole-life costing: a review 95
6.4 Costs and condition 96
6.5 Models and scenarios 100
6.6 Data acquisition systems and model updating 102
6.7 Optimization techniques and decision 105
6.8 Conclusion 107
References 107
7 Sustainability and Bridges

(Andrew J. Martin and Martin J.D. Kirk) 111
7.1 Introduction 111
7.2 Bridges and sustainability 112
7.3 Aspects of sustainability related to bridges 112
7.3.1 Environment 113
7.3.2 Society 116
7.3.3 Economics 117
7.4 The life-cylce of a bridge 119
7.4.1 Inception, feasibility, and option selection 119
7.4.2 Design and specification 120
7.4.3 Construction 121
7.4.4 Operation and maintenance 121
7.4.5 Assessment and strengthening 122
7.4.6 Demolition 122
7.5 Case studies 122
7.5.1 Case study 1—Capilano River bridge replacement (Canada) 123
7.5.2 Case study 2—Queensferry Crossing (Scotland, UK) 126
7.5.3 Case study 3—Bridges for the Queen Elizabeth Olympic Park,
London (UK) 128
7.6 A sustainability checklist for bridges 132
7.7 Conclusion 132
Acknowledgements 135
References 135
Further reading 137
8 Structural Reassessment for Lifetime Extension

(Christian Bucher and Maik Brehm) 141
8.2 General philosophy 142
8.3 Best practice 143
sed_toc.indd 3 20/08/15 12:24 PM

8.4 Review of methodologies useful for structural reassessment 147
8.4.1 Model calibration 147
8.4.2 Optimal sensor placement 147
8.4.3 Uncertainty quantification and propagation methods 148
8.4.4 System reliability analysis 148
8.4.5 Cost-benefit analysis 149
8.4.6 Structural health monitoring 149
8.5 Conclusion 149
References 150
9 Sustainability through Disaster Risk Reduction

(Paul Grundy) 153
9.2 The triple bottom line 153
9.3 Acceptable risk 154
9.4 Basic features of natural hazards leading to disaster 155
9.4.1 Excessive hazard intensity 155
9.4.2 Synchronous failure 156
9.5 Design for disaster risk reduction 157
9.5.1 Disaster limit state 157
9.5.2 Reconstruction 160
9.5.3 Retrofitting 160
9.6 Obstacles to sustainability in disaster risk 161
9.6.1 Awareness of risk 161
9.6.2 Cost of disaster prevention measures 162
9.7 Conclusion 162
References 163
10 Green Materials for Concrete Production

(Jorge de Brito and Rui V. Silva) 165
10.2 Background 166
10.3 How to make concrete more sustainable 168
10.4 Recycled materials for concrete 169
10.4.1 Industrial wastes 169
10.4.2 Construction and demolition wastes 170
10.4.3 Converting CDW into usable aggregates 172
10.5 Early age behaviour of structural RAC 174
10.6 Mechanical behaviour of structural RAC 177
10.7 Durability behaviour of structural RAC 180
10.8 Successful case studies using structural RAC 183
10.9 Concluding remarks 183
References 186
Introduction 186
Industrial wastes 187
Construction and demolition wastes 190
Fresh behaviour of RAC 191
Mechanical behaviour of RAC 193
Durability behaviour of RAC 194
sed_toc.indd 4 20/08/15 12:24 PM

1
Chapter
1
Safety and Sustainability—
the Structural Engineer’s Role
Jun Kanda, Prof.; College of Science and Technology, Nihon University, Tokyo, Japan.
Contact: kanda@arch.cst.nihon-u.ac.jp
1.1 Introduction
The mission of structural engineering is to design and construct safe structures by making
appropriate decisions. At the same time, society also has a strong demand for sustainability, to
which structural engineers can contribute through their decisions. Such decisions are necessary
at every step of the design, construction, maintenance, and demolition process. The appropriate-
ness depends on people’s expectancy for a structure, which varies according to their cultural
background and economic well-being, as well as technological development. Historically, when
quantitative information of a design variable was not available, the structural safety was deter-
mined by engineers, based mainly on their own experiences. Materials and construction systems
simply followed what had been successful in the past.
Due to the scientific developments, structural analysis is now available to examine if structural
materials are strong enough to withstand the likely forces on a structure, and these forces can
be calculated for postulated unfavourable situations. Safety is one of the essential requirements
for a structure, but the purpose of construction is to create comfortable spaces for human activi-
ties, with serviceability requirements being equally important. Economic efficiencies are also
important in addition to safety and serviceability. Sustainability is now another important aspect
for buildings and structures. Quantitative discussions on the balance between safety and sustain-
ability has thus become possible.
The availability of quantitative information to assess structural safety (e.g., probabilistic models
for the physical characteristics of structural materials, environmental actions, and the physi-
cal dimensions of structural members) has enabled the reliability of a structure to be evalu-
ated for required safety and serviceability limits. The reliability concept for structures is now
commonly; the standard ISO 2394 becoming first available in 1986 [1]. Safety and structural
requirements can be discussed at the design stage for new construction or at the maintenance
stage for existing structures.
Back to table of contents
sed_1401.indd 1 20/08/15 4:55 PM

2 CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION
The introduction of the concept of sustainability has brought an additional dimension to the
engineering decision process. In this chapter, the role of engineers is discussed in achieving an
appropriate level of safety for structures in a society that expects sustainability of structures for
the future. A greater demand for structural safety can result in overdesign with excess use of
materials. However, a more durable structure has a longer life, which saves resource consump-
tion. With diverse information available from different sources, an engineer is expected to be
professional not only in engineering aspects but also in addressing the much wider topic of
sustainability. At some stages of economic development, the focus tends to be on the efficiency
over a rather short period of time. This can lead to the selection of a lower level of safety, par-
ticularly for natural hazards such as earthquakes and hurricanes. Sustainability considerations
require life-cycle assessment of structural engineering aspects. Based on such considerations,
engineers are expected to provide sufficient explanations to society as well as to their clients for
the appropriateness of the structural safety. At the same time, engineers should make efforts to
create sustainable structures.
1.2 Major elements for architecture

Marcus Vitruvius (80/70–15 BC) in the Roman period discussed the essence of architecture as a
combination of firmness, functionality, and aesthetics. These three elements are still the princi-
pal elements for any architecture. Firmness refers not only to structural safety, but also to dura-
bility and stability. Functionality, refers largely to the mechanical, electrical, and environmental
aspects, but the volume or height is also a part of the functionality of a structure. Aesthetics,
which is not only the artistic impression but also encompasses the street view or impact on the
landscape, is a common concern for architecture.
Economy can be added as the fourth element to be considered by society. The balance between
these four elements is an essential condition for the design of a high quality building as shown
in Fig. 1.1. The degree of safety or durability
tends to be treated as a given as these are often
Functionality clearly specified in the regulations. However,
when the budget for the construction is limited,
how much is spent on the safety and function-
ality must be carefully examined beforehand.
Safety Aesthetics
Sometimes the aesthetic requirements may be
sacrificed for the safety, and occasionally the
opposite will occur.
Economy is an important element of architec-

Economy ture, but it is different from the other three ele-
ments. Economy provides a common value but
Fig. 1.1: Balance between the four elements does not encompass the purpose of architec-
of architecture ture in a way that the other three elements do.
When the balance between safety and economy
is considered, the minimum total expected cost
concept is applied to find an optimal solution as discussed later. It does not consider the bal-
ance between the degree of safety and degree of economy, but the whole economic efficiency
BackBack
to table ofofcontents
to table contents
sed_1401.indd 2 20/08/15 4:55 PM

1.3 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS 3
is introduced. Therefore, the economy element may be regarded as an evaluation system rather
than an element of architecture. The monetary value is often used, but this could be substituted
with environmental impacts or some other new measurement tool.
The quality of aesthetics can be immediately judged by people when the architecture is visible,
although the results can be very diverse. Functionality can be examined after one year by users
or occupants. Safety is the most difficult quality to perceive as this metric can be observed only
in the future. The expected failure cost or the risk potential is a measure for the safety. Science
and engineering also play important roles. An important role of the structural engineer is justi-
fying the appropriate safety of a structure, and taking the required functionality and aesthetics
into account. Such overall consideration is always necessary, particularly in a society concerned
with sustainability. The long-term consideration of economic parameters is also a basic aspect
of sustainability.
The concept of balancing between the four elements of architecture discussed above can
be applied to any civil engineering construction such as bridges and tunnels or even to any
manufactured product. The safety is not determined in isolation, but is rather determined as the
balance with other elements, which are influenced by social as well as cultural environments.
1.3 Environmental impacts

When a structure is constructed, it influences the environment in many ways. It occupies a cer-
tain volume on a site and this itself produces an environmental impact. The use of the structure
consumes energy. In addition, the structure contains embodied greenhouse gas emissions (i.e.,
CO2), which is a metric for environmental impacts and is a political issue as well. The materials
that comprise the structure are products whose manufacture result in CO2 emissions. In particu-
lar, concrete have greater embodied CO2 emissions than natural materials such as wood or stone.
Long-distance transportation also emits significant CO2. Consequently, the selection of materi-
als can significantly affect the impact of a structure on the environment.
Failures of structures can cause many undesirable consequences. If such failures occur in large
numbers in a single event, they can cause major disasters. Disaster mitigation is a basic policy
for the sustainability of structure. Disasters can be mitigated by increasing the safety of struc-
tures. If a higher reliability and importance for safety is given at the design stage or the rehabili-
tation stage, the probability of the occurrence of a failure will be reduced.
A higher level of safety may, however, cause overuse of resources and energy. On the other
hand, a level of safety lower than the appropriate level may cause frequent failures in the struc-
ture followed by extreme consequences, which will cost more than the mitigation measures.
It becomes the role of the structural engineer to find the appropriate level for the safety of the
building. Efforts to minimize total estimated costs can help in developing a solution based
on probabilistic models [1–3]. A similar approach is required in the case of rehabilitation of
structures [4].
The longer the service life of a structure, the lower the embodied CO2 emission per year of service
life. A procedure for optimizing reliability while minimizing CO2 emissions is available from
existing case studies [5]. The ratio of structural cost to the whole building cost is less than the
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1401.indd 3 20/08/15 4:55 PM

ratio of structural CO2 emissions to the whole building CO2 emissions. A typical value for the
former is 0.25, while that for the latter is 0.4. Then the minimization of total expected CO2 emis-
sions leads to a significantly lower optimal safety than that based on the minimization of total
expected costs. A further consideration is needed to make a decision based on these different mea-
sures. In general, safer and more durable buildings are essentially more environmentally friendly.
How to determine the service life and the safety target are both essential questions for structural
engineers.
1.4 Role of regulations

If engineers could confidently provide suitable decisions on structural safety, regulations would
likely not be necessary. However, in order to avoid the construction of unsafe buildings, speci-
fication of minimum requirements for structures is a convenient tool and usually the subject of
regulations. Although requirements are stated as the minimum, in most situations, such mini-
mum requirements are regarded as standard criteria for society. This seems to be the result of an
appreciation of economic efficiency at the construction stage and the negligence of the benefits
resulting from the lower probability of failure in the future. Consequently, when some natural
disasters, such as earthquakes and hurricanes cause significant damage, to structures in reality,
some improvements for a safer society are proposed and discussed to reduce those damages.
When the Hyogoken-Nambu earthquake shook Kobe city in Japan in 1995, serious structural
damages occurred in a wide area. However, the statistical survey of the damage suggested that
the current level of safety requirements in the regulations were sufficient [6]. Although some
new buildings were destroyed, the ratio was very small. The return period of the maximum
ground motion in Kobe city was assumed to be around 1000 years or more, while 500 years was
considered for the safety level for design in the regulatory requirements of the Japanese law.
For new construction, the 1995 experience effectively confirmed that the safety levels stipulated
by the regulations were appropriate. Most of the damaged buildings were those constructed
before 1981, when significant changes were made to the regulations with capacity design being
specified.
Nevertheless, the appropriateness of the safety level for buildings or civil structures needs to
be examined, paying more attention to their long-term use or sustainability. Since the market
mechanism often controls the quality of structures, the degree of safety may not be optimal.
Structural safety needs careful attention as safety is not as visible as functionality or aesthetics
are. Once the requirements according to the regulations are satisfied, people tend to think that
the structure is safe without further considerations, but this is not entirely reliable. Regulations
should be relatively simple but society should not forget that only the minimum requirements
are regulated. Soil characteristics and seismic hazard are both site-dependent and regulations
usually cannot provide sufficient requirements for these factors. In such cases, engineers should
make complete use of the available technical information for the determination of design loads
and explain and persuade the client to increase the level for safety when it is appropriate for
long-term consideration.
The Tsunami disaster of the East Japan earthquake on 11 March 2011 has shown that the certified
regulations supported by experts and scientists can be wrong or at least greatly underestimated.
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1401.indd 4 20/08/15 4:55 PM

1.5 TRANSPARENCY AND ACCOUNTABILITY 5
Those who are affected by the consequences of structural failure should have more commitment
towards the safety decision. Regulations alone cannot provide optimal safety for individual
structures, and engineers have to play an important role particularly in a sustainable society.
Sustainability aspects will be included in future regulations; however, engineers have to provide
sufficient information to the client and society regarding their decisions on safety after consider-
ing sustainability requirements rather than only regulatory rules. Similar effects of regulations
as minimum requirements for the sustainability and safety of structures have to be considered.
How to achieve an appropriate level of sustainability for society is dependent on individual ele-
ments, such as materials, construction, and transportation. Therefore, engineers have to provide
sufficient information regarding the sustainability and safety beyond regulations.
1.5 Transparency and accountability

Only engineers can evaluate the safety of a structure. Of course, there are alternative safety
measures, and assumptions and conditions for the evaluation can significantly affect the result.
In other words, even professionals cannot collect ideal information, and so scientific evalua-
tions are always insufficient. Nevertheless, the engineer should provide sufficient information
to the client in order to make the best decision possible. Failures of a structure influence the
surrounding environment, and thus people in the neighbourhood of the structure have a right
to contribute to the decision-making on the safety of the building. Resource consumption and
CO2 emissions also are a matter of concern for the overall society. Information regarding these
is readily available.
The minimum requirements according to the regulations may not be appropriate for the long-
term interest of society. When strong demands arise for development of housings and buildings,
minimization of construction cost tends to be the concern of society. The minimum require-
ments are then regarded as the target for safety. However, considering the future generation
and the long-term economy, individuals have the responsibility for a sustainable society. The
minimum safety requirements in the 1950s in Japan are not regarded as appropriate in the pres-
ent society of Japan. The appropriateness depends on more specific conditions and cultural
situations. Such specificities and diversities cannot be implemented as national regulations. The
same applies to sustainability.
Therefore, an engineer has a large responsibility for ensuring structural safety for the client
as well as for the society. Communication between the professional engineer and the public is
therefore extremely important. In order to have meaningful discussions for decision making,
information transfer alone is not sufficient; knowledge also has to be shared [7].
There is an interesting comparison regarding the safety attitude of house owners and that of a
structural engineer [8]. Figures 1.2 and 1.3 are answers of house owners to the question: “Are
you provided explanations on the safety from experts?” and “Do you want to receive explana-
tions on safety?”, respectively. People are concerned about the safety of a building and want to
have more information on the safety as indicated in Fig. 1.3. Nevertheless, in most cases, there
are no explanations provided by a structural engineer, as shown in Fig. 1.2.
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1401.indd 5 20/08/15 4:55 PM

Houses and buildings have to satisfy regulatory requirements before construction. This means
that all houses and buildings can be regarded as being safe. However, people tend to pay less
attention to the structural safety. When they were questioned if they want explanations on the
safety, however, 80% of people answered “yes” [8]. Engineers should find more opportunities
to explain structural safety and sustainability to the general public. Explanations should not just
be the compatibility of the regulatory requirements, but should justify rational safety measures
based on scientific evidences.
Regulations deal with the safety of buildings at the national level and tend to be focused on
human safety. The safety of individual buildings also depends on the decision of clients based
on the engineers’ explanation. When a community level is considered, the role of the engineer
is more important because the cost of managing disasters increases exponentially with the size
of the disaster as discussed in Ref. [9]. There are benefits from mitigation at the community
level, which are not reflected in the benefits for individual buildings. Engineers are expected to
play a leading role in ensuring safety of the community as well as that of the structures from the
sustainability aspect [7]. Mutual agreement on the safety of a structure among the community
supported by professional engineers is a key for sustainability. The safety decision as well as
sustainability decision have to be made in a transparent manner.
Yes No Not sure
Non-Expert
Expert
Whole
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Fig. 1.2: Answers to question, “Are you provided explanations on safety from experts?”
Yes No Either is good
Non-Expert
Expert
Whole
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Fig. 1.3:Answers to question, “Do you want to receive explanations on safety?”
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1401.indd 6 20/08/15 4:55 PM

1.6 FURTHER CONSIDERATIONS 7
1.6 Further considerations

The appropriateness of safety has to be determined from a sustainability point of view. For this,
safety and sustainability have to be carefully defined. The local conditions of a site influence
the safety as well as the sustainability. From the vast amount of information available, engineers
have to choose rational and unbiased information and provide explanations that enable the client
to make appropriate decisions on building safety.
Clients or building owners usually do not have sufficient knowledge to make decisions on safety;
therefore, information provided by engineers is essential for making decisions. In order to make
situations simple, a few alternatives for the structural design with different degrees of safety or
different levels of environmental impacts with possible consequences may be proposed to a cli-
ent as options. The situation is similar to the case between a patient and a medical doctor when
making a decision on medical treatment alternatives. Professionals have to provide unbiased
information for a client to make a decision.
The difference between the medical case and structural case is the social aspect. The medical
case is rather private, but the structural case is concerned with the social consequences from
both safety and environmental aspects. Minimum requirement regulations are convenient from
an economic perspective, but a more conscientious outlook for sustainability is required. Finally,
societal consensus on structural safety and durability have to be considered and discussed in a
transparent manner.
References
[1] ISO 2394. 1998. General principles on reliability for structures, ISO.
[2] Kanda, J., Ellingwood, B. 1991. Formulation of load factors based on optimum reliability.
Struct. Saf., 9: 197–210.
[3] Walker, G.R., Musulin, R. 2012. Utilising catastrophe risk modelling for cost benefit anal-
ysis of structural engineering code changes, Proceedings of the Australasian Structural
Engineering Conference 2012, Institution of Engineers Australia, Perth, Australia. www.
engineersaustralia.org.au.
[4] Walker, G.R., Musulin, R. 2011. Economic analysis of structures deficient in earthquake
resilience, Proceedings of the 9th Pacific Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Auckland
(CD-Rom).
[5] Kanda, J., Kanda, S. 2002. Comparison of minimization of L.C.C. and L.C.CO2 emission
for structures, Proceedings of IABSE Symposium, Melbourne, Australia.
[6] Kanda, J., Takada, T., Choi, H. 2007. Target structural reliability in life cycle consideration.
Int. J. Risk Assess. Manag., 7(6/7): 846–861.
[7] Kanda, J., Elms, G.D. 2010. Communications in structural engineering from ethical aspects,
Proceedings of IABSE Symposium, Venice.
[8] Kanda, J., Takada, T., Choi, H. 2004. Internet-based system for structural safety evalua-
tion in Japan, Proceedings of Third Asian-Pacific Symposium Structural Reliability and its
Applications, Seoul, South Korea, 95–103.
[9] Walker, G.R., Grundy, P., Musulin, R. 2011. Disaster risk reduction and wind engineering,
Proceedings of 13th International Conference on Wind Engineering, Amsterdam (CD-Rom).
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1401.indd 7 20/08/15 4:55 PM

BackBack
to table contents
sed_1401.indd 8 20/08/15 4:55 PM

9
Chapter
2
Integration Concept of Sustainable
Engineering
Ekasit Limsuwan, Prof., Dr.; Department of Civil Engineering, Chulalongkorn University,

Thailand. Contact: Ekasit.l@chula.ac.th
2.1 Introduction
Modern civil engineering mega-projects dealing with buildings, bridges, and infrastructures
take sustainable engineering into consideration for the development and execution of their proj-
ects. Since sustainable development and sustainable engineering are rather broadly covered as
global issues, each individual needs to take personal responsibility for environmental, social,
and economic questions whose performance outcomes may impact the life cycle of the struc-
ture. An integration concept on sustainable engineering will deal with emerging criteria and
concept for a strategic approach to the planning, execution, operation, and maintenance phase
of the building process. It can be shown that approaches to and strategies for these issues result
from individual consciousness, national policies, and global actions. Current research has been
conducted on the sustainability perspective of areas such as global climate changes, CO2 levels,
life-cycle assessment (LCA), green design rating, emerging trends in sustainable engineering,
and sustainability monitoring and evaluation criteria. However, there may still be more areas
requiring further research to apply an integrated concept to emerging strategies for building a
process to achieve the goals. Then the methods and procedures appropriate for each community
or society can be explored. However, a quantifying performance method also needs to be used
as a measure to guarantee satisfactory findings.
2.1.1 Sustainable development

Sustainable development has played an important role in the environmental, social, and eco-
nomic quotients of human beings and their individual contribution, perception, and response.
Analysis of such behaviour is significant in order to reach a public consensus of a sociocultural
perception, and to understand the environmental impacts on the macro-diversity of the ecology
system. The responsibility of the public or community with regard to environmental problems
should emphasize the ecosystem, health, well-being, and natural resources. It is also well
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1402.indd 9 12/08/15 5:45 PM

10 CHAPTER 2. INTEGRATION CONCEPT OF SUSTAINABLE ENGINEERING
accepted that social aspirations should be addressed to bring satisfaction to society, in terms
of not only human security but also public safety and sociocultural satisfaction. In the arena of
economics, the principle of sufficiency economy has played an important role in developing
countries, such as Thailand, where concepts of appropriate conduct and ways of living in bal-
ance with a development strategy to reduce wasteful consumption, minimize waste, increase the
life cycle, and bring a sense of satisfaction of well-being have been introduced. The sustainable
development coverage by such objectives is rather broad but their execution can be achieved
when each individual makes a global commitment to every sector. However, assessment of the
performance outcome will be a long-term project with respect to its monitoring system and the
corresponding LCA. It should be noted that the outcome assessment addresses multiple indica-
tors on an integration basis.
2.1.2 Sustainable engineering

Sustainable engineering has confined itself to the issues and solutions of a systematic approach
to CO2 emissions, LCA, natural resources, energy consumption, and environmental impact.
Sustainability goals have been set up as a long-term perspective of CO2 levels by the Intergov-
ernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) [1]. The LCA has been outlined by the International
Organization Standardization (ISO), for environmental management [2,3] as a methodology
and framework to determine environmental aspects and potential impacts. These frameworks
have received reasonable attention from individual scientists, technologists, and engineers as
well as the private and public sectors of design services and manufacturing. The International
Association for Bridges and Structural Engineers (IABSE), through the Working Commission
7, has explored the role of structural engineering on sustainable engineering to lead in planning,
designing, and building sustainable civil infrastructure systems. In addition, there has been a
fundamental shift towards integrating sustainability into all aspects of the university curricula
in order to achieve a global optimization regarding safety, durability, economy, and a minimum
environmental impact, and to consider the ecological, economic, and sociocultural effects in
every phase of the life cycle of a building[4]. Structural engineers have the responsibility for the
sustainability of buildings and constructed assets as in traditional requirements, including struc-
tural safety and reliability, architectural design, site requirements, functionality, and construc-
tion costs. Furthermore, they have new additional requirements such as energy performance,
environmental performance, life-cycle costs, functionality and serviceability, risk assessment,
dismantling, and closed-loop-management. However, it will still be essential to merge concepts
and criteria for a strategic approach towards the building process.
2.1.3 Integration concept on sustainability engineering

An integration concept of sustainability engineering introduced in this chapter will deal with
emerging criteria and concepts for a strategic approach to the planning and development phase,
the design and construction phase, and the operation and maintenance phase. Although sustain-
able issues focus on engineering approaches, criticism of the concepts will be accepted only
when they are realistic and practically implemented. The most effective performance will be
achieved when the strategic plan has been executed on a voluntary basis with the favourable
interests of a green rating for buildings, bridges, and infrastructure systems. Some immediate
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1402.indd 10 12/08/15 5:45 PM

2.2 INTEGRATION CONCEPT IN THE BUILDING PROCESS 11
outcome indicators may be publicly criticized and can be used to make suitable and appropriate
adjustment to the local ecosystem, the sociocultural background, and the economic common
interest of each community. This chapter will also introduce relevant laws or regulations that
may be needed for each individual jurisdiction of national measures, codes of professional con-
duct, and the practice for engineering services to improve professional competency, as well as
international standards, guidelines, and a framework within which to proceed with such impor-
tant tasks of sustainability.
2.2 Integration concept in the building process

For civil engineering mega-projects such as buildings, bridges, and infrastructure systems, the
important role of sustainability needs to be taken into account throughout the project from the
planning and development phase through the life span to the end of the service life. Integration
concepts in the building process should be introduced soon after emerging trends of technolo-
gies have come up with the most effective strategies. Then, the methodology’s rules and pro-
cedures can be exercised during the building process with monitoring measures and outcome
performance indicators for further adjustment to improve the system as an integration concept.
2.2.1 Emerging strategy

Current research work on sustainability may be categorized under such areas as sustainability
goals, LCA, and green design rating. Strategic approaches emphasize the three major areas of
technology, outcome performance of research work, and the social perception of economic fea-
sibility. The emerging technology for sustainability also depends on the trends of environment
and social impacts balanced by economic status. Principal indicators of energy consumption to
stabilize environmental improvement should be taken into consideration by using a green rating
system as the benchmark for adjustment.
International consensus has been achieved on the goal of sustainable development according to
which global climate change is considered to be the most important environmental issue. The
long-term perspective for CO2 stabilization levels as recommended by the IPCC can be a guide-
line for government, non-government, and private sectors to set their goals. For example, the
European Union (EU) is aiming to reduce the 1990 CO2 emissions by 80–95% by 2050[5]. Sim-
ilarly, in the construction industry, “The 2030 Challenge” has set the goal of reducing energy
use by 60% for all new buildings and aims for carbon neutral buildings by 2030[6].
The LCA is most widely used as the methodology and framework for environmental assess-
ment. The international standard for LCA has been outlined by the ISO in the ISO-14000 series
for environmental management. However, there are three approaches of the LCA presented
on the basis of process, economic input-output, and hybrid. For civil engineering, the process-
based LCA would be a relevant utilization of the concept of material and energy balances for
a specific process. The four steps of assessment are to define the goal and the scope of study,
to perform a life-cycle inventory, to conduct a life-cycle impact assessment, and to interpret
the results [2,3]. The state of research on LCA for structural engineers has found that reducing
cementitious material in the concrete mix would lead to a reduction of gas emissions [7]. The
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1402.indd 11 12/08/15 5:45 PM

life-cycle impact of steel structures in comparison to that of concrete structures has shown
similar energy use and gas emission [8]. And lastly, the structures that use concrete and steel
consume the most energy at 52 and 38%, respectively [9].
A green rating system has been developed for buildings, bridges, and infrastructural systems. For
buildings, the green building rating system encourages sustainable building practices through
the use of market forces on a voluntary basis with realism and economic feasibility. It should
be noted that continuous requirements will lead to some improvement of design practices and
display of sustainability consciousness by structural engineers. The construction of bridges and
infrastructure is also placing increasing attention on the design of a green rating system such as
Greenroads [10] for bridges and highways and Envision [12] for infrastructure systems. Sus-
tainable design parameters for bridges and infrastructure will also be required to illustrate an
effective green rating system.
2.2.2 Planning and development

The planning and development phase is considered to be the most important process for sustain-
ability engineering. There are numerous ways to integrate sustainability into the process of a
project’s execution. For example, an environmental impact assessment (EIA) could be conducted
for environmental issues, a feasibility study (FS) for economic and technical issues, and an LCA
for sustainability. A variety of ideas begin to emerge from technology for ways to set up the
objective, the procedure, and the outcome by means of the terms of reference (TOR) for such
processes.
In particular, an EIA should include biotic factors and resources, human use value, quality of
life value, and the direct or indirect environmental impact. The short-term and long-term condi-
tions should be assessed as well as the severity of its service life on human beings. The measures
to prevent and correct impacts to the environment and to compensate for the damage incurred
should be provided in the review process reports and the decision making.
The FS for traditional projects is concerned with the technical and financial feasibility with
respect to expenditures, revenues, rates of return, and a project’s life cycle. However, current
research related to technologies can emerge from these technical, financial, and sustainable ele-
ments of project development. For example, a sustainable engineering project may require use
of advanced technologies that may reflect a negative signal for financial feasibility in the short
term, but a positive signal in the long term. A strategic plan for this issue should be included in
the overall study with the objectives, proposals, and reports that address various scenarios or
alternatives of green design rating.
The outlines of ISO-14040, principles and framework, and ISO-14044, requirement and guide-
lines, cover all aspects of LCA, that is, definition of goal and scope, life-cycle impact assess-
ment, life-cycle interpretation, as well as reporting and a review of the LCA. From a general
point of view, the LCA may be used for environmental management especially through the
concept of material and energy balances for a specific process [11]. It may then be considered
as one of the most appropriate approaches in the planning phase of the project. Furthermore,
the life-cycle interpretation and a review of the procedure bring forth the outcome of decision
making regarding the project execution.
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1402.indd 12 12/08/15 5:45 PM

2.2 INTEGRATION CONCEPT IN THE BUILDING PROCESS 13
2.2.3 Design
Sustainability development is made with the consideration of global warming or gas emission.
Five design strategies have been accepted among structural engineers [7] on materials, recycling,
efficiency, energy, and adaptability. Then the design phase can play an important role within the
scope of the work and professional conduct and practices. For traditional practices, the structural
engineers may take responsibility for the materials, structural system, construction techniques,
operation, and maintenance. In addition, the responsibility during its service life may be extended
to rehabilitation, remedial work, strengthening, and demolition. To elaborate the design strate-
gies to reflect real professional practices, numerous approaches are put into action, such as the
LCA and green design rating. The research work concerning these five strategies may be used
for bench marking as a guideline for professional practice. The framework for sustainable design
has already been established as a green rating system for buildings, bridges, and infrastructure,
but system analyses will be still required to compare the effectiveness among the design values,
and monitor the results and the performance indicator at the end of the service life. Continuing
on with the practical design can lead towards excellence in design proficiency for sustainability.
The design process, in conjunction with the construction phase, should be based on the design
documents of construction drawings, general conditions, and specifications. The integration
concept on sustainability engineering should emphasize the construction materials, prefabrica-
tion and erection, and construction techniques of the methods, equipment, and sequences. The
method statement should cover the construction simulation to show the effectiveness of the
green rating in the construction phase.
2.2.4 Construction
The construction phase should cover the construction materials, techniques, management, and
the quality assurance. The sustainability concept is integrated by means of key parameters
through the construction sequences.
Materials
The green rating and the LCA have been evaluated in the design process for production or
manufacturing. They are still present in some activities of the construction process, such as pre-
fabrication and erection. Both specific and general conditions must cover some key indicators
of the procedure. One of the most outstanding indexes would concern energy conservation and
gas emission.
Techniques
This involves construction methods, equipment, and the sequences. The methods, as indicated
in the method statement, are verified by construction simulation as well as the monitoring sys-
tem by means of energy consumption and the outcome performance of the green rating and the
LCA. The equipment associated with the construction sequence would have indicated some key
performance during the operation.
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1402.indd 13 12/08/15 5:45 PM

Management
This concerns the construction sequence, the duration of each activity, the operating cost, and the
resource allocation. Management can be carried out through the critical path method (CPM) to
obtain a critical and sub-critical path whereby the resources of manpower or equipment, or other
resources, can be managed to optimize the cost, the equipment, and the effective work done.
Quality assurance can be done by means of setting up quality policies, followed by the draft-
ing of the quality manual; followed by the activities with their internal auditing; finally, by the
evaluation of the product. Here, the quality can be approved and certified by external auditing
to ensure success through performance.
2.2.5 Operation and maintenance

The operation and maintenance phase should require a management system to monitor and
adapt for effective outcome performance during the process. Thus the procedure should start
with an established operation manual to provide measures for improvement or upgrading of the
operation. The manual should set up inspection systems that can be categorized into periodic
inspections, routine inspections, or special inspections. It would also require reports or records
that may be used for some analysis and evaluation.
For periodic or routine inspections, follow-up measures can be made automatically as per the
manual, but special inspections may require some expert attention at each stage of the process
for decision making regarding rehabilitation, repairs, or even for demolition or replacement. The
sustainability strategies in these phases should concentrate only on how to extend the service life
during which the green rating is to be improved. Maintenance work during its operation would
also require some management for decision making regarding the extension of service life to
ensure the most effective process of execution. However, there would still need to be a review
procedure to guarantee the most satisfactory conditions for the best outcome performance.
2.3 Implementation solution

The Implementation phase should be considered as the most complicated solution of sustain-
ability development since its criteria involve global problems that cover the whole diversity
of the global biodiversity and human beings. The solution as shown in Table 2.1 would also
include positive voluntary approaches, but it would require substantial cooperation for the green
concept of restoration and improvement of global warming. The implementation measures are
classified into three categories: the public consciousness of each individual, the cooperation of
private or social enterprises, as well as local community, city, or nation; laws or regulations cov-
ering the jurisdiction of the community, economy, city, or nation; and codes of practice such as
the professional tools or conducts associated with professional ethics and professional practices.
2.3.1 Public consciousness

The Integration concept of sustainability is derived by each individual consciousness. It is
acceptable that education background and social communication form the public consciousness
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1402.indd 14 12/08/15 5:45 PM

2.3 IMPLEMENTATION SOLUTION 15
to reflect the social perception. The perception of sustainability engineering should be expressed
in terms of responsibility and capacity building as the individual engineer, or in terms of account-
ability as cooperative social responsibility.
Educational measures
The sustainability concepts should be integrated in the university curriculums of each disci-
pline. Some related technologies will then emerge and be adopted to serve each level of educa-
tion. The phenomena of global warming or temperature rises should be interpreted in the most
comprehensive ways that each graduate can form his/her own perception in similar patterns.
This means that, some consciousness will be a cognitive response to the most appropriate func-
tions. Some natural disaster events may be associated with the environmental impacts of glo-
bal warming, which can induce formidable knowledge through the lifelong learning of natural
phenomena. Public mass media can then be one of the most effective education tools for each
individual’s perception of and corresponding reaction to the problems.
Communication measures
These shall be done through the mass communication media of the society or community and
through an organization’s public relations activities. It is quite agreeable that the social or press
media should be aware of the lessons of global warming and sustainable development and have the
capacity to facilitate educational forums in the community or society. Social or public concerns may
be driven by some proactive measures of campaigning on the national policies, sociocultural events
of the community commitment, and the corporate social responsibility of the private sector or NGOs.
Corporate social responsibility (CSR)
CSR can be another tool for the private sector to communicate with the public, firstly to provide
information, secondly to educate through learning lessons, and thirdly to perceive the reaction
of the public. The corporate accountability of the CSR is quite essential for the private sector
to establish key performance indicators (KPI). The CSR promotion of integrated approaches to
multiple activities will ensure a process that gives optimal performance outcome.
Social enterprise
This would also be a way of creating public consciousness and social responsibility with eco-
nomic indicators. It may not be as direct as an economic scale of benefit but it would bring about
social benefit in terms of participation, the sharing of responsibility, and claiming back the gain
of those impacts.
2.3.2 Laws and regulations

Even though the integration concept of sustainability can be successfully implemented by positive
voluntary action, certain laws or regulations may be needed as tools to govern particular fundamental
problems of global warming. The laws and regulations are categorized at national levels such as
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1402.indd 15 12/08/15 5:45 PM

the jurisdiction, federation, and nation, and at local levels such as province, city, municipality and
district. The laws and regulations may also be classified as control acts and promotion acts. Civil
engineering mega-projects are concerned only with the environmental, city planning, and building
control acts. They may also be differentiated by legal acts, ministerial regulations, local regulations,
and rules and procedures. The most important laws and regulations shall refer to the following.
The environmental impact assessment (EIA)
The EIA is a part of the Environmental Act depending upon each jurisdiction, but the study must
cover the impacts on the environment from activities in the project and the surrounding areas,
affecting the living and/or non-living organisms and the environment on a short- and long-term
basis. Information about plants, animals, soil, water, air, human health, and employment will
be considered. The EIA report must also point out the impacts of the project on the environ-
ment and the natural resources. It should recommend suitable measures to prevent or correct the
project impacts, as well as suitable methods to monitor environmental conditions. The report
must also offer alternatives for consideration of site selection and project implementation.
The city planning act
City planning should cover environmental conditions, land use, and zoning. In addition, consid-
eration of urban facilities that are of primary concern to the city planning act should concentrate
on the geographic condition, sociocultural heritage, public functions, infrastructure systems,
natural resources, environmental movements, historic or natural preservation, and human well-
being. The objectives centre on the belief that man and nature can coexist in productive har-
mony and fulfill the social, economic, and other requirements of sustainability.
The building control act
Traditional concerns are usually about structural strength, public safety, fire protection, health
and sanitation, environmental impacts, city planning, architectural functioning, and traffic con-
venience. Public safety such as risk of health shall be one of the most important concerns.
From a modern view of globalization, sustainability development should be extended to broader
scopes of life span of services, material production, energy consumption, and environmental
friendliness. The building control acts also should be harmonized with current regulations by
emerging technologies on sustainable engineering such as LCA and green rating, which repre-
sent the inclination of the owners, and the private or public sectors, who must take responsibility
for sustainable engineering.
2.3.3 Professional practices

One of the most effective means to upgrade professional competencies would be to integrate
the sustainability concept in academic or educational curricula and to continue the professional
development (CPD) of professional practices. In professional practices, a code of ethics, a code
of conduct, and a code of practices are considered as a part of the concepts in the process.
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1402.indd 16 12/08/15 5:45 PM

2.4 EXAMPLES OF IMPLEMENTATION SOLUTION 17
Implement Emerging Planning and Design Construction Operation and

solution technology development maintenance
Public
consciousness: – Goal/ Policy Making Material –Materials – Inspection
• Corporate objective Life cycle –Method – Routine/
accountability – LCA periodic
• Proactive – Green – Maintenance
measures rating
Laws/ – – EIA – Recycle Method/ – Special
regulations – Integrated – Efficiency procedure – Inspection
engineering – Energy – Evaluation
– Adaptability
Code of practice – – – Management – Remedy/
monitoring repair
– Rehabilitation
– Strengthening
Table 2.1: Implementation solution
The professional society should take responsibility to establish a competency standard to cover
sustainability.
The International Engineering Agreements (IEA) has committed engineering competencies to

the following areas: to contribute to the development of engineering practice, to lead and man-
age significant projects, to demonstrate engineering leadership, to manage engineering business
outcomes, and to identify opportunities for research and development.
2.4 Examples of implementation solution

Three sustainable development projects in Thailand can be used as examples of an implementa-
tion solution. The first project has been an outgrowth of the King’s projects[12] since 1997, and
the other two projects were implemented at a later date and are associated with the proactive
measures of the private sector to address the moral responsibility of the current generation as
trustees of the environment for future generations. The projects have tried to achieve a balance
between population and resource uses with better living standards, and to enhance the quality
of renewable resources. The approaches are to assure the maximum attainable recycling of non-
renewable resources. The case study presents a philosophy on sustainable development through
the implementation of corporate governance to achieve outcome performance that guarantees
satisfaction for the public and the environment.
2.4.1 Thailand sufficiency economy

Sufficiency Economy is a philosophy of the middle path, underlining the principle for appropri-
ate conduct and way of life at the level of individual, family, and community (Fig. 2.1). It pro-
vides a choice of balanced development strategy for the nation to harmonize with globalization.
To achieve the goal, great care is needed in the application of theories, technical know-how, and
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1402.indd 17 12/08/15 5:45 PM

methodologies for planning and

Middle path implementation. It is also essen-
tial to strengthen the moral fibre
Sufficient of each individual, family, com-
munity, private and public sectors,
Reasonable Security as well as the nation. The balanced
approach combining patience, per-
severance, diligence, wisdom, and
Knowledge Ethic/moral prudence is indispensable to cope
appropriately with critical chal-
lenges and socio-economic, envi-
Resource/environment/socio-culture
ronmental, and cultural changes.
Balanced strategy to challenge the changes
The government sectors have to
Fig. 2.1: Philosophy of sufficiency economy [13] take immediate action on policy
making, facilitate the productivity
of the private sector, and integrate its public service aiming for equitable deals. The government
must provide good governance through public policies, transparency, and accountability. It is
recommended that power be decentralized to the local government of a city or township and
the community. The government sector is also to take responsibility for education, economic
opportunities, as well as social and public welfare. They are supposed to provide rules and regu-
lations, security, national security, and services.
The private sector is categorized into the three levels of individual, community, and the nation.
For sustainability, each individual must receive sufficient living space, health-promoting sanita-
tion, sufficient food, and income to support a sufficiency economy. To implement this project,
the philosophy must be integrated at all levels of the education curriculum. Individual character
building will then be gradually developed for a sufficiency economy of a middle path approach
to lifestyles to fulfill psychological satisfaction.
The outcome
From the time the project was introduced in 1998, up to now, 10 000 education institutions,
1261 communities, and 24 business organizations have committed to implement and operate
the “sufficiency economy” approach. It should be noted that sufficiency economy should be
harmonized as the initial stage of sustainability development, and the outcome must be in align-
ment with the green rating on the basis of limited resources, energy consumption, environmental
impacts, and socio-economic issues. However, the psychological fulfillment has proved to be
a satisfactory guarantee of success as surplus outcome in terms of happiness index calculated
prior to and after the execution of the project.
2.4.2 PTT sustainable development

PTT, a Thai premier multinational energy company, is committed to a mission that stresses
responsibility to all stakeholders: the nation, society, communities, shareholders, business
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1402.indd 18 12/08/15 5:45 PM

2.4 EXAMPLES OF IMPLEMENTATION SOLUTION 19
(a) (b) l governance and

tiona lea
niza de
rs
a Human Labour
hi
Or
HPO
p
rights rights
High Performance
Organization
CSR Environmental
reporting management
Stakeholder
Sustainable
growth engagement Fair
Product
strategy operating
stewardship
practices
CSR CG Social
Corporate social Corpotare Supply
investment
responsibility governance chain
and community
management
development
Fig. 2.2: PTT sustainable development [14]: (a) sustainable growth strategy and (b) PTT CSR
framework
partners, customers, and employees. PTT has valued the fostering of national energy stability in
parallel with taking responsibility for society, the community, and the environment through its
operations. The company has in place a clear guideline for sustainable development by keep-
ing a good balance among corporate social responsibility (CSR), corporate governance (CG),
and high performance organization (HPO) in order to lay a strong foundation for the long-term
development of the organization (Fig. 2.2).
Corporate social responsibility (CSR)
PTT is determined to conduct its business with concrete responsibility for society. This has
been clearly stated in the company’s vision and mission throughout its three decades of oper-
ation to ensure that all business units translate the mission into practice, starting from the
responsibility for each individual work process, strict compliance with laws and regulations,
to constant development to meet international standards, to control, prevent, and minimize
potential impacts on the company’s process to deliver products and services. Parallel with this,
PTT has the responsibility for society, the community, and the environment to ensure that all
sectors can coexist with sustainability. The practice of the CSR policy and guidelines is the
responsibility of all, management and employees, and is embedded throughout the manage-
ment hierarchy of each business. All business units and affiliates are allowed to draw up their
own implementation plans considered suitable for their respective businesses. To encourage
further development, best practices are shared through the CSR policy committee among PTT
and PTT Group levels.
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1402.indd 19 12/08/15 5:45 PM

Corporate governance (CG)
PTT is committed to strict adherence to doing business under good corporate governance and
applying the principles of good corporate governance along with the practical guidelines of the
Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) as its prime consideration enhancing its manage-
ment efficiency and serving as a foundation of sustainable growth. To conform to the man-
agement approach of the PTT Group, PTT has taken group governance seriously through the
projected upgrading of the group’s practices to make them comparable. Specifically, a suitable
international set of approaches was investigated as a role model; all companies prepared them-
selves for good corporate governance ranking, and policies and rules were written for integrity
and ethics for all personnel to comply with, including regulations on finance, hiring and pro-
curement, and water-tight management practices to prevent fraud. In 2008, PTT pushed for and
supervised risk management against the corporate risk profile for efficiency and alignment with
the framework, and for managing and controlling risk satisfactorily. The performance outcome,
as related to PTT’s CSR, consists of project execution risks, risks associated with operations,
and operation risks from compliance with environmental and safety regulations.
High performance organizations (HPO)
PTT has synergy resulting from modelling the strong points of each PTT Group company by
sharing and learning, for the benefit of business excellence and efficiency improvement in the
world stage. This approach has led to what is known as the HPO model, with its six pillars: lead-
ership, innovation, knowledge, management, information technology, and operational excel-
lence. In addition, the PTT Group has successfully applied an international approach and the
management tools in propelling the organization towards sustainable excellence.
Corporate outcome
PTT recognizes the criticality of fostering the company’s potential, which can be achieved by
networking with other organizations having similar goals. It promotes cooperation and exchange
of knowledge and practices, a mechanism to drive the organization to become a power to reckon
with for a sustainable future. PTT, therefore, joined various externally developed initiatives
both at the national and the international levels.
2.4.3 SCG sustainable development

The Siam Cement Group, SCG, a major construction material manufacturer in Thailand, has
committed itself to corporate governance, which takes into account the economy, society, and
the environment. It launched the SCG-Sustainable Development Guidelines in 2006 and has
pushed forward to an action plan that is ready for implementation.
For good governance, the SCG has emphasized corporate governance, integrated risk manage-
ment, and disclosure and reporting. From an economic perspective, direct economic value gener-
ation and economic value distribution are taken into consideration. From a social perspective, the
management is concerned with community investment, labour standards and practices, human
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1402.indd 20 12/08/15 5:45 PM

2.5 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION 21
SCG SD roadmap
Governance
Gap analysis/
Economy
benchmarking
Identify key issues Global concerns

Environment Society for SCG World class company practices
Global SD issues
Source* ; Global institute/ *Source: Global compact / UNFCCC / WBCSD / WRI / GRI /
organisation ISO 26000 / IEA / ILO - Labor standards / DJSI / FTSE
Fig. 2.3: SCG sustainable development process [15]
rights, human resources and human

capital development, occupational
health and safety, and stakeholder
engagement. Finally, environ-
mental involvement includes five
projects that have been executed,
such as climate change, water
management, waste management,
ecosystem and biodiversity, and
eco-products (Fig. 2.3).
The outcome performance of

water management through water
retention with small coffer dams,
Fig. 2.4: Outcome performance of water management as shown in Fig. 2.4, can be
[15] well exemplified. The SCG eco-
products of environment-friendly
materials, following an integration criterion, have been initiated through a focus on research and
development, eco-design and a technology roadmap, in addition to LCA, adaptive performance,
and the achievement of a green rating. SCG issues a green label for the products and furthers their
promotion in the building processes of erection or fabrication as well as operation and maintenance.
2.5 Conclusion and recommendation

The integration concept to implement sustainable engineering in the building process has been
exercised in some enterprises at the community and society levels. However, global warm-
ing and climate change issues are extremely complex problems, and responsibility should be
shared among individuals, communities, and nations of the entire world. This is true even if
the initiative for commitment at each level of responsibility may take quite some time to be
achieved. Up to now, research by the scientific, technological, and engineering sectors has
revealed the facts and understanding behind climate change, CO2 emissions, LCA, and green
rating systems. Further areas for consideration should be the objective or goal that may lead to
policy making and strategic plans to be executed.
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1402.indd 21 12/08/15 5:45 PM

In conclusion, in order to introduce an integration concept of sustainable engineering in the

building process, first of all, a policy and a strategic plan would have to be developed through
public awareness. The next step in the planning and development phase of the project would be
to involve an action plan for project execution. Strategies, for example, such as the LCA and
the green rating, should be taken into consideration. Relevant laws and regulations, the EIA, the
FS, and integrated engineering, must be conducted for review, monitoring, and management.
The execution phase, following a sustainable design should be integrated by service life, mate-
rials, recycling, efficiency, energy, and adaptability. The construction for sustainability would
involve methods and procedures in the use of materials, techniques, management, and quality
assurance. The operation and maintenance of the project, including its inspection and evaluation
for remedy or repair, rehabilitation, or strengthening should be carried out. The project out-
comes should be evaluated by an available and relevant review process according to the green
rating system. Adjustable and/or adaptable measures shall be applied in order to obtain the most
effective performance.
For sustainable development, the following recommendations are offered:
• Principal concerns of reducing consumption of material energy and waste should be pro-
portional to population growth. Social perception of reducing growth can be one of the
objectives or goals of sustainable development.
• Potential reduction of gas emissions can also be done by changing the mode of living or
the well-being standard to that which is environmentally friendly and harmonized well with
nature. To minimize the requirement, the achievement will meet the needs and satisfaction
of each individual.
• Critical issues for sustainable engineering can be addressed through immediate action by
reducing growth in certain critical sectors.
References
[1] Working Group III Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change (IPCC). http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/publications_ipcc_fourth_
assessment_report_wg3_report_mitigation_of_climate_change.htm
[2] International Organization for Standardization. 2006. ISO 14040 – Environmental
management, Life Cycle Assessment, Principles and Framework, ISO.
[3] International Organization for Standardization. 2006. ISO 14044 – Environmental
Management, Life Cycle Assessment, Requirements and Guidelines, ISO.
[4] Dirk M. Kestner, Jennifer Goupil & Emily Lorenz. (Eds.) (2010) “Sustainability Guide-
lines for the Structural Engineer” Structural Engineering Institute, ASCE.
[5] Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and
Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions. 2011. A Roadmap for Moving to a
Competitive Low Carbon Economy in 2050, European Commission, Brussels.
[6] Architecture 2030. 2012. The 2030 Challenge [Online]. http://architecture2030.org/2030_
challenges/the_2030_challenge/
[7] Anderson, J.E., Silman, R. 2009. A life cycle inventory of structural engineering design
strategies for greenhouse gas reduction. Struct. Eng. Int., 19(3): 283–288. http://www.scg.
co.th/en/05sustainability_development/INDEX-1.html
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1402.indd 22 12/08/15 5:45 PM

REFERENCES 23
[8] Guggemos, A.A., Horvath, A. 2005. Comparison of environmental effects of steel- and
concrete-framed buildings. J. Infrastruct. Syst., 11(2): 93–101.
[9] Wu, H.J., Yuan, Z.W., Zhang, L., Bi, J. 2012. Life cycle energy consumption and CO2
emission of an office building in China. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess., 17(2): 105–118.
[10] Greenroads. Green Roads [Online]. (accessed March 1 2012). http://www.greenroads.org
[11] Hendrickson, C.T., Lave, L.B., Matthews, H.S. 2006. Environmental Life Cycle Assess-
ment of Goods and Services: An Input-Output Approach. Resources for the Future Press,
Washington, DC.
[12] Institute for Sustainable Infrastructure, 2015. “EnvisionTM Sustainable Infrastructure
Rating System”, http://www.sustainableinfrastructure.org/rating/
[13] National Economic and Social Development Board. 1997. H.M. the King’s Sufficiency
Economy, “Sufficiency Economy: Basis to the Sustainable Development”, King’s Projects,
NESDB.
[14] Petroleum Authority of Thailand (PTT). 2008. Guideline for Sustainable Develop-
ment. Petroleum Authority of Thailand. http://www.pttplc.com/en/Sustainability/PTT-
Sustainability/Governance/Pages/Sustainability-Governance-and-Framework.aspx
[15] Siam Cement Group (SCG). 2008. SCG-Sustainable Development Guidelines, Siam
Cement Group. http://www.scg.co.th/en/05sustainability_development/INDEX-1.html
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1402.indd 23 12/08/15 5:45 PM

BackBack
to table contents
sed_1402.indd 24 12/08/15 5:45 PM

25
Chapter
3
A Sustainable Approach to Structural
Design
Tobia Zordan, Bolina Engineering Ltd., Venice, Italy. Contact: zordan@bolinaingegneria.com
3.1 Introduction
A contemporary definition of civil engineering given by the American Society of Civil Engineers
(ASCE) in 1961 [1] states that “Civil Engineering is the profession in which a knowledge of
the mathematical and physical sciences gained by study, experience, and practice is applied
with judgment to develop ways to utilize, economically, the materials and forces of nature
for the progressive well-being of humanity in creating, improving, and protecting the envi-
ronment, in providing facilities for community living, industry and transportation, and in pro-
viding structures for the use of humanity”. This definition implicitly embodies in the concept
of civil engineering the concept of sustainability. Unlike other branches of civil engineering,
however, where the concept of “sustainability” can boast a rather standardized and globally
accepted meaning, for structural engineers, this concept can still lead to a certain degree of
misunderstanding and interpretation. The concept of sustainable structural design can embody
the canonical idea of “meeting present needs without compromising the ability of future genera-
tions to meet their needs” [2], but for this category it still represents a fancy idea rather than an
operational and encoded approach to design.
Nonetheless, from the statement above [2], two meaningful concepts can be retrieved: (a) the
concept of need, fundamental for the developing countries and for the poorer areas of the planet,
where the care of the wealthier population should be addressed and (b) the idea of limit, associ-
ated to the available and finite resources, unable to meet the aspirations of the global population.
How can therefore structural engineers contribute to a sustainable and controlled decrease of the
most developed areas of the world based on the idea that available resources have to be shared with
the greater majority of the world’s population that rightfully claims for improved life conditions?
How can this goal be reached in the era of digital tools, where the claim is that every shape that
can possibly be “implemented” and “solved” by a software, even if fantastically conceived and
aesthetically stunning, is sustainably buildable in a continuous search for amazement (Fig. 3.1),
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1403.indd 25 20/08/15 4:57 PM

26 CHAPTER 3. A SUSTAINABLE APPROACH TO STRUCTURAL DESIGN
despite the associated uncertainties in terms of costs and life-cycle demands and disregarding
the scale problem associated with mechanical properties of available building materials?
If the process of “form finding” is defined as the search for the most suitable structural shape able
to optimally fit a set of applied loads under given boundary conditions, the example of Robert Le
Ricolais and his motto: “the art of structure is where to put the holes” (Fig. 3.2) [3] sounds partic-
ularly up-to-date when confronting two of the most important schools in contemporary building
trends such as those of Form Finding and Free Form Design, the first based on a strict control of
the consequences of any formal choice on the structural response, with the search for the mini-
mum material consumption, and the second based on the mere expressive freedom disregarding
any other issue and thus involving ethical issues about the sustainability of this approach to design
because of related uncertainties about life-cycle costs, durability, and reliability in general.
3.2 Ecological footprint and appropriate carrying capacity

In relatively recent times, the idea that the development ratio and wealth demand of the increas-
ing world population would be not compatible with the available Earth’s resources has become
Fig. 3.1: Zaha Adid, project for the Nuragic and Contemporary Art Museum Cagliari, Italy
(a) (b) (c)
Fig. 3.2: The lesson of Robert Le Ricolais and his motto “Structural Engineering is the Art of
where to put the holes” (a), seem to be perfectly applied by Pier Luigi Nervi—exhibition hall in
Turin, Italy (b), but less present in some recent examples of free form design (FFD) applied to
free form building (FFB) (c)
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1403.indd 26 20/08/15 4:57 PM

3.2 ECOLOGICAL FOOTPRINT AND APPROPRIATE CARRYING CAPACITY 27
a reality. A possible and effective way to measure this statement is represented by the so-called
ecological footprint (EF) [4], or appropriate carrying capacity, defined as the comparison
between the demands for natural resources that can be balanced by the planet’s ecological abil-
ity to regenerate [5].
Ecological footprint analysis compares human demand on nature with the biosphere’s ability
to regenerate resources and provide services. The EF represents the extension of biologically
productive land and sea area necessary to balance the consumption of the Earth population
granting, at the same time, the disposal of waste.
In 2006, the average biologically productive area per person worldwide was approximately 1.8
global hectares (gha) per capita. The U.S. EF per capita was 9.0 gha, and that of Switzerland
was 5.6 gha per person, while China’s EF was estimated to be 1.8 gha per person [5] (Fig. 3.3).
It is somehow worrisome that these figures, in their totality, are just by a mere 33% composed
by primal necessities such as food and water (Fig. 3.3).
It originally estimated that the available biological capacity for the 6 billion people on Earth
at that time was about 1.3 hectares per person, which is smaller than the 1.8 gha published for
2006, because the initial studies neither used global hectares nor included bio-productive marine
areas [4]. A number of non-governmental organization (NGO) websites allow estimation of the
ecological footprint.
According to 2007 data, the EF was estimated as 1.5 planet Earth, meaning that, according to
the average level of lifestyle of the time, the world’s population should use 50% more than the
surface of land and sea available in order to allow for the natural renewal of available natural
resources [6] (Fig. 3.4).
From the data presented above, it clearly appears that:
DE > AE = 1 (3.1)
Human welfare and ecological footprints compared

1.000 Norway Australia USA
Canada
0.900
Cuba
0% 0%
0.800 6%
Human development index
2% 16%
Earth’s biocapacity = 2.1 hectares per person
Africa
0.700
Asia-Pacific
Europe (EU)
0.600 Europe (Non-EU) 17%
Latin America and Caribbean
Middle East and Central Asia 50%
0.500 9%
North America
Food Housing
0.400
Data sourced from: Transportation Goods and services
Sierra Leone Global Footprint Network Electricity Natural gas
0.300 2008 report (2005 data) Water Waste
UN Human Development
Index 2007/08
0.200
0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 10.0
Ecological footprint (global hectares per capita)
Fig. 3.3: Human welfare and ecological footprint comparison (2007/2008)
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1403.indd 27 20/08/15 4:57 PM

(a) 1961 to 2005

1.4
Total UK
1.2
France
Number of Planets Earth
World Biocapacity
1.0 Mexico
Germany
0.8 Brazil
0.6 Japan
Russia
0.4 India
China
0.2
USA
0
1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 05
(b) 1961 to 2005

1.4
1.2
Number of Planets Earth
World Biocapacity
1.0 Built areas
Fishing areas
0.8 Forests
Pastures
0.6
Cultivated areas
0.4 Carbon
0.2
0
1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 05
Fig. 3.4: EF estimated in planet Earth for single states(s) (a) and by components (b)
Projecting ecological debt to 2050 with IPCC scenarios

2.5
Ecological footprint (in number of Earths)
Biocapacity
Footprint A2
2.0 Footprint B2
Footprint A1
Footprint B1
1.5 Footprint A1B
1.0
0.5
0.0
1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050
Fig. 3.5: Projection of the EF in terms of number of Earths to 2050 according to different
possible scenarios [7]
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1403.indd 28 20/08/15 4:57 PM

3.3 CONCEPTION AND UNCERTAINTIES IN DESIGN APPROACH 29
where DE is the demand of Earth needed to sustain the world’s population, while AE is the
available number of Earths at present average level of resource consumption.
The statement supported by Eq. (1), projected to the year 2050 through the application of differ-
ent scenarios according to different possible strategies adopted by different countries, appears
to be expected to worsen [7] (Fig. 3.5).
The same approach, applied on the total amount of available resources, can also be applied to
single activities, such as manufacturing and building industry.
3.3 Some considerations on sustainability in integrated

life-cycle structural engineering: conception
and uncertainties in design approach
Talking about sustainability in structural engineering, among all possible topics within the
general framework supplied by the ISO 14000 standards, with specific reference to ISO
14001 [8], some considerations on the issues of conceptual design and uncertainties evalua-
tion seem to be appropriate in order to focus on some important aspects related to structural
design, considered as one of the main disciplines, which are part of the concept of sustain-
ability applied to constructions [9] (Fig. 3.6), where the optimization of different aspects of
the service life of structures through an optimum integrated life-cycle design process must
be performed [10].
Sustainable
construction
Dimensions of
sustainability
Ecological Economic Social

sustainability sustainability sustainability
Objectives of – Regional spin-offs – Satisfaction
– Maintenance – Employment
protection – Mobility costs – Regional spin-offs
– Risk management – Sick building syndrome
– Life cycle costs
Human Natural – Flexible use
Ecosystem – Reliability
health resources
– Waste avoidance – Human toxicity of – Resource efficiency:
– Emissions building materials materials (biotic, abi-
– Pollutants – Pollutants otic, energy, soil)
– Land use – Sick building – Recycling economy
syndrome
Fig. 3.6: Dimensions of sustainability and objectives of protection [9]
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1403.indd 29 20/08/15 4:57 PM

Design phase Tasks Life cycle design methods

Investment – Define objectives and schedule of – Multiple criteria analysis, opti-
planning the project mization and decision making
– Create alternative investment – LCCs (financial and environ-
plans mental)
– Calculate life-cycle costs (LCCs)
– Calculate cash flows of alternative
plans
– Evaluate benefits of alternative
plans
– Compare LCCs and take final
decision
Analysis of – Identify customers’ requirements – Modular design methodology
clients’ and – Estimate the rate of importance of – Quality function deployment
users’ needs each attribute as weight method QFDa
Functional – Translate the results of needs – Modular design methodology
specifications of analysis to demands – QFD method
project – Identify relevant functional prop-
erties
– Define weight of each property
Technical – Translate functional properties – Modular design methodology
performance and related weights from previous – QFD method
specifications task to demands
– Identify technical performance
properties
– Identify weight of each property
Creation and – Create and outline alternative – Modular design methodology
outlining of alter- solutions for the object of design,
native structural its static schemes, and structural
solutions systems, in cooperation with other
designers
Modular life- – Define the number of modules – Modular design methodology
cycle planning and requirements for the design – Modular service life planning
and service life service life of each component of – Life-cycle (financial and envi-
optimization of the project ronmental) costs calculation
each alternative – Identify the design life costs of
different modules on the basis of a
minimum total cost criterion
Multiple – Evaluate the performance proper- – Modular design methodology
criteria ranking ties of each alternative – QFD method
and selection – Multiple criteria analysis, opti-
between alterna- mization, and decision making
tive solutions and
products
Table 3.1: Continued
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1403.indd 30 20/08/15 4:57 PM

3.3 CONCEPTION AND UNCERTAINTIES IN DESIGN APPROACH 31
Detailed design – Perform conceptual and final – Design for safety

of the selected design of each identified modulus – Design for serviceability
solution – Design for aesthetics
– Design for structural efficiency
– Design for adaptability
– Design for durability, minimal
maintenance, and life-cycle
costs
– Design for risk reduction and
value protection
– Design for minimal ecological
footprint (embodied energy,
minimal material use,
emissions, reuse, recycling,
disposal)
a
QFD method transforms user demands into engineering characteristics combining quality
assurance and quality control issues; its first formulation is adapted from Ref. [11] and
it is embodied in the ISO 9001 standard for quality assurance. ISO 9001, 2008. Quality
management. International Organization for Standardization, Geneva, Switzerland.
Terms in Bold refer to those that include structural engineers also.
Table 3.1: Example of possible integrated life-cycle design process and sustainable
approach to design (adapted from Ref. [10])
Structural design is certainly a multiple objective activity, based on the application of a number
of different requirements concerning:
• material technology,
• manufacturing,
• assembly and erection,
• life-cycle response,
• adaptability,
• demounting and reuse,
• disposal.
Optimization processes have to be applied to the single aspects mentioned above or to the over-
all process in evaluating all aspects related to the above points within an integrated structural
design, capable of meeting the requirements of sustainable development.
Conceptual design, understood not only in its limited meaning as the first design ideas but also
as the ability of identifying and optimizing all the aspects related to an integrated approach to
design capable of optimizing the multi-objective function describing the overall performance
of a structure during all the service-life, plays a fundamental role in ensuring the achievement
of the goals mentioned above together with the identification and evaluation of the associated
uncertainties. Table 3.1, adapted from the original proposal in Ref. [10], can serve as a base of
discussion and as an operational model.
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1403.indd 31 20/08/15 4:57 PM

(a) (b)
Services New construction 8%
Site work
6% Demolition 48%
24% Construction
7%
13% Finishes
26% Renovation 44%
Envelope 24%
Structure
Fig. 3.7: Initial embodied energy for an office building (a) and waste production during life
cycle (b)
Uncertainties related to the life-cycle response structures have led the research activity of struc-
tural engineers of the past centuries mainly searching for:
• efficient use of new construction materials within different static schemes and structural
shapes during the 19th and first half of 20th centuries,
• maintenance of existing structures during the second half of 20th century,
• life-cycle analysis and use of “green materials” (Fig. 3.7) (embodied energy (Fig 3.7a),
reusable, recyclable, biodegradable) and waste reduction at the beginning of 21st
century.
3.4 Complexity versus complicacy within a sustainable

conceptual design
The lesson learnt from the masters of structural engineering of the last century, with their
utmost attention in the definition of the most suitable shape able to fit the structural require-
ments under given boundary conditions in a real “form finding” process, seems to acquire the
greatest importance within a sustainable approach to design, where the limitation of “uncer-
tainties” (unpredictable long-term consequences) appears to meaningfully contribute to the
reliable quantification of the life-cycle costs and resource consumption through a predictable
structural response. The intensive use of digital tools (for three-dimensional architectural
and structural modelling) not just as suitable “means” for a more appropriate and sustainable
design in the contemporary meaning defined above but as the real “goal” of the design itself,
in the continuous and exasperated search for a spectacular Free Form Architecture, with the
creation of sculpted shapes inspired by art (Janet Elchman—Fig. 3.8b) deriving from the realm
of industrial design (Fig. 3.9a, b), despite huge “scale” problems (Figs. 3.8 and 3.9) related to
the mechanical properties of available construction materials, the appropriate choice of static
schemes, the ease of erection, and maintenance, has triggered a process where, according to
Ref. [12], the “know how” has widely exceeded the “know why” (Fig. 3.10). This has, as a
clear consequence, led to the introduction of an increasing ratio of uncertainty, which is at the
basis of larger future possibilities of “failure”, suitably defined as “performance not consistent
to expectation” [13].
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1403.indd 32 20/08/15 4:57 PM

3.4 COMPLEXITY VERSUS COMPLICACY WITHIN A SUSTAINABLE CONCEPTUAL DESIGN 33
(a) A cloud (b) A cloud sculpture (c) A cloud building
Fig. 3.8: Free form shapes inspired by natural forms (a) can originate evocative light structured
sculptures—Janet Elchman (b), but when translated into architecture without the application
of a structural conceptual design from the early stages of the creative process (c) can lead to
the creation of massive supporting structures, requiring a remarkable use of structural material
per unit volume, with the potential introduction of uncertainties related to construction costs,
long-term behaviour and life-cycle performance
A table A show room A theatre hall
Fig. 3.9: Free form shapes inspired by the realm of industrial design often originate scale
problems related to the mechanical properties of available structural materials and the choice
of suitable static schemes
Contrarily to the philosophy characterizing the Italian Renaissance, where the activity of
Leonardo Da Vinci in the field of construction, able to influence future generations of archi-
tects and engineers till present times, was a science assisted by a creative act in an attempt to
have total control on the resulting object, and the logical sequence of each step of the design
and construction process was scheduled by a kind of self-evident necessity ruled by a math-
ematical order; in present times, any logical sequence seems to be forgotten and architecture
is somehow, and within a certain thread, more related to advertisement, fashion, visual art. If
Leonardo Da Vinci and the Classical Architects are defined as the ancestors of what is presently
defined as “form finding”, related to the search for predictable consequences (engineering is a
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1403.indd 33 20/08/15 4:57 PM

KNOW “HOW” AND KNOW “WHY”

Understanding Predictable consequences Not completely predictable consequences
Ethics of CONTEMPORANEITY Ethics of RESPONSIBILITY
c
“WHY”
“HOW”
Uncertainty
BACON b
Δt(c;p)
(~1600)
f
“WHY”
Δt(p;c)
e ac = full understanding
“HOW” ab = contribution of science
“HOW” bc = contribution of art
“WHY” Engineering is science assisted by art
Engineering is Engineering is art assisted by science
df = full understanding = contribution of science
ART + Science
d a Time
Fig. 3.10: Free form design, denying the centrality of structural engineering, increases the level
of uncertainty related to design lowering and at the same time the possibility of fully under-
standing the consequences (adapted from Ref. [12])
(a) (b)
Fig. 3.11: Complexity and complicacy as characteristics of form finding (a) and free form
design (b) processes applied to two of the most representative buildings recently realized in
China, such as the main corridor of the 2010 Shanghai Expo and the Bird’s Nest Arena for the
2008 Beijing Olympic Games
science assisted by art with the “know why” exceeding the “know how”), with the beginning
of the age of integrated digital tools, the practice of “free form design” and the introduction
of a consequent increased level of uncertainties, engineering is finally a practice assisted by
science and the level of understanding of the process can be seen as lower than the possibility
of accomplishing it (Fig. 3.10): the “know how” exceeds the “know why”, supported by the
revolutionary opportunities given by the use of geometrical algorithms implemented for fami-
lies of software originally coming from the field of industrial design and applied in the field of
engineering and architecture, raising issues pertaining to the fields of ethics and sustainability.
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1403.indd 34 20/08/15 4:57 PM

3.5 STRUCTURAL ART: A RULED FREEDOM 35
Usual uncertainties due to random variability or lack of data, use of non-representative sim-
plified models, or due to human factors such as ignorance and carelessness are consequently
increased.
The concepts of complexity and complicacy can therefore be evaluated and briefly compared.
Complex is different from complicated.
Complexity in design has historically led to advancement in knowledge with the creation of
new theories and new achievements in structural engineering: Complexity is challenging in
relation to the concept of necessity. On the contrary, complicacy does not account for any
process related to necessity and it is somehow detached from any self-evidence or search for
objective rules.
The history of structural engineering is studded by milestone “complex structures”, while it

is way more difficult to have the chance to count within the same category any “complicated”
structures (Fig. 3.11).
3.5 Structural art: a ruled freedom

In an era of global access to information, responsibilities are also global. The role and diffu-
sion of knowledge is therefore a key issue and the history of structural engineering has to be
transferred to younger generations of structural engineers as the origin and cause of present
knowledge.
The choice of suitable and countless examples, within the schools of civil engineering, is there-
fore fundamental in order to make structural designers aware of the chances they are given, and
capable in potential to judge and choose, instead of limiting their profile to that of mere “calcu-
lating men”, even if greatly qualified and skilled.
According to Ref. [14], “Engineering works can boast the title of art when responding most
gracefully to the structural requirements that they must meet”. This definition, far from any kind
of simplification in the practice of structural engineering and not worried by possible associ-
ated complexities, is pervaded by that concept of “necessity” presented above, and struggles for
codified rules, without seeking for any kind of free complicacy and embodying the concept of
sustainability in that, “most gracefully”.
Furthermore, a suitable definition for a correct approach to structural design can be derived
from the world of architecture, quoting the motto of one of the Masters of Modern Architecture
between the 19th and 20th centuries, such as Louis Sullivan: “Form follows Function”.
This sounds particularly interesting in remembering the common origin of the two complemen-
tary disciplines of architecture and structural engineering, united, until the beginning of the 19th
century, in the single knowledge related to construction.
The search for the optimal and minimal use of available construction materials (Fig. 3.12), and
a clear and suitable use of static schemes (Fig. 3.13) identified on the basis of the available
structural components, has characterized the history of structural engineering and the landmark
achievements in this field. The feasibility and suitability of the work of the masters in structural
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1403.indd 35 20/08/15 4:57 PM

Fig. 3.12: The minimal use of construction materials: Vladimir G. Shukov; Piezometric tower,
Niznij Novgorod, Russia, 1853
Fig. 3.13: The clearness of the static scheme: James Fowler, Benjamin Baker; Forth bridge on
Firth of Forth, Scotland (L = 570 m), 1890
engineering have always been a clear goal, even if not explicitly categorized under the recent
definition of “sustainable”.
These concepts are almost self-evident peering at the work of some of the most renowned struc-
tural engineers of earlier centuries, whose activity can truly boast the title of “art”, not because
they are characterized by freedom and absence of rules in the way their works are shaped, but
thanks to the search for strict rules, and often “new” rules, able to give each single structural
component within that shape, a true character of “necessity” despite the overall complexity of
the final geometry and questionable aesthetical issues.
Conceptual design is therefore related to “intuition” and “control” (Fig. 3.14). Creativity must
be firmly linked to the possibility of foreseeing and evaluate the outcomes of the design process,
minimizing the uncertainties related to the mentioned process with a suitable combination of
structural schemes and use of materials and structural components (Fig. 3.15).
Structural art can be then suitably associated to the oxymoron: “ruled freedom” (Fig. 3.16).
In this context, architects are privileged partners, with architecture and structural engineering
today being complementary aspects of the same knowledge [15]. The spoken language must be
the same in the common pursuit of global quality. The history of architecture and the history of
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1403.indd 36 20/08/15 4:57 PM

3.5 STRUCTURAL ART: A RULED FREEDOM 37
(a) (b)
Fig. 3.14: Intuition and control: (a) Eduardo Torroja, Secundino Zuazo: Fronton Recoletos,
Madrid, Spain, 1936; (b) Frei Otto, Leonhardt und Ändra: German Pavillion, Montreal,
Canada, 1967
(a) (b)
Fig. 3.15: Wise use of construction materials and structural components: (a) Li Chun, Zhaozhou
stone bridge, in Zhaoxian, Ebei Province, China (L = 35 m), Seventh Century; (b) Carlo Cestelli
Guidi, Bruno Zevi, Garibaldi bridge over the River Tiber in Rome, Italy (L = 50 + 50 m), 1955
Fig. 3.16: The Ruled Freedom: Sergio Musmeci, bridge over Basento river in Potenza, Italy, 1976
structural engineering are the bases for a common action and the study and knowledge of the
past are fundamental for a conscious design (Fig. 3.17).
Structural engineers are called to an effort to regain that role of “structural designers” that per-
tained to their category and that today seems to be fading in favour of that of “structural verifiers”.
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1403.indd 37 20/08/15 4:57 PM

(a) (b)
Fig. 3.17: Contemporary Structural Art inspired by past examples: (a) Albert Fink, five span
Green River railway bridge in Munfordville, KY, USA, 1859; (b) Lifschutz Davidson Sandilands
and Techniker, Royal Victoria Dock footbridge in London, UK, 1996
(a) (b)
Fig. 3.18: Outstanding realizations where structural design plays different roles: (a) Frank
Gehry: BP bridge at Millennium Park, Chicago, USA, 2004; (b) Rosales & Partners in
collaboration with Schlaich Bergermann & Partner: Liberty Bridge at Falls Park on the Reedy,
Greenville, SC, USA, 2004
The concept of “necessity” expressed before, together with the idea of “ruled freedom”, as the
possibility to innovate within a fixed set of rules and with the awareness of the consequences
deriving from each single line traced on paper by the designer, can lead to a more conscious and
sustainable result, even when the structural engineer has the challenge to deal with extremely
complex structures. “Complex” and outstanding structures are rarely “complicated”, because
the “rule” is the leading element of the design and there is usually no space for anything lacking
that character of “necessity” that can be expressed as the logical sequence of actions linking the
final goal to the starting point of the process under given boundary conditions and requirements.
If the concept of “necessity” is accepted as a reference feature in structural design, truly out-
standing structures can be evaluated in a different way.
As an example, two magnificent and well-known curved footbridges whose design was inspired,
respectively, by the leading architect Frank Gehry and the leading structural engineer Jörg Schla-
ich deeply involved in outstanding architectural works [16] can be compared with the purpose
mentioned above (Fig. 3.18).
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1403.indd 38 20/08/15 4:57 PM

3.6 SUSTAINABLE CONCEPTUAL DESIGN OF STRUCTURES 39
In the first case, the footbridge is a landmark sculpture, a purely stunning shape, and the final
result could be reached, from a structural point of view, in many different ways. Structural
members are disguised and the overall layout does not possess any character of necessity from
a structural point of view.
In the second case, the layout possesses a true character of necessity: structural members
efficiently shape the structure and constitute its main aesthetical features. There is no space
for change: there is nothing more and nothing less than what is necessary to achieve the stated
goal. The structural solution is intimately and efficiently related to the final shape and purposely
conceived: structure and architecture coincides.
The freedom of the designer in creating an outstanding shape is strictly ruled and the “know
how” and the “know why” are perfectly blended within the concept of structural efficiency.
3.6 Sustainable conceptual design of structures

Structural designers have the chance to apply the principles of sustainability, taking into consid-
eration some of the principles listed in Table 3.1:
• design for safety,

• design for serviceability,
• design for structural efficiency,
• design for adaptability,
• design for durability and minimal maintenance and life-cycle costs,
• design for risk reduction and value protection,
• design for aesthetics,
• design for minimal ecological footprint (embodied energy, minimal material use, emissions,
reuse, recycling, disposal).
In the following, some of the above-mentioned points will be briefly examined through a number
of case studies.
3.6.1 Design for structural efficiency

Structural efficiency constitutes a key feature within a sustainable design process. Structural effi-
ciency embodies the ideas of a correct choice of static scheme, appropriate use of construction
materials and structural solutions and, last but not least, the concept of structural optimization.
3.6.2 Choice of a suitable static scheme

The choice of the correct static scheme will influence the life-cycle behaviour of the structure
with remarkable consequence in terms of maintenance costs. The choice of the static scheme is
fully part of the conceptual design of a structure and must be clarified from the very beginning of
the design process and be very much related to the boundary conditions and available resources.
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1403.indd 39 20/08/15 4:57 PM

For some special cases, and especially for moveable structures, a single structure can have more
than one static scheme and the structural design, in order to be led by the concept of efficiency,
must take this aspect into consideration. This is the case of the design for a swinging footbridge
characterized by a varying stiffness according to the different static schemes [17].
The change from the condition of simply supported to the condition of cantilevering girder is
accompanied by a change in stiffness of the cross section that varies its shape from “flat” to
“U-shaped” (Fig. 3.19).
The recent and well-known construction of the fourth bridge over the Grand Canal in Venice,
Italy, designed by the Spanish Architect Santiago Calatrava (Fig. 3.20), greatly emphasized the
consequences of the choice of a certain static scheme under special boundary conditions [18].
Fig. 3.19: Swing bridge with variable stiffness according to the different static schemes: Bruno
Briseghella and Tobia Zordan [17]; 2002 IABSE Award for outstanding paper from young
authors
(a)
(c) H
Fourth bridge
2
1) Cross section with poor bending stiffness
2) Cross section with high bending stiffness
(b) SCALZI 1
h 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.05 0.02

l
Arches Girders
Fig. 3.20: 300 m and 74 years away: comparison of the horizontal thrust H at the abutments of
outstanding bridges in Venice, Italy. The fourth bridge from Santiago Calatrava (2008) and the
Scalzi bridge from Eugenio Miozzi (1934), respectively, (a) and (b). (c) The Venetian tradition
in bridge design and construction before the fourth bridge, because of the poor mechanical
properties of local soil, displayed the utmost attention in limiting the horizontal forces transmit-
ted by the superstructure to the foundations and in controlling the raise/span ratio of the arched
structures
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1403.indd 40 20/08/15 4:57 PM

This stunning landmark bridge is built on a soil with poor mechanical properties. The bridge has
a total span of 80.8 m and a raise/span ratio of approximately 1/16. This figure implies a great
horizontal thrust that necessitates massive diaphragm foundations reaching a depth of 22.5 m.
The response of the steel superstructure, weighing approximately 6.5 kN/m2, is highly sensitive
to settlements. The final unit cost of the bridge is approximately of 6000 €/m2. The Venetian
tradition shows a different approach to bridge design, characterized by much more favourable
raise/span ratios and, contrarily to the fourth bridge, characterized by stocky abutments and
slender keys, in order to provide a quasi-vertical force applied to the foundation by dead-loads.
This is the case of the Scalzi bridge, just 300 m away from the new fourth bridge, designed in
1934 by Eugenio Miozzi with a raise/span ratio of 1/4 (Fig. 3.20).
The fourth bridge is characterized by the presence of a system of jacks. It is based on finite ele-
ment (FE) modelling, carried out with the purpose of optimizing the erection phases; the parts
were pre-assembled prior to final on-site welding, and located at the abutments. The FE model
displayed the high sensitivity of the structure to foundation settlements because of the unfavour-
able raise/span ratio. Jacks are used to reset the bridge in its original geometrical configuration
in case of unexpected foundation settlements.
3.6.3 Structural optimization

Structural optimization, which is a commonly used tool in mechanical and aeronautical engi-
neering, is also becoming a common and useful tool in structural engineering to help the
designer to find the most suitable shape of a structure allowing for a better exploitation of
construction materials with a consequent reduction in structural weight and decreased life-
cycle costs. Structural optimization, if guided step by step by the ability and intuition of the
designer, can represent an effective tool in reaching the condition of “necessity” that can lead
to the creation of a piece of structural art within the context of “ruled freedom”, as expressed
in Section 3.5.
In recent years, intuitive approaches to topology optimization based on the concept of remov-
ing inefficient material have been introduced. The two most popular ones are the solid isotropic
material with penalization (SIMP) method [19] and the evolutionary structural optimization
(ESO) method [20]. In general, performing an optimization process, of every kind, means taking
into account the following problem [21]:
(3.2)
where x=[x1,x2,…,xn] is the vector of the n design variables, continuous or discrete, f ( x ) is the
vector of the i = 1,2…,Q object criteria function f i ( x ) that are each to be minimized for the
design, and g j ( x ) defines the sets of equality or inequality constraint governing the design.
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1403.indd 41 20/08/15 4:57 PM

A structural optimization procedure, with the purpose to minimize the overall weight of the
bridge and therefore allow for the minimum use of construction material, was carried out through
the SIMP method in the Granatieri di Sardegna bridge over the River Piave in the Province of
Venice, Italy (Fig. 3.21) [22], as designed by Enzo Siviero. The bridge has a total length of 500 m
arranged on five arched bays of 100 m each. The cross section has a width of almost 18 m.
Structural optimization was performed in two stages. Firstly, a structural optimization was
performed to measure the thicknesses of the webs and flanges, assumed as discrete variables, to
minimize the self-weight of the deck. Plate thicknesses were assumed as discrete design vari-
ables whose optimum arrangement was found by minimizing the plate’s total weight with the
conditions that the stress level was lower than an allowable value and the plate thickness higher
than a minimum value (to avoid local stability problems).
Furthermore, unnecessary material was removed from the bottom flange through topology opti-
mization in the second stage. A design solution with holes was thus obtained. Different configu-
rations of holes were obtained, varying based on the percentage of volume reduction assigned
by the designer. Topology optimization [23] through the SIMP method was performed using
Ansys, in which the design variables are internal pseudo-densities that are assigned to each i-th
FE in the topological problem.
Based on the hypothesis about the relationship between the variation of material properties and
density, the stiffness matrix of each element is assumed as proportional to ηE, where E is the
actual elastic modulus; η = r q is the internal pseudo-density of the element; r is the relative
density compared with the actual density of the material and continuously varying between 0
and 1; Eef = ηE is the “effective” elastic modulus, lower than E in regions with relative density
r lower than 1. From a structural point of view, all of the previous assumptions mean that the
elements with a nearly 0 value give very little contribution to the global stiffness matrix (and
therefore to the model compliance), so that the effect of their removal is negligible. Constraints
were given from the designers in order to obtain elliptical holes, once the structural material
was removed. This choice was derived from a formerly step-by-step manually controlled opti-
mization based on engineering judgement and past experience (Fig. 3.21). Among the design
solutions obtained from the increasing ratios of removed material, a good compromise between
the competing requirements of volume reduction and structural performance was identified by
defining an appropriate Optimization Index that assigned a suitable score to each design solu-
tion. The optimization process led to the best score being assigned to a design solution with
two elliptical holes such as the one named D3a in Fig. 3.21 and corresponding to the minimal
weight.
3.6.4 Design for durability, minimal maintenance, and life-cycle costs

Life-cycle maintenance costs of ageing structures and infrastructures have proved to be much
higher than construction costs.
For more developed countries, the building investment ratio for new structures and infrastruc-
tures is rapidly decreasing while the amount of money invested for the maintenance of existing
stocks is dramatically increasing. Developing countries are probably going to face the same
situation within a few years.
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1403.indd 42 20/08/15 4:57 PM

T1 D1
T2 D2
T3a D3a
T4a D4a
TOP DOP
T3b D3b
T4b D4b
T5 D5
T6 D6
Fig. 3.21: Design for minimal use of construction materials and weight reduction. An example
of structural optimization applied to the design of the Granatieri di Sardegna bridge over the
Piave river in Venice, Italy. The final solution is the result of the comparison between an itera-
tive topology optimization procedure (TOP) based on pseudo-density of elements and a step-
by-step manually controlled design optimization procedure (DOP) based on Von Mises stress.
Final optimal design with reference to the minimization of structural weight, according to the
Optimization Index set at the beginning of the design process, has been D3a [22]
This represents a non-sustainable trend that can be faced due to a sudden change of direction
towards a more sustainable design approach that can be supported by life-cycle assessment [24]
and minimization of life-cycle–associated costs for construction, inspection, maintenance, repair,
upgrade, demolition, disposal, reuse, recycle, together with environmental and social impacts [25].
In this view, evaluation and prediction of future performance plays a fundamental role in defin-
ing long-term strategies, even if the uncertainties and the risks associated with this process make
the definition of evaluation models capable of reliably assessing the life cycle of a structure
(or of a stock of structures) and the related cradle-to-grave costs, at the moment, still rather
uncertain.
3.6.4.1 Integral abutment concept
Together with global strategies, single tools able to mitigate the usual vulnerabilities limiting the
lifespan of structures can be introduced both in the design of new structures and in the upgrading
of existing structures.
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1403.indd 43 20/08/15 4:57 PM

For instance, talking about bridges, the great majority of the overall value of the existing stock
is represented by small- or medium-span, simply supported inexpensive bridges, whose initial
quality is sometime questionable and whose long-term behaviour displays non-sustainable
maintenance costs, which creates an overall deterioration of the stock. Bearings and expansion
joints are known as vulnerable elements, whose maintenance usually has a strong impact on the
social environment, because of the associated indirect costs due to the limitation or the interrup-
tion of the traffic flow.
The integral abutment bridge concept, based on the elimination of bearings and expansion
joints, has recently become a topic of remarkable interest among structural engineers, not only
for newly built bridges but also for refurbishment or upgrading of existing bridges [26].
The superstructure of integral abutment bridges can be fully or partially restrained to the abut-
ments and the foundations. The system constituted by the substructure and the superstructure can
achieve a composite action responding as a single structural unit; this principle is clearly appli-
cable in converting existing simply supported bridges into integral abutment bridges (IABs).
Several guidelines for the design of IABs have been published in the last few years. The main
idea is to lead the designers towards this type of structures, limiting their total length, the skew-
ness, and the inclination of the deck.
No. Name State/Country Length Remarks

1 Isola della Scala, Veneto, Italy 400.8 m Prefabricated pre-stressed
Verona V-shaped concrete girders
2 SR 50 (over Happy Tennessee, USA 358.4 m Precast, prestressed concrete
Hollow Creek) bulb-T girders, curved,
nine-span (Fig. 3.8)
3 Unknown Colorado, USA 339.2 m Precast girder
4 Unknown Oregon, USA 335.5 m Precast girder
5 Unknown Colorado, USA 318.4 m Steel girder
6 SR 249 (over US 12) Indiana, USA 302.0 m Composite pre-stressed bulb-T
girder, ten-span (26.4–35.0 m)
7 Unknown Colorado, USA 290.4 m Cast-in-place
8 SR 34 (over Southern Tennessee, USA 250.0 m Pile-supported stub-type
Railway & Whitehorn abutment; 12-span precast/
Creek) pre-stressed box beams with
composite concrete deck
9 Unknown Virginia, USA 235.5 m Precast girder
10 Bushley Bayou (LA Louisiana, USA 221.0 m Nine-span, semi-integral abut-
124) ment
11 Unknown South Dakota, 209.2 m Precast girder
USA
Table 3.2. Super long integral abutment bridges [27]
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1403.indd 44 20/08/15 4:57 PM

The maximum lengths usually recommended for this type of structures are around 100 m or
even less. This limitation derives from the uncertainties related to the prediction of the soil–
structure interaction associated with main factors such as temperature variations affecting the
response of this kind of structures.
The longest IAB ever built [27] (Table 3.2), the “Isola della Scala Bridge” in Verona, Italy,
was completed in 2007 as the result of an upgrading of a partially existing, simply supported,
pre-stressed concrete bridge (Fig. 3.22). The total length of the structure, arranged on 13 spans,
is approximately 400 m. The construction of the bridge, which began in 2001 on a simply
supported static scheme, was halted after 2 years because of financial problems faced by the
contractor. At that time, all pre-stressed concrete girders and the main prefabricated elements
had already been purchased. In early 2006, works resumed with a new proposal that aimed to
improve the quality of the structure and change the static scheme from “simply supported” to
“fully integral”. The main bridge data are listed in Fig. 3.22.
During this kind of “refurbishment” process, in order to achieve an IAB, by eliminating all bear-
ings and expansion joints, resistance to bending moment was attained at the pier caps with the
casting of concrete diaphragms between the beams of adjacent spans at the pier tops. Hogging
and sagging moment resistance was also determined using a similar technique at the abutments
for the end bays: The connections between the beams of adjacent spans were built by casting
the concrete of the diaphragms also inside the V-shaped girders for a length of 2 m. The connec-
tions between the pier caps and the transverse diaphragm were achieved with a segment of steel
for every beam. During construction, the average air temperature remained approximately 10 to
15°C. The construction sequence of the transverse diaphragms started from the central part of
the bridge and proceeded symmetrically towards the abutments.
SP1 P1 P2 P3 P4 P5 P6 P7 P8 P9 P10 P11 P12 SP2

400.8
29.9 31.0 31.0 31.0 31.0 31.0 31.0 31.0 31.0 31.0 31.0 31.0 29.9
Spans length 29.9 m + 11 × 31.0 m + 29.9 m = 400.8 m

Static scheme: (pre-to post-
Simply supported to continuous
refurbish.)
Deck width/height 13.5 m/(1.5 m + 0.3 m)
Piers column diameter 3.0 m
Piers height (cap + column +
1.8 m + (3.775–5.385) m + 2.5 m
footing):
Piles type RC/friction
Piles section Circular D = 1.2 m
Piles length 15–20 m
Piles number Six for each pier and abutment
Fig. 3.22: Design for minimal maintenance and life-cycle cost reduction: an example of upgrad-
ing of an existing simply supported bridge into an integral abutment bridge. The Isola della
Scala bridge in Verona, Italy [26]
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1403.indd 45 20/08/15 4:57 PM

Temperature pushover parametric analyses were performed in order to assess the failure pattern
of the structure and attaining the rotation limit of internal joints within the range of ±40°C [28].
The bridge was opened to traffic in 2007; no mentionable damages have been noticed until now,
except for some uniformly distributed cracks of limited width in the approach slabs. The greatly
extended life-cycle span of the IAB, compared with the one expected for the initial simply sup-
ported solution, mainly depends on the durability of the construction materials.
3.6.5 Design for value protection

The concept of value protection deals with uncertainties related to life-cycle and risk assessment
and represents an interesting subject both for new buildings and infrastructures and for existing
ones.
This topic represents a real key feature for a sustainable development, especially for seismic
areas and, in general, for areas prone to extreme events. While the need to protect buildings and
infrastructures from structural damages caused by seismic events is well known and considered
[29], in relatively recent times, the need to preserve non-structural components and contents
has also become evident within the sustainable approach to long-term management strategies
of existing stock of buildings. The damage to non-structural elements and components occurs
even for levels of ground acceleration much smaller than those creating an appreciable struc-
tural damage. At the same time, the value of a building is mainly attributed to its components
and non-structural elements (Fig. 3.23) together with the possibility of keeping its functioning
uninterrupted [30]. In case of an earthquake, the non-structural elements such as partitions,
claddings, floors, furniture, and plants, can be easily damaged and lose their value. Furthermore,
in case of damaged partitions, the intervention of the civil protection or equivalent national
authorities implies building evacuation with a temporary loss of function and consequent rel-
evant economic losses for the community. In 2009, the case of the L’Aquila earthquake, in Italy,
with the debate that follows about the opportunity of performing different retrofitting techniques
[31], confirmed the necessity of protecting a large stock of buildings from damages involving
100%
20% 17%
80% 44%
60% Structural
62% 70% Non-structural
40% Contents
48%
20%
18% 13% 8%
0%
Offices Hotels Hospitals
Fig. 3.23: Total value distribution according to different type of buildings
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1403.indd 46 20/08/15 4:57 PM

non-structural components and contents as well, because of the evacuation of a large part of the
local population and the related costs.
(a) 1.2
1.0
LS of NC
0.8 LS of SD
LS of DL
Sa/g
0.6
0.4
0.2
0.0
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0
T (s)
(b) Base
shear
demand
Very rare events Tr = 2475

(2%/50 years)
Rare events SLCO
(10%/50 years) (SLU)
Tr = 475 SLDS
Occasional events
(20%/50 years)
Operational
Frequent events Structurally

(50%/50 years) (SLD) Life safe stable
SLDL
10%/10 years
Tr = 95 years
Fig. 3.24: The effect of base isolation with the increment of the fundamental vibration period of
the structure allows for a reduced level of acceleration so that the elastic state is not exceeded
for seismic events characterized by higher return periods (from: Pacific Earthquake Engineering
Research Center) (LS - Limit State, NC - Near Collapse, SD - Significant Damage, DL - Damage
Limitation)
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1403.indd 47 20/08/15 4:57 PM

3.6.5.1 Seismic isolation of existing buildings
Among the possible strategies that can be applied in the ambit of a value protection strategy
within a sustainable approach to risk assessment, seismic isolation (SI) has proved to be a sus-
tainable technique to preserve the value of a building. SI, which is becoming a “standard” for
new buildings, can also be conveniently applied to existing buildings. As it is known, the idea
Fig. 3.25: Scheme of the “lift-up” system achieving base isolation on existing buildings.
Construction phases are as follows: a concrete slab is built underneath the existing foundations
(the use of piles can be an option for special cases); a second slab is realized incorporating
lifting devices and tightly connected to the existing foundations; a system of jacks is connected
to the second slab; building is raised by the jacks, thanks to the contrast applied to the lower
slab; seismic bearings are positioned and the building is lowered to its final position; jacks
are removed. Several buildings have been upgraded using internationally patented Italian
technology. [32]
Type of intervention Average unit

cost in L’Aquila
(€/m2)
Fig. 3.26: The building (formerly damaged during the 2009 L’Aquila earthquake in Italy) at the
end of “lift-up” and detail of the isolation system. The system proposed appears to be cheaper
than traditional strengthening methods and other isolation techniques such as cutting at the
base or at the top of columns
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1403.indd 48 20/08/15 4:57 PM

3.7 CONCLUSION 49
behind SI is to disconnect the superstructure from the foundation system at the base of the build-
ing by the insertion of suitable devices characterized by high vertical stiffness associated with
a low horizontal stiffness and suitable damping ratio. In this way, the fundamental vibration
period of the structure in the response spectrum is shifted towards higher values associated with
lower levels of acceleration. As a consequence, just a limited part of the ground acceleration
is transferred to the building, which is meant to remain within the elastic limit state also for
seismic events characterized by the highest return periods, allowing for a immediate use of the
building after the earthquake under fully operational conditions (Fig. 3.24).
After the earthquake of L’Aquila, base isolation has been introduced to a rather consistent num-
ber of damaged buildings in the city downtown and surroundings. Works have been completed
by using internationally patented Italian technology. This technology is based on the possibility
of raising the building, disconnecting the superstructure from the foundation system after real-
izing a concrete slab immediately below the level of the existing foundations, as a contrast to
the hydraulic jacks responsible for the “lift-up” [30]. The system can be used for both masonry
buildings (Fig. 3.25) and frame structures (Fig. 3.26) and it is suitable to protect the value of
the building for its future lifespan. Realization costs are comparable to the ones necessary to
strengthen same kind of buildings with conventional techniques.
3.7 Conclusion
In the era of real-time communication and information, the claim for better life conditions is
global and involves the amount of available resources in all aspects of real life.
The increasing world population will not be compatible with the available Earth’s resources
unless the ecological footprint or carrying capacity, defined as the comparison between the
demands for natural resources that can be balanced by the planet’s ecological ability to regener-
ate, would be decreased rapidly in the coming years. Conceptual design of structures, understood
not only in its limited meaning as the initial design ideas but also as the ability of identifying
and optimizing all the aspects related to an integrated approach to optimize the multi-objective
functions describing the overall performance of a structure during its entire service life, plays a
fundamental role in ensuring the achievement of goals pertaining to the ambit of sustainability
in this specific field. Sustainable structural design, even if not influenced by codified measuring
indexes, should relate to issues such as safety, serviceability, structural efficiency, adaptability,
durability, minimal maintenance, life-cycle costs, risk reduction, value protection, and mini-
mal ecological footprint. The history of structural engineering with its great past achievements
demonstrates that its masters and pioneers have always struggled to reduce uncertainties and to
operate within a “ruled freedom”, in order to realize structures of structural art generated from
“necessity” and internal coherence, even when characterized by the highest level of complexity,
in an iterative process characterized by “intuition” and “control”.
Today, the latest architectural trends based on the opportunities rendered by digital tools and
information technology are generating worldwide examples that are in contrast to the aforemen-
tioned character, introducing an increasing level of uncertainty with reference to the long-term
behaviour and life-cycle costs of structures. Structural engineers are called upon to regain the
leading role of “designers” that appears to be fading in favour of that of “verifiers” and give their
highest contribution towards a more sustainable built environment.
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1403.indd 49 20/08/15 4:57 PM

References
[1] American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE). 2008. Civil Engineering Body of Knowledge
for the 21st Century, ASCE.
[2] World Commission on Environmental and Development Report, 1987. From one Earth
to one World – World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED). Oxford
University Press.
[3] Le Ricolais, R. 1960. Grids and Space Frames – An Investigation on Structures. College
of Architecture and Design, University of Michigan.
[4] Rees, E.W. 1992. Ecological footprints and appropriated carrying capacity: what urban
economics leaves out. Environ. Urban., 4(2): 121–130.
[5] World Wildlife Found (WWF). 2006. Living Planet 2006, WWF, Gland, Switzerland.
[6] Ewing, B., Goldfinger, S., Wackernagel, M., Stechbart, M., Rizk, S.M., Reed, A., Kitzes,
J. 2008. The Ecological Footprint Atlas 2008. Global Footprint Network, Oakland, CA.
[7] Nakicenovich, E., et al. 2008. Report on Emissions Scenarios: A Special Report of Work-
ing Group III of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Cambridge University
Press, Cambridge, UK.
[8] ISO 14001. 2004. Environmental management systems – Requirements with guidance for
use, International Organization for Standardization, Geneva, Switzerland.
[9] Maydl, P. 2004. Sustainable engineering: state-of-the-art and prospects. Struct. Eng. Int.,
14(3): 176–180.
[10] Sarja, A. 2004. Integrated Life Cycle Design of Structures. Taylor & Francis, New York,
NY, USA.
[11] Akao, Y. 1994. Development History of Quality Function Deployment. Asian
Productivity Organization, Tokyo, Japan.
[12] Majowiecki, M. 2007. Ethics and structural reliability in free-form-design. J. Int. Assoc.
Shell Spatial Struct., 48(4): 29–50.
[13] Carper, K. 2001. Lessons architects can learn from failures, Proceedings of International
Conference on Structural Failures and Reliability of Civil Structures, Venice, Italy, 6–7
December 2001.
[14] Billington, D. 1983. The Tower and the Bridge: The New Art of Structural Engineering.
Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, USA.
[15] Siviero, E. 2011. Bridgescape. La Scuola di Pitagora Editrice, Napoli, Italy.
[16] Schlaich, J., Bergermann, R. 2003. Light Structures. Prestel Publishing, New York, NY,
USA.
[17] Briseghella, B., Zordan, T. 2002. Design and analysis of a variable stiffness moveable
footbridge, Proceedings of the 2002 IABSE Symposium “Towards a Better Built Environ-
ment – Innovation, Sustainability, Information Technology, Melbourne, Australia, (IAB-
SE Award for Outstanding Paper by Young Authors).
[18] Zordan, T., Briseghella, B., Siviero, E. 2010. The IVth bridge over the Grand Canal in
Venice: from the idea to analysis and construction. Struct. Eng. Int., 20(1).
[19] Bendsoe, M.P., Kikuchi, N. 1988. Generating optimal topologies in structural design using
a homogenization method. Comp. Meth. Appl. Mech. Eng., 71(2): 197–224.
[20] Xie, Y., Steven, G.P. 1992. Shape and layout optimization via an evolutionary procedure,
Proceedings of the International Conference on Computational Engineering Science,
University of Science and Technology, Hong Kong, PRC.
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1403.indd 50 20/08/15 4:57 PM

REFERENCES 51
[21] Scott, A.B. 2002. Recent Advantage in Optimal Structural Design. Structural Engineering
Institute of the American Society of Civil Engineers, Reston, VA, USA.
[22] Briseghella, B., Fenu, L., Lan, C., Mazzarolo, E., Zordan, T. 2012. An application of
topology optimization to bridge design. ASCE J. Brid. Eng.
[23] Bendsoe, M.P., Sigmund, O. 2003. Topology Optimization: Theory, Methods, and Appli-
cations. Springer-Verlag London Ltd., London, UK.
[24] ISO 14044. 2006. Life cycle assessment – Requirements with guidance for use. Interna-
tional Organization for Standardization, Geneva, Switzerland.
[25] Chen A. 2008. Bridge Design Processes based on given Structural Life. China
Communications Press, Bejing, PRC.
[26] Zordan, T., Briseghella, B. 2007. Attainment of an integral abutment bridge through the
refurbishment of a simply supported structure. Struct. Eng. Int., 17(3): 228–234.
[27] Lan, C. 2012. On the Performance of Super Long Integral Abutment Bridges, PhD thesis,
Joint Doctoral School in Civil and Mechanical Structural Systems Engineering, Univer-
sity of Trento, Trento, Italy.
[28] Zordan, T., Briseghella, B., Lan, C. 2010. Pushover analysis on integral abutment bridge
superstructure. Eng. Struct., 33(2).
[29] Manfredi, G. 2001. Evaluation of seismic energy demand. Earthquake Eng. Struct. Dyn.,
30(4): 485–499.
[30] Briseghella, B., Zordan, T. 2007. On the Evaluation of the Seismic Risk for the Hospital
Buildings. Ingegneria Sismica, Patron Ed., Quarto Inferiore BO, Italy.
[31] Nuti, C., Vanzi, I. 2003. To retofit or not to retrofit? Eng. Struct., 25(6): 701–711.
[32] Briseghella, B., Zordan, T., Romano, A., Zambianchi, L., Simone, G., Liu, T. 2012. Lift-
up and base isolation as an upgrading technique for R.C. existing buildings, Proceedings
of the 15th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Lisbon, Portugal, September
24–28, 2012.
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1403.indd 51 20/08/15 4:57 PM

BackBack
to table contents
sed_1403.indd 52 20/08/15 4:57 PM

53
Chapter
4
Sustainability and Cultural Heritage
Buildings
Paulo B. Lourenço, Prof.; Jorge M. Branco, Dr.; Ana Coelho, Researcher; ISISE,
Department of Civil Engineering, University of Minho, Guimarães, Portugal.
Contact: pbl@civil.uminho.pt; jbranco@civil.uminho.pt; coelho.ana.arq@gmail.com
4.1 Introduction
Conservation of cultural heritage buildings is a demand from society, which recognizes this
heritage as a part of their identity, but it is also an economic issue. In Europe, tourism accounts
for 10% of the gross domestic product (GDP) and 12% of the employment, if linked sectors are
considered [1]. The European Union (EU) is the world’s number one tourist destination, with
40% of arrivals in the world and with seven European countries among the top ten [2]. Accord-
ing to the World Trade Organization (WTO) estimates, international tourist arrivals in Europe
will increase significantly. The built European heritage, namely monuments or historical cen-
tres, is a main attractor for tourism, with 45% of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and
Cultural Organization (UNESCO) World Heritage sites situated within the EU. Therefore, the
need for their conservation is unquestionable.
Cultural heritage buildings are particularly vulnerable to disasters because they may be deterio-
rated and damaged, they were built with low-resistance materials, they are heavy, and the con-
nections between the various structural components are often insufficient. The main causes for
damage are the lack of maintenance, water-induced deterioration (from rain or rising damp), soil
settlements, and extreme events such as earthquakes, but there are many other causes of dam-
age, namely: high stresses due to gravity loading, alterations in layout or construction, cyclic
environmental actions, climate change, physical attack from wind and water, chemical and bio-
logical attack, vegetation growth, fire, floods, vibration and micro-tremors, and anthropogenic
actions. Nevertheless, extreme events often lead to disasters, in light of the high vulnerability.
A disaster is an event caused by nature or man, which causes great physical damage, destruction
or loss of life, or a drastic change in the natural environment. Danger is the level of threat to
life, property, or environment, but it is important to understand that danger is not correlated to
damage, and that disasters are the result of poor risk management. Risk management involves,
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1404.indd 53 12/08/15 5:48 PM

54 CHAPTER 4. SUSTAINABILITY AND CULTURAL HERITAGE BUILDINGS
first, the perception and communication of risk to society. It is then essential not only to have
proper tools for assessment and diagnosis but also to define a set of possible solutions, and their
costs, to implement a risk mitigation strategy. Over the past 30 years, economic losses due to
disasters have increased tenfold, while earthquakes caused 80 000 deaths per year in the last
decade (Figs. 4.1 and 4.2). Studies indicate that investment in mitigation provides society an
average of four times the amount invested [3]. In addition to savings to society, the US Federal
Treasury can redirect an average of 3.65 times the money spent on mitigation resulting from
disaster relief costs and tax losses avoided. This result was published in December 2005 in a
report prepared by the Multi-hazard Mitigation Council of the National Institute of Building
Sciences, called “Natural Hazard Mitigation Saves” [4]. The report was the culmination of a
250 000
200 000
Million current US$
150 000
100 000
50 000
1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005

Year
Fig. 4.1: Effects of disasters. Economic losses associated with natural disasters, see Ref. [7]
350 000
320.120
300 000
228.802
250 000
200 000
150 000
88.003 88.011
100 000
33.819 21.953 15.848

50 000
1.685 6.605 712 1.790
0
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2011
Haiti earthquake East Japan earthquake
Kashmir earthquake Sichuan earthquake
Indian Ocean earthquake and tsunami
Fig. 4.2: Effects of disasters. Number of deaths in the last 10 years, see Ref. [27]
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1404.indd 54 12/08/15 5:48 PM

4.2 DEFINITIONS 55
3-year, Congressional mandated independent study. Another interesting example is given by the
World Bank [5] and the United Nations where a study about retrofitting of buildings to increase
earthquake resiliency provides a cost-benefit ratio of up to 8, for a discount rate of 5%. [6] The
same study provides a cost-benefit ratio of 4.6 for earthquakes, based in Istanbul, and stressed
the obvious fact that the world population exposed to earthquakes will rise dramatically in 2050
from that in 2000. As risk mitigation of the existing built heritage implies a large investment, it
is necessary to set priorities and consider an extended period of time to get communities physi-
cally, socially, and economically resilient.
The approach for risk reduction is known as being necessary to (a) characterize the existing built
heritage; (b) perform simplified analysis at the territorial level to estimate the vulnerability and
risk of this heritage; (c) perform detailed analyses to confirm the vulnerability and risk, in cases
identified with higher risk in the previous step; (d) define a plan with long-term intervention
measures and their costs, taking into account the observed risk; and (e) implement the plan, with
periodic reviews of time and costs, considering the economic constraints and the costs incurred
in actual interventions. It is also true that a strategy like this requires political and societal com-
mitment to become a reality.
Another important question is if heritage buildings can be somehow related to the sustainability
agenda. It is currently accepted that the improvement of the energy performance of existing
building plays an important role in the decrease of the overall energy consumption, which is a
key feature of the sustainability profile of buildings. Nevertheless, heritage buildings have a cul-
tural and symbolic function that might limit the need for comfort, with energy performance often
being a minor concern in the conservation and rehabilitation of monuments and other protected
buildings. On the contrary, the safety of cultural heritage assets cannot be negotiated and several
interventions are made for this purpose. The same does not hold for minor assets and historic city
centres, where comfort, reuse, and rehabilitation should address energy performance.
Despite the minor importance for energy issues in monuments and major cultural heritage assets,
intervention to heritage buildings may be an important part of sustainability policies, as far as it
produces impacts on the different sustainability dimensions: economy, environment, and society.
This chapter presents an overview of the role of cultural heritage buildings in the sustainability
goals, focusing on the construction materials, the methodology of interventions, the application
of life-cycle assessment tools to existing buildings, and, finally, a summary of the impacts pro-
duced on the sustainability dimensions. Because it can be an unusual topic for some engineers, it
also intends to provide a background on cultural heritage and historic preservation engineering.
Only with a correct understanding of the global methodology for the preservation of cultural
heritage buildings, one can seek sustainability in this specific area of engineering.
4.2 Definitions
4.2.1 Cultural heritage conservation specificities
A first relevant question is what is “cultural heritage”? The concept is reviewed in Ref. [8],
and refers to a cultural resource involving technical, artistic, and spiritual merits and a land-
mark providing identity to cultures, world regions, and towns. Cultural heritage also provides a
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1404.indd 55 12/08/15 5:48 PM

document on ancient knowledge, practices, culture, technology, and history and a live document
of outstanding cultural and technical achievements, from which one can still learn and improve.
Finally, cultural heritage is an economic resource with extremely large capacity to generate
secondary economy, while contributing to cultural diversity, global cultural wealth, and human
development.
Cultural heritage can be distinguished as the Built Environment (such as buildings, townscapes,
and archaeological remains), the Natural Environment (such as rural landscapes, coasts and
shorelines, and agricultural heritage), and Artefacts (such as books and documents, objects,
and pictures). The first type is referred to as the built cultural heritage and in order for people
to understand, value, want to care for, and enjoy, the idea of authenticity, i.e. truth free of devia-
tion, as well as novelty and creativity, arises. Depending on the nature of the cultural heritage,
its cultural context, and its evolution through time, authenticity judgements may be linked to
the values of a great variety of sources of information, such as form and design, materials and
substance, use and function, traditions and techniques, location and setting, spirit and feeling,
and other internal and external factors.
The built cultural heritage thus includes not only archaeological remains, monuments, dwellings
and vernacular buildings, groups of buildings, ancient city centres, and historical urban tex-
ture but also outstanding engineering works from antiquity to present, industrial heritage from
19th and 20th centuries, 20th century heritage in steel or reinforced concrete, and even modern
heritage. Value is not related to age or to the fact whether an asset is being listed or not. Still, it is
obvious that most of the existing built heritage structures are constructed with the so-called tra-
ditional materials (masonry and timber) and special attention is devoted here to these materials.
The concept of a “historic monument” embraces not only the single asset but also the urban or
rural setting in which is found the evidence of a particular civilization, a significant develop-
ment, or a historic event. The criterion of “historic significance” is often used to justify the need
to protect individual objects or groups of buildings. Despite the extension of cultural heritage
legislation and protection to groups of buildings and urban spaces, irrespective of the listing
(inventory) of complete town centres, the instruments and the application of monument protec-
tion are still fundamentally “object” centred. A significant risk and threat to groups of buildings,
urban spaces, and isolated buildings tends to affect the prominent objects less and the loss of
density, historic nature, complexity, and quality of urban fragments more [9]. The importance of
the building stock as cultural heritage and the consideration of the building stock as “resource”
are discussed in detail elsewhere [10].
Conservation is defined in the Nara Charter [11] as “all efforts designed to understand cul-
tural heritage, know its history and meaning, ensure its material safeguard and, as required, its
presentation, restoration, and enhancement”. A more technical oriented definition can be: all
actions or processes that are aimed at safeguarding the character-defining elements of a cultural
resource so as to retain its heritage value and extend its physical life. A different concept is resto-
ration, an action or process of accurately revealing, recovering, or representing the state of a cul-
tural resource or of an individual component, as it appeared at a particular period in its history,
while protecting its heritage value. Restoration is a complex concept for the built heritage as
this heritage was hardly produced in any given period of time. On the contrary, the built heritage
evolved together with the society, the needs, and the building styles and techniques. The con-
cept of restoration is in fact very controversial and encompasses many different interpretations,
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1404.indd 56 12/08/15 5:48 PM

4.2 DEFINITIONS 57
ranging between reconstruction/full “repristination”, even involving the reconstruction of parts

historically collapsed or which may have never been actually built, to that of minimal interven-
tion oriented to strict preservation/conservation. The understanding of restoration connected to
reconstruction/repristination is clearly out of fashion and in contradiction with modern conser-
vation principles.
Other technical concepts are stabilization, an action aimed at stopping a deteriorating process
involving structural damage or material decay (also applied to actions meant to prevent the par-
tial or total collapse of a deteriorated structure); repair, an action to recover the initial mechani-
cal or strength properties of a material, structural component, or structural system (also applied
to cases where a structure has experienced a deterioration process that produced a partial loss
of its initial performance level); and strengthening, an action providing additional strength to
the structure (needed to resist new loading conditions and uses, to comply with a more demand-
ing level of structural safety, or to respond to increasing damage associated with continuous or
long-term processes). In the context of conservation of historical structures, repair is not meant
to correct any historical deterioration or transformation (including those man-made), which
only affects the appearance or formal integrity of the building and does not compromise its
stability. Repair should be only used to improve structures that have experienced severe dam-
age conveying a loss of structural performance and thus causing a structural insufficiency with
respect to either frequent or exceptional actions. Strict conservation will normally require sta-
bilization or repair operations. Conversely, rehabilitation will frequently lead to strengthening
operations. Rehabilitation is defined as the upgrading of a building to comply with modern uses
and standards. Rehabilitation constitutes an activity substantially different to conservation and
frequently leads to alteration of the structure to an extent incompatible with the strict conserva-
tion principles.
Rehabilitation is also often defined as an action or a process of making possible a continuing

or compatible contemporary use of a cultural resource or an individual component, through
repair, alterations, and/or additions, while protecting its heritage value. The problem with this
definition is that making possible a modern use according to modern standards and codes may
be incompatible with sound protection of heritage value. Rehabilitation will often require sig-
nificant transformation with loss of authenticity and cultural value. Still, a cost-benefit analysis
must be made in all cases, as the modern requirement of a living cultural heritage allows for a
change of use and it is economically impossible to maintain the built heritage only for touristic
and “monumental” use. The built cultural heritage includes residential and commercial build-
ings, meaning that, even if the regulations for new buildings cannot be blindly adopted, adequate
performance is required in terms of comfort, accessibility, and thermal efficiency, among others,
and adequate performance must be demonstrated in terms of structural safety, fire protection,
and other non-negotiable requirements. Nevertheless, the intervention in cultural heritage build-
ings may be regulated by specific policies and rules, which tend to vary according to the clas-
sification and the location of the building.
4.2.2 Rehabilitation and sustainability

Sustainability may be assessed through three different perspectives: economic, environmental,
and social impacts, which should work in harmony. Rehabilitation of cultural heritage buildings
produces impacts in the three categories, some of them being more remarkable than the others.
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1404.indd 57 12/08/15 5:48 PM

From the economics point of view, rehabilitation represents a significant initial investment, due
to the specifics imposed by heritage buildings, including keeping their original features, using
traditional techniques and materials, difficult accessibilities, and unexpected findings during
the works, among others. Rehabilitation is often more expensive than new construction, partly
because many interventions are too extensive and fail to reuse the original fabric. The invest-
ment in the rehabilitation of ancient buildings has important economic outcomes, such as the
creation of jobs (considering that the use of traditional techniques demands more manpower
than modern techniques), local employment (small and medium enterprises are mode competi-
tive to do these works than major contractors), and the value added to a certain region (due
to the increase of its touristic potential and/or the improvement of the region’s self-esteem)
(see also Ref. [12]). According to the Whitestone’s Facility Cost Forecast System originally
developed for the US Army, the cost of a building per year is 6% of the initial cost, including
35% for operation; 46% for preventive maintenance, repair, and part replacement; and 19% for
recapitalization. Even if the cost of maintenance is lowered from about 3% per year to a value
of only 1 to 2% per year, the building heritage by itself (which has no operation costs) implies
significant costs. Therefore, the sensible option is to rehabilitate and reuse, with a positive
economic impact.
Considering the environmental issues, the rehabilitation of ancient buildings usually produces
lower impact than making a new building. In fact, rehabilitation is a form of reuse of an exist-
ing fabric, thus extending its life span. Conservation works are frequently limited to surgical
interventions, demanding few material quantities and low amounts of energy, which cause very
low environmental impacts. Also, efficient rehabilitation can provide a similar result. It should
be noted that the use of traditional materials and techniques, when applicable, is characterized
by a very low environmental impact, due to the low amounts of energy required for its manu-
facture and processing.
From the social perspective, rehabilitation of cultural heritage buildings may be analysed
under two major aspects: the valorization of a region and the creation of jobs. On the local
valorization issue, it is supported by the fact that people are likely to feel a higher connection
to a place and its history, through the rehabilitation of historical buildings or urban texture.
The increase in awareness for history and traditions may have remarkable positive impacts on
the society as well. The creation of jobs, in addition to the economic benefits, also helps in
retaining people in a certain region, which may help to boost the region’s social performance.
Thus, it is possible to provide better quality of life to the users of a building or at an urban
scale, by revitalization of economic activities, by attracting new users, or by providing new
urban equipment.
4.3 Traditional materials and sustainability

Masonry and timber are the oldest building materials that still find wide use in today’s build-
ing industries. Important new developments in materials and applications occurred in the last
decades but the techniques are essentially the same as the ones developed some thousand years
ago. Ancient buildings are often characterized by a remarkable durability, which has enabled
them to remain in good condition over the long time periods. The role of masonry and wood in
sustainability issues is described in this section.
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1404.indd 58 12/08/15 5:48 PM

4.3 TRADITIONAL MATERIALS AND SUSTAINABILITY 59
4.3.1 Masonry
Innumerable variations have occurred in masonry materials, techniques, and applications during
the course of time. The influential factors were mainly the local culture and wealth, the knowl-
edge of materials and tools, the availability of material, and aesthetic reasons. The most important
characteristic of masonry construction is its simplicity. Laying pieces of stone or bricks on top of
each other, either with or without cohesion via mortar, is a simple, although adequate, technique
that has been successful ever since ancient times. Other important characteristics are the aesthet-
ics, solidity, durability and low maintenance, versatility, sound absorption, and fire protection.
The first masonry material to be used was probably stone. Evolution of housing was from huts,
to apsidal houses, and, finally, to rectangular. Several legacies of stone masonry have survived
until now as testimonies of ancient and medieval cultures. In addition to the use of stone, mud
brick was also started to be used as a masonry material. It was a product that could be easily
produced. It was lighter than stone, easy to mould, and formed a wall that was fire resistant and
durable. The practice of burning brick probably started with the observation that the brick was
stronger and more durable. With the Industrial Revolution, traditional handwork procedures
were replaced by machinery. Since then, further research and developments led to the creation
of efficient brick-making industries. Another component of masonry is the mortar, which, tradi-
tionally, was mostly clay or lime mixed with sand and silty soil.
The first aspect related to masonry sustainability is its longevity and durability [13]. Structures
that last the longest, require less maintenance, and can be adapted for reuse cast a smaller
shadow on the environment. Moreover, masonry recyclability is very high, helping in saving
virgin materials and reducing construction waste.
A second sustainability aspect in masonry is resource efficiency, as stone, earth, and mortar (in
its forms of lime or mud) are some of the most abundant materials found on earth. The manner in
which materials are collected, transported short distances, and incorporated into manufactured
products with relatively little energy provides minimal negative impact on the environment.
Modern masonry manufacturers use more than 95% of extracted material in their production,
and the modular design of the manufactured block helps to reduce construction waste.
A third sustainability aspect in masonry is energy efficiency [14]. Masonry has high thermal mass,
meaning that they provide very effective thermal storage. Masonry walls remain warm or cool
long after the heat or air conditioning has been shut off. This benefit results in lower energy con-
sumption in buildings. With proper design, either new or rehabilitated masonry walls, especially
cavity walls, can reduce peak heating and cooling loads; shift peak loads; moderate indoor tem-
perature swings; and reduce the size of heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) systems.
Also, passive design strategies can be successfully implemented by utilizing masonry materials.
Other sustainability aspects in masonry are safety and protection, aesthetics, enclosure and fin-
ish, and natural fit. Masonry provides excellent fire safety and shelter from hurricanes, torna-
does, blasts, bullets, and others. The variety of sizes, shapes, colours, textures, and patterns
available means that people will hold on to their attractive, inviting buildings longer and use
them adaptively. Masonry walls can provide both structural support and exterior/interior fin-
ish. This simplified wall system can eliminate the need for additional materials that require
manufacture, installation, maintenance, and repair. This reduces cost and conserves building
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1404.indd 59 12/08/15 5:48 PM

materials. Masonry is using natural materials, instead of oil-based chemical products. An over-
view of masonry and sustainability is given elsewhere [15].
4.3.2 Wood
Wood is a largely available material in most regions of the world. Since ancient times, it has
been used by humans to build shelter, to light fires, and to produce artefacts. It is not as durable
as the stone; nevertheless, one can find several ancient buildings that have used wood in their
structures. Several centuries of building construction with wood across the world have created a
significant heritage of wood-building know-how.
Wooden construction is empirically known for its sustainability. When performing a life-cycle
assessment (LCA) of wooden buildings, it is usually considered that trees store carbon dioxide
in their tissues, which will only be released by decay or combustion of wood. This feature is
highlighted in long lifespan wood-based products, which are able to store carbon for a signifi-
cant period of time, among which are the main construction materials Ref. [16]. In this discus-
sion, [17] points out that the ability of wood to store carbon is not significant when compared
with the total carbon emissions of building products manufacturing, as all wood products have a
finite life, being the CO2 released to the atmosphere by wood decay, the carbon storage balance
will remain constant over time, considering that the overall use of wood worldwide will eventu-
ally reach a steady state. Due to this fact, the carbon storage of wood products cannot offset the
manufacturing emissions in the long term. Reference [17] concludes that wood products require
small amounts of energy in their manufacture, compared with bricks, aluminium, steel, and
concrete. In summary, the low energy requirements of wood products manufacturing are more
significant towards the aim of carbon emission reduction in the long term, in comparison with
the ability of wood to store carbon.
Forestry industry has social and economic importance in many regions of the world. Besides
that, it also contributes to control soil erosion, helps to regulate the climate, and has a decisive
role in the efficiency of water cycle and on the biodiversity of wildlife and flora. Besides low
energy requirements of wood products manufacture, it can be assumed that the transformation
process of wood produces virtually no waste, since all the “waste” can be used for the produc-
tion of wood-based products or fuel, decreasing the demand for fossil fuels [18,19]. Although
wooden constructions need maintenance throughout their lifetime, common wooden building
systems allow partial replacement of modules or damaged elements, without compromising the
entire structure. The use of wood also contributes to the energy efficiency of buildings, since it
is a material with low thermal conductivity.
When dismantling a wooden building, the recovered wood can be directly reused in another build-
ing or used as raw material for wood-based products, either by extending its useful life or simply
using as biofuel, avoiding the need for fossil fuels. On landfill, wood decomposes slowly, further
extending the carbon storage period. This is particularly efficient in modern landfills, equipped
to capture methane emissions. Otherwise, the methane emissions partially offset the benefit from
the carbon storage in the landfill [19]. Nevertheless, both combustion and decomposition of wood
result in the release of stored CO2 back to the atmosphere [17]. Some European countries do not
allow wood deposition in landfill, because it is a combustible material. In these cases, wood resi-
dues have necessarily to be burned as biofuel or reprocessed into new products [20].
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1404.indd 60 12/08/15 5:48 PM

4.4 METHODOLOGY FOR INTERVENTION IN HERITAGE STRUCTURES 61
4.4 Methodology for intervention in heritage structures

Europe is the world leader in the field of conservation of cultural heritage buildings, from the
very first approaches, through the Renaissance and the Industrial Revolution, to the first res-
toration theories and the Milan School. Until the end of the 19th century, the value of cultural
heritage buildings was mostly associated with their use. With the end of the First World War,
internationalization of culture received a boost and the famous early Charters for Conservation
appeared, such as the Athens Charter for the Restoration of Historic Monuments [21], the Inter-
national Charter for the Conservation and Restoration of Monuments and Sites [22], and the
European Charter of the Architectural Heritage [23].
The first conservation approaches are nowadays considered outdated. They resulted in accu-
mulation of significant negative experience, such as blind confidence in modern materials and
technologies, mistrust towards traditional materials and original structural resources, devalua-
tion of ancient structural features, and insufficient importance attributed to diagnostic studies
before an intervention. On the contrary, modern conservation respects the authenticity of ancient
materials and building structure, meaning that interventions must be based on understanding
the nature of the structure and the real causes of damage or alterations. Interventions are kept
minimal, using an incremental approach, and much importance is attributed to diagnosis stud-
ies comprising historical, material, and structural aspects. Only recently, in 2001, these aspects
were condensed in a document issued by the International Council of Monuments and Sites
[24], recognizing that conventional techniques and legal codes or standards oriented towards
the design of new buildings may be difficult to apply, or even inapplicable, to heritage build-
ings, and stating the importance of a scientific and multidisciplinary approach involving his-
torical investigation, inspection, monitoring, and structural analysis. Many developments have
been made recently, namely on investigation procedures for the diagnosis of historic fabric, e.g.
Ref. [25] and structural analysis techniques, e.g. Ref. [26].
4.4.1 Principles
A multidisciplinary approach is obviously required in any conservation or rehabilitation proj-
ect, and the peculiarity of cultural heritage buildings, with their complex history, requires the
organization of studies and analysis in steps that are similar to those used in medicine, such
as anamnesis, diagnosis, therapy, and controls, corresponding, respectively, to the condition
survey, identification of the causes of damage and decay, choice of the remedial measures, and
control of the efficiency of the interventions. Thus, no action should be undertaken without
ascertaining the likely benefit and harm to the building.
A full understanding of the structural behaviour and material characteristics is essential for
any project. Diagnosis is based on historical information and qualitative and quantitative
approaches. The qualitative approach is based on direct observation of the damage and mate-
rial decay as well as historical and archaeological research, while the quantitative approach
requires material and structural tests, monitoring, and analysis. Often, the application of the
same safety levels used in the design of new buildings requires excessive, if not impossible,
measures. In these cases, other methods, appropriately justified, may allow different
approaches to safety.
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1404.indd 61 12/08/15 5:48 PM

Therapy should address root causes rather than symptoms. Each intervention should be in pro-
portion to the safety objectives, keeping intervention to the minimum necessary to guarantee
safety and durability and with the least damage to heritage values. The choice between “tradi-
tional” and “innovative” techniques should be determined on a case-by-case basis with prefer-
ence given to those that are least invasive and most compatible with heritage values, consistent
with the need for safety and durability. At times, the difficulty of evaluating both the safety
levels and the possible benefits of interventions may suggest “an observational method”, i.e. an
incremental approach, beginning with a minimum level of intervention, with the possible adop-
tion of subsequent supplementary or corrective measures.
The characteristics of materials used in restoration work (in particular new materials) and their
compatibility with existing materials should be fully established. This must include long-term
effects, so that undesirable side effects are avoided.
Finally, a most relevant aspect is that the value and authenticity of cultural heritage buildings
cannot be assessed by fixed criteria because of the diversity of cultural backgrounds and accept-
able practices.
4.4.2 Guidelines
A combination of both scientific and cultural knowledge and experience is indispensable for
the study of cultural heritage buildings. The purpose of studies, research, and interventions
is to safeguard the cultural and historical value of the building. The evaluation of a building
frequently requires a holistic approach considering the building as a whole, rather than just the
assessment of individual elements. The investigation of the structure requires an interdisciplin-
ary approach that goes beyond simple technical considerations because historical research can
discover phenomena involving structural issues while historical questions may be answered
from the process of understanding the structural behaviour. Knowledge of the structure requires
information on its conception, its constructional techniques, the processes of decay and damage,
changes that have been made, and finally, on its present state.
The recommended methodology for completing a project is shown in Fig. 4.3, where an itera-
tive process is clearly required, between the tasks of data acquisition, structural behaviour, and
diagnosis and safety. In particular, diagnosis and safety evaluation of the structure are two con-
secutive and related stages on the basis of which the effective need for and extent of treatment
measures are determined. If these stages are performed incorrectly, the resulting decisions will
be arbitrary: poor judgement may result in either conservative and therefore heavy-handed con-
servation measures or inadequate safety levels. Evaluation of the safety of the building should
be based on both qualitative (documentation, observation, etc.) and quantitative (experimen-
tal, mathematical, etc.) methods that take into account the effect of the phenomena on struc-
tural behaviour. Any assessment of safety is seriously affected by the uncertainty attached to
data (actions, resistance, deformations, etc.), laws, models, assumptions, and so on used in the
research, and by the difficulty of representing real phenomena in a precise way.
The methodology stresses the importance of an “Explanatory Report”, where all the acquired
information, the diagnosis, including the safety evaluation, and any decision to intervene should
be fully detailed. This is essential for future analysis of continuous processes (such as decay
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1404.indd 62 12/08/15 5:48 PM

4.5 APPLICATION OF LIFE-CYCLE ASSESSMENT TOOLS TO EXISTING BUILDINGS 63
Historical investigation (documents)

Survey of the structure = document
Data acquisition
Field research and laboratory testing
Monitoring
Structural scheme: model

Structural behaviour Material characteristics
Actions
Historical analysis
Qualitative analysis
Diagnosis and safety Explanatory report
Quantitative analysis
Experimental analysis
Masonry
Timber
Remedial measures Execution documents
Iron and steel
Concrete
Fig. 4.3: International Council on Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS) methodology
processes or slow soil settlements), phenomena of cyclical nature (such as variation in tempera-
ture or moisture content), phenomena that can suddenly occur (such as earthquakes or hurricanes),
and for future evaluation and understanding of the remedial measures adopted in the present.
4.5 Application of life-cycle assessment tools to existing

buildings
The LCA methodology is not designed to a specific kind of product, but can be applied to build-
ings, after the definition of a functional unit, for instance: “provide shelter to four people dur-
ing a 50-year period, in predetermined comfort conditions”. ISO 14040:2006 [28] states “The
essential property of a product system is characterized by its function and cannot be defined
solely in terms of the final products”. The boundary of a unit process is determined by the level
of modelling detail that is required to satisfy the goal of the study. Nevertheless, it is important
to fix a reference flow in each product system, expressed in the amount of products needed to
fulfil the predefined function. An LCA study comprises four phases, namely: (a) the goal and
scope definition phase; (b) the inventory analysis phase; (c) the impact assessment phase; and
(d) the interpretation phase. It is clearly stated in this standard that the reduction of LCA results
to a single overall score or a number is made by means of weighting, which requires value
choices, and therefore is not possible to be performed under a scientific basis.
LCA of buildings, according to ISO 14040:2006 [28], adaptable to new and existing buildings,
is a methodology used to assess the actual and potential impacts of the life cycle of a product,
from raw material acquisition through production, use, end-of-life treatment, recycling, and final
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1404.indd 63 12/08/15 5:48 PM

disposal. One of the core issues in LCA is the consideration of time. The time scale adopted in
the analysis strongly influences the results of the assessment, as the impacts are distributed over a
certain period of time, which influences its importance. In the specific case of heritage buildings,
this feature may be highlighted. In fact, all data concerning building stock are time sensitive, pre-
senting historical, present, and future time scales and very different time constants [10].
Through simulation, different periods can be linked, whereby the consequences of decisions
can be appreciated. In practice, with respect to time issues, the period of the analysis should
be determined according to the goals of the assessment. There are several options, including or
excluding the existing structure: the analysis may start before the construction of the building,
decades or centuries ago, with the calculation of all the present materials and the embodied
energy related to their manufacturing and to the on-site construction, as well as all the conserva-
tion and maintenance operations performed over time. Alternatively, if the focus of the analy-
sis is on the intervention and further utilization of the ancient structure, the defined timeline
may start at present, avoiding the quantification of the existing materials, as well as the energy
embodied in the building. This second option is suitable, for instance, for the comparative analy-
sis of several different rehabilitation strategies, in order to assess their impacts, dismissing the
consideration of the existing fabric, because of the fact that it is common to all the options, and
therefore not producing any impact in the comparative results. Nevertheless, when the aim of
the analysis is to assess the percentage of impacts related to the rehabilitation of the asset in its
overall life cycle, the consideration of the existing structure may be important. The assessment
of an ancient structure calls for an in-depth analysis of its features and materials, allowing an
accurate quantification of the involved processes since the time of its original construction,
which may be a time-consuming task.
In many cases, rehabilitation has been shown to be a sustainable process, due to the remarkable
increase of the use phase. According to Ref. [10], from the resource conservation perspective,
preliminary calculations show that conservation and transformation strategies induce signifi-
cantly smaller mass-flows than new constructions over the average life time. Nevertheless, the
difficulties presented by the assessment of the existing building stock demands the development
of specific methodologies, in order to make its inclusion in LCA simpler and more feasible.
There is a need for rapid and comprehensive evaluation methods to measure the resource value
of buildings. Some aspects that should be included in the assessment of ancient buildings are
the resource value, the protection of cultural diversity, as well as the preservation of historical or
technical information that may be encapsulated in the building [10].
4.6 Cultural heritage buildings and sustainability

The reuse of existing buildings to suit the needs of the present and future generations,
while avoiding demolition and reconstruction, is one of the most sustainable forms of urban
development [29].
4.6.1 Environmental impacts

The reuse of existing structures and materials is itself a sustainable option under an environmental
perspective, owing to the avoidance of new products manufacturing, as well as the prevention of
demolition operations and consequent residue production, with subsequent waste rubble and landfill.
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1404.indd 64 12/08/15 5:48 PM

4.6 CULTURAL HERITAGE BUILDINGS AND SUSTAINABILITY 65
The increase of existing structures’ service life means that a past investment in energy and capi-
tal will be further amortized, avoiding new construction. Avoiding new construction, besides
avoiding new material production, further transport, and energy consumption necessary up to
the construction phase will also be saved, along with the reduction of associated pollution ([29];
[30]). Moreover, the conservation of significant heritage values, by means of a “green” adaptive
reuse, provides economic, environmental, and social benefits, which are the core of sustainable
development [29].
4.6.2 Economic impacts

Environmental and economic impacts are usually related. Avoiding new construction needs,
while preventing materials and energy consumption related to a new construction, provides
cost savings. Although there was a general line of thought that considered the conservation of
historical centres and development of cultural heritage as restrictions to economic development,
present analyses show a complementarity between both [31]. Practice has shown that a well-
preserved heritage provides visibility and recognition to a region’s value and potential, creates
feelings of belonging and pride to the inhabitants, as well as valorization by foreigners.
Regarding labour and employment issues, rehabilitation may play an important role, because
of the intensive labour that it requires, compared with modern construction practice. To support
this statement, Ref. [30] shows that rehabilitation of historic buildings in Norway allowed the
creation of 16.5% more direct jobs, not to mention the 26.7% indirect jobs, in comparison with
the new construction industry.
Besides the direct effects of construction, the investment in cultural heritage produces effects
in tourism and on intangible values, like the public popularity of history. Therefore, its second-
ary effects may be linked to the generation of economic value [32], although it may be hard to
quantify it precisely, due to the multiplicity of influences and effects related to the phenomenon.
The consideration of secondary effects should also be addressed by the specific assessment
methodologies currently under development.
4.6.3 Social impacts

Social impacts, in the overall sustainability assessment, are a more recent concern, compared
with economy and environmental issues. For this reason, and because impacts in society are fre-
quently the result of multiple influences that are difficult to measure, this sustainability dimen-
sion is the least developed so far, remaining rather subjective. Nevertheless, some aspects of
rehabilitation of cultural heritage buildings should be assessed and must be considered in the
social analysis, namely: the promotion of collective memory, improving people’s relationship
with history; the effects of job creation on local communities, especially the ones that need
investment in economic activities that enable population retention in the region, avoiding
emigration; and the importance of reviving ancient techniques as intangible heritage, namely
through the preservation of traditional building know-how, that would otherwise be lost.
Through rehabilitation process, local craftsmen are trained and have gained experience in tra-
ditional building techniques, and today some of these specialists are being “exported” to other
sites or regions to assist in rehabilitation projects or educate other craftsmen. This is a secondary
effect linked to the heritage strategy [12].
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1404.indd 65 12/08/15 5:48 PM

4.7 Conclusion
Rehabilitation of cultural heritage buildings plays an important role in sustainability policies,
mainly due to its role in: (a) the documentation of ancient knowledge, practice, and culture, among
others, which should be used on actual source of improvement; (b) the reuse of existing structures,
frequently made of sustainable building materials such as masonry and wood; (c) the promotion
of historic values and local valorization, which produce positive impacts both in the economy and
the society; and (d) the promotion of job creation, because of the labour-intensive techniques used.
References
[1] European Commission. 2010. Europe, the world’s No 1 tourist destination – a new politi-
cal framework for tourism in Europe, European Commission, Brussels, COM, 352, http://
eur-lex.europa.eu/
[2] ECORSYS SCS Group. 2009. Study on the Competitiveness of the EU tourism industry,
ECORYS Macro & Sector Policies, Rotterdam, http://ec.europa.eu/
[3] FEMA. 2011. Fact sheet – Mitigation’s value to society, Federal Emergency Management
Agency Washington, D.C., USA.
[4] MMC. 2005. Natural Hazard Mitigation Saves: An Independent Study to Assess the
Future Savings from Mitigation Activities. Volume 1 – Findings, Conclusions and Recom-
mendations. Volume 2 − Study Documentation, Multihazard Mitigation Council of the
National Institute of Building Sciences Washington, D.C., USA.
[5] The World Bank and United Nations. 2010. Natural Hazards, Unnatural Disasters: The
Economics Of Effective Prevention. The World Bank and The United Nations, Washington,
DC, USA.
[6] Sanghi, A. 2010. Presentation on “Natural hazards, unnatural disasters: The economics
of effective prevention”, The World Bank, Bangkok, Thailand.
[7] UNISDR. 2009. Global Assessment Report on Disaster Risk Reduction. United Nations
International Strategy for Disaster Reduction Secretariat, United Nations, Geneva, Swit-
zerland, ISBN 9789211320282, 207 pp.
[8] ICCROM. 2005. Definition of Cultural Heritage. Revised by Jokilehto, J., Definition
of Cultural Heritage: References to documents in history, ICCROM Working Group
“Heritage and Society” http://cif.icomos.org/pdf_docs/Documents%20on%20line/
Heritage%20definitions.pdf.
[9] Dupagne, A., Mathus, P., Servotte, C. 2001. Les espaces urbains – Extrait du rapport final
du thème 1.3 – les espaces, LEPUR-ULg, Liège, Septembre 2001.
[10] Kohler, N., Hassler, U. 2002. The building stock as a research object. Build. Res. Inf.,
30(4): 226–236.
[11] UNESCO: World Heritage Committee. 1994. The Nara Document on Authenticity,
International Council on Monuments and Sites, 12–17 December 1994, Phuket, Thailand,
http://www.international.icomos.org/charters/nara-e.pdf
[12] Bowitz, E., Ibenholt, K. 2009. Economic impacts of cultural heritage – research perspec-
tives. J. Cult. Herit., 10: 1–8.
[13] Grimm, C.T. 1985. Durability of brick masonry: a review of literature. In: Masonry:
Research, Application, and Problems. Grogan, J.C., Conway, J.T. (eds.), ASTM STP 871,
American Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, PA, USA, 202–234.
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1404.indd 66 12/08/15 5:48 PM

REFERENCES 67
[14] Reddy, B.V.V., Jagadish, K.S. 2003. Embodied energy of common and alternative build-
ing materials and technologies. Energ Buildings, 35(2): 129–137.
[15] Verhelst, F., Kjaer, E., Jäger, W., Middendorf, B., Van Balen, K., Walker, P. 2011. Masonry
– sustainable, contemporary and durable: anachronism, bold statement or visionary
outlook? Mauerwerk, 15(2): 118–122.
[16] Börjesson, P., Gustavsson, L. 2000. Greenhouse gas balances in building construction:
wood versus concrete from life-cycle and forest land-use perspectives. Energ Policy,
28(9): 575–588.
[17] Buchanan, A., Levine, S. 1999. Wood based building materials and atmospheric carbon
emissions. Environ. Sci. Policy, 2(6): 427–437.
[18] Sathre, R., Gustavsson, L. 2009. Using wood products to mitigate climate changes: exter-
nal costs and structural change. Appl. Energ., 89: 251–257.
[19] Lippke, B., Wilson, J., Meil, J., Taylor, A. 2010. Characterizing the importance of carbon
stored in wood products. Wood Fiber Sci., 42 (Corrim Special Issue): 5–14.
[20] Dodoo, A., Gustavsson, L., Sathre, R. 2009. Carbon implications of end-of-life manage-
ment of building materials. Resour. Conserv. Recy., 53: 276–286.
[21] International Council on Monuments and Sites. 1931. Athens Charter for the Restoration
of Historic Monuments – 1931. http://www.icomos.org/en/charters-and-texts/179-arti-
cles-en-francais/ressources/charters-and-standards/167-the-athens-charter-for-the-resto-
ration-of-historic-monuments
[22] International Council on Monuments and Sites. 1964. International Charter for the
Conservation and Restoration of Monuments and Sites (1964). http://www.icomos.org/
char-ters/venice_e.pdf
[23] International Council on Monuments and Sites. 1975. European Charter of the Archi-
tectural Heritage, 1975. http://www.unescobkk.org/fileadmin/user_upload/culture/cultu-
reMain/Instru-ments/European_Charter.pdf
[24] ICOMOS. 2003. Recommendations for the Analysis and Restoration of Historical Struc-
tures, ISCARSAH.
[25] Binda, L., Saisi, A., Tiraboschi, C. 2000. Investigation procedures for the diagnosis of
historic masonries. Constr. Build. Mater., 14(4): 199–233.
[26] Lourenço, P.B., Mendes, N., Ramos, L.F., Oliveira, D.V. 2011. Analysis of masonry struc-
tures without box behavior. Int. J. Archit. Herit., 5: 369–382.
[27] U.S.G.S. 2012. U.S. Geological Survey. http://www.usgs.gov/ (accessed 27/01/2012).
[28] ISO 14040. 2006. Environmental Management – Life Cycle Assessment – Principles and
Framework. International Organization for Standardization, Geneva, Switzerland.
[29] Yung E.H.K., Chan, E.H.W. 2012. Implementation challenges to the adaptive reuse of
heritage buildings: towards the goals of sustainable, low carbon cities. Habitat Int., 36(3):
352–361.
[30] Gražulevicˇiu-te, I. 2006. Cultural heritage in the context of sustainable development.
Environ. Res. Eng. Manage., 37: 74–79.
[31] Fusco Girard, L., Nijkamp, P. 1997. Le valuazioni per lo sviluppo sostenibile della cittá e
del territorio. FrancoAngeli, Milano.
[32] Stubbs, M. 2004. Heritage-sustainability: developing a methodology for the sustainable
appraisal of the historic environment. Plan. Prac. Res., 19(3): 285–305.
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1404.indd 67 12/08/15 5:48 PM

BackBack
to table contents
sed_1404.indd 68 12/08/15 5:48 PM

69
Chapter
5
Measuring Sustainability
and Life-Cycle Assessment
John E. Anderson, Dr., PE; Technische Universität München, Munich, Germany. Frances
Yang, SE, LEED AP, Structures and Sustainability Specialist, Arup, San Francisco, CA, USA.
Contact: John.Anderson@tum.de; Frances.Yang@arup.com
5.1 Introduction
Structural engineers make design decisions based on objective criteria. From the strength of mate-
rials to finite element analysis, engineers rely on quantifiable metrics to design structural systems.
With the emergence of sustainability objectives within the design profession, engineers have a
unique opportunity to utilize their analytical expertise to produce structural systems with a positive
impact on the natural environment. This chapter presents sustainability goals, an overview of life-
cycle assessment (LCA), life-cycle assessment case studies answering common engineering ques-
tions, green design rating systems, and emerging trends in measuring environmental performance.
The concept of sustainability has achieved widespread acceptance and support from design
professionals and in particular from the international structural engineering community (e.g.,
American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) Structural Engineering Institute, Sustainability
Committee; IABSE Working Commission 7: Sustainable Engineering). Although sustainabil-
ity has become a central pillar of contemporary design, there remain significant challenges in
achieving sustainability objectives due to the opaqueness and qualitative nature of terminology
used and its numerous interpretations. The U.N. Report of the World Commission on Environ-
ment and Development defines sustainable development as “development that meets the needs of
the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs” [1].
The ASCE defines sustainable development as “the process of applying natural, human, and
economic resources to enhance the safety, welfare, and quality of life for all of society while
maintaining the availability of the remaining natural resources” [2]. An overarching challenge for
sustainable design is in verification: defining and quantifying metrics in order to achieve sustain-
ability objectives.
In addition to defining and quantifying sustainability metrics, it is necessary to ensure that all
impacts and a systems-based approach are considered. For example, reducing the operational
energy use of a building alone omits the trend of increasing building size [3], increasing use
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1405.indd 69 11/08/15 6:55 PM

70 CHAPTER 5. MEASURING SUSTAINABILITY AND LIFE-CYCLE ASSESSMENT
of electricity [4], and increasing material quantities required for additional structural materials
and insulation [5]. Thus, focusing solely on operational energy use may be an insufficient met-
ric for reducing net energy consumption. Further, systems-based analysis is required to ensure
that sustainability goals do not lead to unsustainable results. To illustrate, “green roads” (i.e.,
roadways designed using sustainable guidelines [6]) focus attention on infrastructure for one
transportation system (i.e., personal automobiles) rather than considering more environmentally
preferred modes (e.g., mass transit, walking, biking). A system-wide analysis as a prerequisite
can offer better overall solutions to meet sustainability objectives. Consequently, complex and
integrated methods and tools are required to understand interrelated impacts and ensure that
actual environmental improvements are achieved.
This chapter presents the state-of-the-art methods for measuring sustainability of structures.
Contemporary sustainability goals are reviewed, followed by a detailed presentation of “LCA-
the most” common and comprehensive methodology for quantifying environmental perfor-
mance of a product or process. The chapter then presents the latest research from LCA for
structures—enabling structural engineers to quickly identify areas for environmental improve-
ment during the design process. Common questions for practicing structural engineers are then
answered. Finally, green rating systems for buildings and infrastructure are discussed along with
emerging global trends in the construction industry. The chapter aims to provide the reader with
practical knowledge on how structures relate to overall sustainability objectives and how tools
such as LCA can be utilized to improve the environmental performance of structural design.
5.1.1 Sustainability goals

There are numerous metrics to quantify the three aspects of sustainability—social, economic,
and environment. The European Union uses ten sustainable development indicators (SDIs) and
associated indicators to track progress of sustainable development. Their themes and associated
indicators (in parentheses) are socioeconomic development (real gross domestic product [GDP]
per capita), sustainable consumption and production (resource productivity), social inclusion
(risk of poverty or social exclusion), demographic changes (employment rate of older workers),
public health (life expectancy and healthy life years), climate change and energy (greenhouse
gas emissions, consumption of renewables), sustainable transportation (energy consumption of
transport relative to GDP), natural resources (abundance of common birds, conservation of fish
stocks), global partnership (official development assistance), and good governance (no indica-
tor) [7]. Common metrics for LCA tend to concentrate on environmental impacts. They include
global warming, stratospheric ozone depletion, acidification, eutrophication, photochemical
smog, terrestrial toxicity, aquatic toxicity, human health, resource depletion, land use, and water
use [8]. Sustainability consequently comprises numerous metrics, which can have interrelated
and inverse relationships. To illustrate the process of defining sustainability goals, one metric is
examined in detail: greenhouse gas emissions.
Contemporary environmental targets predominately focus on global climate change metrics

because climate change is currently considered to be the most important environmental issue
with severe implications and time-sensitive mitigation and adaptation strategies. Scientific
research substantiating global climate change and recommendations for mitigation and adapta-
tion have been put forth by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Based on
their research, the IPCC outlines six ranges of global changes based on when CO2 and CO2-
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1405.indd 70 11/08/15 6:55 PM

5.2 LIFE-CYCLE ASSESSMENT 71
equivalent concentration levels are stabilized. For each range of stabilization, the change in
global CO2 emission in 2050 (as a percent of 2000 emissions), global average sea level rise, and
global average temperature increase are presented (see Table 5.1) [9].
According to the IPCC, the lowest feasible CO2 concentration level at stabilization (Category I)
represents a CO2 equivalent level of 445 to 490 ppm with CO2 emissions peaking between 2000
and 2015. This corresponds to global CO2 emissions in 2050, which are −50 to −85% of 2000
emissions, an average temperature change of 2.0 to 2.4°C, and an average sea rise of 0.4 to 1.4
m [9]. These findings gave way to the Kyoto Protocol [10], an international treaty by numerous
governments to mitigate climate change as a part of sustainable development.
Consequently, the scientific results and recommendations of the IPCC form the basis for a
majority of environmental goals set by governmental, non-governmental, and private organiza-
tions. For example, in keeping with the recommendations of the IPCC, the European Union is
aiming to reduce CO2 emissions by 80 to 95% (based on 1990 emissions) by 2050 [11].
These goals also help organizations specifically concerned with the construction industry (e.g.,
Architecture 2030 [12]) to define environmental objectives by concentrating on climate change
indicators. The 2030 Challenge sets forth the goal of reducing energy use by 60% for all new
buildings and aims for carbon neutral buildings by 2030 [12].
The above is an example of the motivation for one environmental goal: climate change miti-
gation. After defining environmental objectives, it is then crucial to determine whether these
objectives are being met based on the chosen metrics and measurement tools. Choosing proper
metrics and tools is greatly aided by LCA—the most widely used methodology and framework
for environmental assessment. The following section examines LCA in detail.
5.2 Life-cycle assessment

Which structural material, concrete or steel, is better for the environment? Producing concrete
requires extensive energy to convert limestone to clinker. Steel structures, on the other hand,
often lack thermal mass, thereby possibly losing an opportunity to reduce the operational energy
requirements of the building. The materials also differ in their end-of-life phase. Steel can be
recycled to create a similar quality material, whereas concrete can only be down-cycled (a pro-
cess whereby after recycling the final material is of lower quality or value than the initial input)
to a material commonly used as sub-base aggregate. What might first appear to be a simple
question is in fact extremely complex and requires advanced analysis tools to determine a quan-
titative and conclusive answer.
To help with this challenge, many in the design industry have turned to LCA Life-cycle assess-
ment is a methodology and framework to determine “the environmental aspects and potential
impacts throughout a product’s life (i.e., cradle-to-grave) from raw material acquisition through
production, use, and disposal” (see Fig. 5.1) [13].
International standards for LCAs are outlined by the International Organization for Standard-
ization in ISO 14040, principles and framework, and ISO 14044, requirements and guidelines
[13,14]. These standards cover the four phases of an LCA: goal and scope definition, inventory
analysis, impact assessment, and interpretation [13,14] (see Fig. 5.2).
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1405.indd 71 11/08/15 6:55 PM

72
sed_1405.indd 72
BackBack
to table
to table
Category CO2 concen- CO2-equivalent Peaking Change in Global average tem- Global average Number
tration at concentration year global CO2 perature increase sea level rise of assessed
contents
ofofcontents
stabilization at stabilization for CO2 emissions in above pre-industrial above pre- scenarios
(2005 = 379 including GHGs emission 2050 (percent at equilibrium, using industrial at
ppm) and aerosols (2005 (year) of 2000 “best estimate” cli- equilibrium
(ppm) = 375 ppm) emissions) mate sensitivity (°C) from thermal
(ppm) (%) expansion only
(m)
I 350–400 445–490 2000–2015 –85 to –50 2.0–2.4 0.4–1.4 6
II 400–440 490–535 2000–2020 –60 to –30 2.4–2.8 0.5–1.7 18
III 440–485 535–590 2010–2030 –30 to +5 2.8–3.2 0.6–1.9 21
IV 485–570 590–710 2020–2060 +10 to +60 3.2–4.0 0.6–2.4 118
V 570–660 710–855 2050–2080 +25 to +85 4.0–4.9 0.8–2.9 9
VI 660–790 855–1130 2060–2090 +90 to +140 4.9–6.1 1.0–3.7 5
Table 5.1. Long-term perspective for CO2 stabilization levels [9]
CHAPTER 5. MEASURING SUSTAINABILITY AND LIFE-CYCLE ASSESSMENT
11/08/15 6:55 PM
Recycling/
Reuse/
Disposal
Resource extraction
Demolition
Life cycle of
building
products Manufacturing
Occupancy/
Maintenance
On-site
construction
Fig. 5.1: Diagram of the life-cycle assessment process for building products. Graphic courtesy
of Athena Sustainable Materials Institute
The objective of the ISO 14040 is to ensure con-

sistency, transparency, and robustness in the imple- Life cycle assessment framework
mentation of an LCA. As per the ISO, there are four
main phases of an LCA. The first phase, defining Goal and scope
the goal and scope, is foundational for carrying definition
out the next three phases. In the second phase, the
inventory analysis defines the process flows within
the system and compiles the inputs (resources) and
outputs (emissions) to and from the environment Inventory
over its life-cycle into an inventory. Interpretation
analysis
In the impact assessment, one relates the inventory

items to environmental impact categories, called
“classification,” and applies a set of equivalency
Impact
factors to arrive at the metrics of the chosen set of
assessment
impact categories, called “characterization.” The
general equation for characterization is:
Impact = Σ (characterization factor × inventory Fig. 5.2: Four main phases of a life-
item) cycle assessment [13]
Figure 5.3 illustrates this relationship between
inventory data and impact categories.
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1405.indd 73 11/08/15 6:55 PM

Resource use Environmental

Process
and emissions impacts
Abiotic depletion
Coal use
(fossil fuels)
Carbon Global warming

1
dioxide potential
25
Methane Summer smog

Coal fired
electricity
Sulfur dioxide 1.2 Acidification
0.5
Nitrogen dioxide Eutrophication
Other Other
emissions... impacts...
Fig. 5.3: Illustration of the relationship between inventory data and impact categories for coal
fired electricity. The numbers represent the different weights of the emission on the impact
category [15]
Looking specifically at global warming potential (GWP), the equation that relates GWP to the
inventory items of carbon dioxide (CO2) and methane (CH4) is:
GWP = 1 × CO2 + 25 × CH4 + …

where CO2 and CH4 are in kg and GWP is in units of kg CO2 equivalent. Similarly, for acidifica-
tion potential (AP), the equation is:
AP = 1.2 × SO2 + 0.5 × NO2 + …

where SO2 and NO2 are in kg and AP is in units of moles of H+ equivalents.
The figure also demonstrates how one inventory item can contribute to more than one impact
factor. For instance, while methane relates to GWP, it is also the base unit for smog potential. It
should also be noted that carbon dioxide and methane, and sulphur dioxide and nitrogen diox-
ide, are not the only emissions that contribute to GWP and AP, respectively. There are numerous
others that are accounted for in the impact characterization equations. The factors for GWP are
typically based on the International Panel for Climate Change recommendations. Many other
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1405.indd 74 11/08/15 6:55 PM

inventory items under “other emissions” relate to the impact categories shown, while the inven-
tory items shown also relate to “other impacts.”
If performing a comparison between options, one could stop at the impact categories and move
to interpretation, where data quality and sensitivity of results to the various assumptions and
uncertainty are explored. Alternately, additional steps of normalization and weighting could be
applied to further the impact assessment and refine the final comparison. With normalization
and weighting, however, certain points of view are introduced that are not always appropriate
for the decision at hand. Thus, many LCA practitioners encourage presenting results according
to the raw impact category metrics.
5.2.1 Metrics
The metrics of an LCA depend on the impact categories one chooses for reporting LCA results.
The most common impact categories, relevant metrics (in parenthesis), and what they mean are
provided below [15]:
• Global warming potential (kg CO2 equivalent)—increase in the temperature of the Earth’s
atmosphere and oceans [8]
• Acidification (moles of H+ equivalent)—increase in acidity of oceans, freshwater, and soil,
thus affecting aquatic life [8]
• Eutrophication (kg N or PO4 equivalent)—excess nutrients in water bodies leading to oxy-
gen depletion and algae growth, which adversely affect aquatic life [8]
• Stratospheric ozone depletion (kg CFC-11 equivalent)—reduction of the ozone layer that
protects against UV rays [8]
• Photochemical ozone creation (kg NOx or C2H6 equivalent)—air pollution affecting human
health [8]
Other indicators commonly provided in an LCA include: renewable and non-renewable primary
energy, water consumption, waste disposal, toxicity to ecosystems and humans, resource deple-
tion (covering various minerals, scarce chemical elements), and radioactivity [15]. The set of
categories most used in the USA is defined by EPA (US Environmental Protection Agency);
TRACI (Tool for the Reduction and Assessment of Chemical and Other Environmental Impacts)
EPA’s TRACI methodology and include: the five listed above, plus three human health indi-
cators: air pollutants (i.e., particulate matter), cancer and non-cancer, and eco-toxicity [16].
Designers should be aware that other impact categories and classification systems are more
popular in other countries.
5.2.2 Methodology
There are three approaches to LCAs (i.e., process-based, economic input–output-based, and
hybrid-based [17]) that can be selected to fit the goals and resources of the LCA. Each approach
has advantages and disadvantages and can yield very different results.
Process-based
The process-based LCA was developed by the Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chem-
istry and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency using the concept of material and energy
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1405.indd 75 11/08/15 6:55 PM

balances for specific processes [17]. While process-based LCAs are extremely useful in deter-
mining the environmental performance of a product or process, there are also several challenges
to this methodology. The first step in the process requires that the scope, or boundary, of the
LCA be defined. This implicitly creates an omission error (i.e., truncation error) in the analysis
as specific processes are not included in the final study. At the same time, the larger criticism
of process-based LCA is that it is extremely time-consuming and financially expensive [17].
The most popular set of tools that uses process-based LCA for North America comes from the
Athena Sustainable Materials Institute.
Economic input–output
In order to address the challenges of process-based LCA, an alternative method, economic

input–output LCA, was developed [17]. Economic input–output (EIO) LCA provides a more
general analysis and is based upon the sectors of the economy as defined by economic input–
output tables [17]. Thus, this methodology allows for a relatively quick and inexpensive analysis
of basic LCA questions and eliminates the truncation error. A challenge for the EIO LCAs is
the requirement for accurate and up-to-date economic input–output tables. Moreover, as the
methodology is based on sectors of the economy, comparisons within sector groups (e.g., two
steel plants, or differentiating between gypsum and cement) are likely unfeasible. A free and
publicly available tool is the EIO–LCA developed by the Green Design Institute of Carnegie
Mellon University [18].
Hybrid
The third methodology, a hybrid LCA, melds process-based and EIO LCAs together to provide
process-specific results (e.g., the two steel plants or difference between cement and gypsum)
in a timely and inexpensive manner, while minimizing the truncation error. The specific use of
one methodology over the other depends on the resources (i.e., finance, time, in addition to the
quality and quantity of the process and economic data) on hand and the specific question to be
answered. In the end, the multiple methods offer a wide range of techniques to arrive at quan-
titative and comparable environment performance results. In the USA, the only published data
set produced by the hybrid method is CEDA® Comprehensive Environmental Data Archive.
5.2.3 Life-cycle inventory databases

Analyzing structural design choices based on environmental criteria is facilitated through LCA,
which in turn necessitates access to high-quality and verifiable data sources. In lieu of per-
forming a full LCA (i.e., defining the goal and scope, performing a life-cycle inventory (LCI),
assessing the impacts (LCIA), and interpreting the results), conducting an LCI and determining
the inherent margins of error alone is often sufficient in making design decisions. Regardless of
whether a full LCA or only an LCI analysis is completed, LCI data for materials and processes
are required. The numerous public and private LCI databases are summarized below to aid the
readers in conducting their own review of different structural choices based on environmental
performance.
One of the most popular inventories for construction materials utilized by designers world-
wide is the Inventory of Carbon and Energy (ICE) created by the University of Bath and made
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1405.indd 76 11/08/15 6:55 PM

5.3 LIFE-CYCLE ASSESSMENT CASE STUDIES OF STRUCTURES 77
available through BSRIA [19]. The ICE summarizes survey findings of embodied energy and
carbon emission factors across industry and academic literature for more than 200 construction
materials. In general, embodied energy factors are similar across countries, but emission factors
can vary if the fuel profile of a given region is different from that in the UK. In the USA, the
federal government has created a publicly available LCI database to assist LCA practitioners
[20]. The U.S. Life Cycle Inventory Database focuses on providing transparent and consistent
LCI data. Support for the database is provided by the federal government, private companies,
and professional organizations [20]. In Europe, the European Commission Joint Research Cen-
tre offers the ELCD core database, another LCI database [21]. In addition, the Federal Republic
of Germany has created a database of 650 different building materials and construction and
transportation processes [22]. The United Nations Environment Programme has also created a
useful summary of global LCI data resources [23].
5.2.4 Software tools

LCA software tools allow users to utilize a variety of databases to perform complex environ-
mental analysis of products, systems, or processes. The array of tools in existence falls on a
spectrum of intended use, ease of use, allowance for customization, and cost among many other
characteristics.
On the one hand, there are tools that aim to reduce the computation and research efforts required
in performing an LCA. They essentially perform mini-LCAs for common materials, assem-
blies, or products used in buildings and have made numerous assumptions to simplify the LCA
process for non-LCA professionals. These include Building for Environmental and Economic
Sustainability (BEES) [24] and Athena Sustainable Materials Institute’s Impact Estimator—a
simplified spreadsheet version of EcoCalculator [25]. These are free and publicly available LCA
tools created especially for design practitioners. Both tools also currently use process-based
LCA (although BEES is shifting to a hybrid LCA model) and focus heavily on structural mate-
rials. Another free resource is the economic input–output tool by the Green Design Institute at
Carnegie Mellon University [18].
In contrast, privately developed LCA software packages are numerous and include GaBi [26],
LEGEP [27], SimaPro [28], and Umberto [29]. These allow for more customization, as they
are meant for use by LCA practitioners working with intimate knowledge of a product supply
chain and manufacturing process. If the tools specific for buildings lack particular materials or
products, a custom material or product would have to be modelled to obtain usable LCA data.
These software packages can also be costly.
Further developments in LCA software are heavily focused on embedding LCA information
directly into building information modelling (BIM), thereby integrating LCA information more
intimately into the building design process. In addition, openLCA is a freely available LCA soft-
ware, which allows users to conduct an LCA using either private or public LCI databases [30].
5.3 Life-cycle assessment case studies of structures

Substantial research has been published based on LCAs, which can provide interesting
insights into the design of environmentally optimized structural systems. This section outlines
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1405.indd 77 11/08/15 6:55 PM

research, case studies, and findings of interest to structural engineers. As stated earlier, LCA is
a measurement tool and, as such, case studies using LCA offer quantified answers to questions
commonly asked by structural engineers. The information presented acts as a guide for prelimi-
nary decisions based on LCA and can be used as a first reference by practicing engineers (see
Table 5.2).
What is the relative effectiveness of different structural design strategies?
An LCA was performed to determine the potential of structural design strategies to minimize
greenhouse gas emissions [31]. The five design strategies examined were design for materials
(i.e., using environmentally preferred materials), design for recycling (i.e., end-of-life recycling
for the materials), design for efficiency (i.e., maximizing the efficiency of the structural system
to the highest degree possible), design for energy (i.e., minimizing operational energy use), and
design for adaptability (i.e., providing a structural system with redundancy to accommodate
future uses). The LCA results showed that maximizing the thermal mass of the structural sys-
tem (i.e., design for energy) offered the largest possible greenhouse gas reductions: 8% savings
including both operational and embodied emissions. Focusing solely on embodied emission,
design for materials showed the most dramatic emission reductions of 44% for concrete and
41% for steel. However, for steel, this optimal value relies on reuse and not traditional recycling,
which is not a readily available practice. Thus, designing for materials using high percentages
of complementary cementitious materials (CCM) in the concrete mix was found to be the best
structural strategy for reducing greenhouse gas emissions [31].
Reinforcing the importance of high CCM (i.e., low cement) concrete mixes, Ref. [32] reports
on a study conducted on behalf of the Concrete Centre in the UK. The study compared the
embodied carbon of eight different steel and concrete structural systems for three different
building types: office, hospital, and school. The analysis found that there was a greater differ-
ence between embodied carbon of building results between using high cement and low cement
concretes than between whether the structural system was of concrete or steel. The cradle-to-
gate embodied carbon of any system could be made lower or higher than another simply by
specifying higher or lower cement in the concrete. Furthermore, on average 50% of the embod-
ied carbon came from the structural elements, and the margin of difference that is within the
control of the structural engineer was found to be as great as the margin due to different carbon
calculation methodologies. These last two results convey the importance of the decisions made
by the structural engineer in influencing the cradle-to-gate carbon emissions of the most com-
mon commercial building types [32].
Which is better: steel- or concrete-framed structure?
The life-cycle impacts of steel- and concrete-framed structures were compared in Ref. [33].
The authors found that during the construction phase, the concrete-framed structure had higher
energy use, CO2, CO, NO2, particulate matter, SO2, and hydrocarbon emissions; whereas the
steel-framed structure had higher emissions of heavy metals (Cr, Ni, Mn) and volatile organic
compounds [33]. The research found that accounting for the entire life cycle of the two build-
ings (i.e., production, construction, operation, and end-of-life) had similar energy use and
emissions [33].
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1405.indd 78 11/08/15 6:55 PM

Source Finding 1 Finding 2 Finding 3

Anderson Design for energy offers Using CCMs There are numerous
and Silman, the largest GHG (green- (complementary different design strate-
2009 [31] house gas) savings when cementitious materials) gies for the structural
including operational offers the largest GHG engineer to reduce
and embodied energy savings when considering GHG emissions
embodied energy only
Kaethner There is a greater dif- The margin of difference Approximately 50%
and Buckley, ference between the that is within the control of the embodied
2010 [32] embodied carbon in of the structural engineer carbon came from the
using high cement and is as great as the margin structural elements
low cement concretes due to different carbon
than between whether calculation methodolo-
the structural system was gies
concrete or steel
Guggemos During construction, During construction, Accounting for all
and Horvath, concrete-framed struc- steel-framed structures phases of a building
2005 [33] tures have higher energy have higher emissions from manufacturing to
use, CO2, CO, NO2, par- of heavy metals (Cr, Ni, end-of-life, concrete-
ticulate matter, SO2, and Mn) and volatile organic and steel-framed
hydrocarbon emissions compounds buildings had similar
energy use and emis-
sions
Masanet Reinforced concrete and Changes in climate zones –
et al., 2012 structural steel buildings and technological options
[34] require similar amounts in material pathways
of energy and result in could switch the superior
similar levels of CO2 option
emissions when assessed
over the full building
life-cycle
Fernandez, Using the Alcorn coeffi- Using the GaBi coeffi- For embodied energy,
2008 [35] cients, the steel building cients, the steel building the Alcorn results
embodies the equivalent embodies the equivalent average 32% higher
of 27 years of operat- of 19 years of operating than the GaBi results,
ing energy consumption energy consumption and for the embodied CO2,
and 12 years of operat- 14 years of operating the Alcorn results
ing CO2 emissions The CO2 emissions, while the average 62% lower
timber building embod- timber building embodies than the GaBi results,
ies the equivalent of the equivalent of 8 years major differences in
11 years of operating of operating energy con- the results are due to
energy consumption and sumption and 8 years of different approaches
stores the equivalent of operating CO2 emissions to CO2 sequestration
3.6 years of operating in timber materials
CO2 emissions
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1405.indd 79 11/08/15 6:55 PM


Marceau and The ICF house outper- Most of the environ- Most of the environ-
VanGeem, formed the wood-framed mental load is from the mental impacts from
2008 [36] house due to a higher household use of natural construction materials
R-value of the insulation gas and electricity during are due to aluminum
and thermal mass of the the lifetime of the houses, siding, ceramic tiles,
concrete which are primarily a paint, roof shingles,
function of climate and polystyrene insulation,
occupant behavior cement-based materi-
als, steel, and cast iron
Kofoworola The operational phase For the embodied im- –
and accounts for 52% of glo- pacts, concrete and steel
Gheewala, bal warming potential, were responsible for 74
2009 [37] 71% of photo-oxidant and 24% of global warm-
potential, and 66% of to- ing potential, 30 and 41%
tal acidification potential of photo-oxidant forma-
tion potential, and 42
and 37% of acidification
potential, respectively
Wu et al., The use-phase of the For embodied impacts, –
2012 [38] building accounted for concrete and steel consume
86% of energy consump- the most energy at 52% and
tion and 81% of CO2 38%, respectively
emissions
Stephan Embodied energy can Low (operational) energy It is important to
et al., 2012 be up to 59% of total homes (e.g., passive homes) include the recurrent
[39] energy; compared to shift energy use from the embodied energy for
operational energy at operational phase to the maintenance and use
only 41% embodied phase a comprehensive LCA
tool
Junnila The proportion of en- For office buildings in The European
et al., 2006 ergy used and emissions the USA and Europe, building has lower
[40] for each phase of the the use-phase dominates energy demands (a
building is comparable energy demand (70%) third), CO2 emissions
between the USA and and emissions (a half), and NOx
Europe emissions (a third)
Siantonas Differences in the as- Both case studies dem- –
and sumptions, scope, and onstrate that as GHG
Fieldson, boundaries of two case emissions are reduced by
2008 [41] studies are highlighted progression towards zero
to demonstrate sensitiv- carbon operation, emis-
ity in results and that, sions embodied in the
if taken out of context, materials and processes
comparisons between of the construction supply
studies can be unfair chain become increas-
ingly important
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1405.indd 80 11/08/15 6:55 PM


Comber Includes the effect of Pairs cost of structural A more robust struc-
et al., 2010 seismic systems within and non-structural ele- tural system that limits
[42] active earthquake loca- ments with environmental damage in non-struc-
tions in order to achieve impacts using EIO–LCA tural elements can
a more accurate sense of save approximately
a building’s full life- 18%–25% over a 50-
cycle impacts year lifespan
Yang, 2011 Describes three case Third case study showed Second case study
[43] studies using LCA that based on a discount- demonstrated a greater
to evaluate structural ing methodology, the significance in reduc-
systems for different greater amount of mate- ing cement within the
purposes: (1) avoided rial needed for a decon- concrete mix than in
impacts, (2) comparing structable floor system choosing any par-
conventional structural counteracted all reuse ticular steel/concrete
systems, and (3) design benefits system—same study
for deconstruction as [32].
Table 5.2. Significant LCA results for structural engineers
A more recent study commissioned by the Portland Cement Association, confirms this finding
[34]. The difference between steel and concrete options for the same building was not statisti-
cally significant. Meanwhile, the study found that changes in climate zones and technological
options in material pathways could switch the superior option, meaning that the material sup-
ply chain and climate-appropriateness of the design matter most. For structural engineers, this
means that specifying more environmentally friendly options for how a material is manufac-
tured and delivered, and designing a more climate-responsive system, is more influential than
choosing between steel and concrete [34].
Is wood always better than steel or concrete?
A study in New Zealand compared four different types of construction for the same six-storey
office building [35]. The first two types of construction were typical timber and a more inten-
sive use of timber, while the third and fourth were steel and concrete construction, respectively.
Initially, this investigation found that the building with greatest use of timber had a net negative
GWP and was far less than the steel and concrete options, and even the traditional timber option.
Taking the analysis a step further, the study used a different set of GWP factors that did not
include the carbon sequestration that occurs during tree growth, since this accounting method is
controversial. The result was that the timber options were still less than concrete and steel, but
were not nearly so different, and the intensive use of timber option was no longer net negative
for GWP [35].
At the other extreme, a more recent study compared a two-story, wood-framed, single-family
home to one built using insulated concrete forms (ICF) [36]. It found that over the total life
cycle, the ICF home used less energy. Most of the environmental load was from the household
use of natural gas and electricity during the lifespan of the homes, primarily a function of cli-
mate and occupant behavior. Secondary to the operational energy, the environmental impacts
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1405.indd 81 11/08/15 6:55 PM

from construction materials were mostly due to aluminum siding, ceramic tiles, paint, roof
shingles, polystyrene insulation, cement-based materials, steel, and cast iron [36].
Although the two different studies give mixed results, together they show how drawing differ-
ent boundaries in the LCA study leads to different results. The first investigation utilized LCIs
that used different boundaries on the life-cycle of the wood products. And while the first only
considered cradle-to-gate, the second analysis extended the life-cycle study of the building to
include the operational phase. Together, the studies also offer an overarching message that mate-
rials affect the total life-cycle impacts on two counts: (a) their embodied impacts and (b) their
participation in the energy performance of the building. It should be noted that, as with evalu-
ating any research results, the stated conclusions should take into account any bias that might
come from the researchers or the project sponsors.
Which life cycle has the greatest environmental impacts?
Researchers conducted an LCA of an office building in Thailand and found that the operational
phase of the building accounted for 52% of global warming potential, 71% of photo-oxidant
potential, and 66% of total acidification potential [37]. The report also showed that for the
embodied impacts, concrete and steel were responsible for 74 and 24% of global warming poten-
tial, 30 and 41% of photo-oxidant formation potential, and 42 and 37% of acidification potential,
respectively [37]. Another study of an office building, this time in China, illustrated that the use-
phase of the building accounted for 86% of energy consumption and 81% of CO2 emissions; the
building material production was the second largest source of energy consumption at 12% [38].
However, the latest research revises these earlier results and shows that embodied energy can
dominate operational energy (59% compared to 41%) [39]. Furthermore, the tendency to focus
on low operational energy buildings was shown to shift energy from the operational phase to the
embodied phase owing to increase in materials needed in the construction of low operational
energy buildings [39]. These findings show the importance of accounting recurrent embodied
materials (i.e., maintenance and replacement) and using a comprehensive LCA to remove trunca-
tion errors [39]. While studies traditionally found the operational phase to dominate environmen-
tal impacts, recent studies utilizing comprehensive input–output-based LCA and accounting for
replacement of materials and components show the increasing importance of embodied impacts.
Taking the life-cycle view a step further, a tool called EnVISA estimates the anticipated embod-
ied carbon (and cost) from probable seismic losses. The conclusions show that a more robust
structural system can provide approximately 18 to 25% savings in embodied carbon incurred
from repairs and replacements due to seismic damage when using a traditional system designed
to minimum code requirements. The results show how much additional embodied carbon the
probable damage of natural hazards such as earthquakes can incur, when it is specifically
accounted for, and offers a methodology for the accounting. It also showed how protective
systems designed to performance levels higher than code requirements can significantly limit
damage to the non-structural building elements over a 50-year lifespan [42].
What factors affect environmental impacts the most?
As highlighted above, climate and occupant behavior play the leading role in total environmen-
tal impacts. On top of this, some other studies have found that location, use type, and how the
LCA is conducted are major factors of influence.
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1405.indd 82 11/08/15 6:55 PM

An LCA was conducted for office buildings in the USA and Europe [40]. The research found
that for each location, the proportion of emissions for each building phase was similar. The use-
phase of the building resulted in 70% of the energy consumption (based on a 50-year lifespan)
and dominated all emissions aside from PM10 emissions [40]. The European building was found
to use a third of the energy, emit half the CO2, and one-third of the NOx of the US building,
illustrating the overall differences among the office buildings [40]. The authors found that the
differences result in part from the varying energy mixes used for electricity production and the
use of combined heat and power production in the European building [40].
A study of two different warehouse buildings showed that differences in the assumptions, scope,
and boundaries can lead to drastically different results. The two case studies demonstrate sen-
sitivity in results to these parameters and how comparisons between studies can be unfair, if
taken out of context. Both case studies demonstrate emissions embodied in the materials, and
processes of the construction supply chain are especially significant for buildings with low oper-
ational demands [41].
How much of total embodied comes from structure?
In the aforementioned study of an office building in China, of the materials used, concrete and
steel consume the most energy at 52 and 38%, respectively [38]. The previously mentioned
investigation arrived at a similar range of 45 to 60% for the three buildings studied, as an aver-
age of the different structural systems studied [32]. Together, these studies illustrate the impor-
tance of the structural materials within the embodied impacts of a building.
Is there a benefit in considering design for deconstruction as part of structural design strategy?
A methodology to account for design for deconstruction within embodied carbon calculations
is proposed in Ref. [43]. The study employed a discounting methodology used by World Steel
that assumes a rate of recovery and recyclability of the materials through future life-cycles. In
this case, reuse factors were substituted for recycling, wherever applicable. The analysis results
showed that the greater amount of material needed for a deconstructable precast concrete slab
over a steel beam system did not generate significant embodied carbon savings over conven-
tional composite systems. The lesson learned was that any sacrifices in material efficiency from
composite systems should be evaluated carefully when aiming to design for deconstruction, so
as not to sacrifice one benefit for another.
5.3.1 Comparing case studies

In attempting to compare results across LCA studies, encountering conflicting conclusions can
be common. This is because the ISO 14040/14044 standards allow a great amount of flexibility
in the choices one can make in conducting an LCA, as long as they are appropriate to the goal
and scope initially set out as required. Therefore, when comparing LCA case studies, it helps to
gauge the parameters involved in the LCA. Within the scope, one must define the type, extent,
impact categories, and indicators. Type refers to whether it is a comparative study or absolute.
Extent refers to which of the life-cycle phases will be included (e.g., cradle-to-gate, or to site,
or to grave). Impact categories refer to the metrics discussed above, and indicators mean, which
unit of measurement will be used for those impacts, as different classification systems may have
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1405.indd 83 11/08/15 6:55 PM

different characterization methods and equivalent units. Additionally, as the functional unit,
data sources, methodology, and system boundaries for the inventory flow analysis must all be
decided within the process of performing an LCA, one can use these to differentiate between
case studies. This is particularly helpful for figuring out if a difference in results between seem-
ingly comparable case studies is due to variations in methodology or due to real differences in
the environmental burden incurred by the supply chain processes themselves.
5.3.2 Limitations of life-cycle assessment

Despite the many insights offered by LCA-based evaluations, the methodology has limita-
tions. Whether process-based, input-output-based, or hybrid-based, the data collected come
from reporting by industrial processes, and the environmental impacts are based on scientific
models. Thus, the results tend to be limited to aggregations of what is reported by representative
industry practices, and what is well understood by the scientific community. This means that
environmental effects that do not have robust models, such as biodiversity, land use, scarcity of
resources, and toxicity, are consequentially less robust. Although there has been some attempt
at models for these metrics, they are not well agreed upon within the LCA and environmental
science community, and thus left out of most categorization systems.
As an example, currently accepted LCA metrics do not differentiate well between forest
management practices because the models and metrics of greatest concern are not widely
accepted, and the data are collected across such a large region—forests with differing types
of management practices are all aggregated. Similarly, human health effects of products in
use are not covered by the LCA methodology because the variety of exposure conditions are
too numerous: one cannot possibly model a representative scenario for the different ways a
building product could be installed and an occupant could interact with that product. Thus, it
is necessary to supplement LCA with other evaluation methods and tools, as is often found in
green design rating systems.
5.4 Green design rating systems

In contrast to LCA, there are a variety of more qualitative forms of assessment that benchmark
projects against best practice. These types of sustainability evaluations within the construction
industry are increasingly found in green design rating systems. These systems offer a framework
to evaluate built structures based on numerous environmental, social, and economic criteria, not
all of which are quantitative. Balancing the variety of metrics and goals across the three spectra
requires a departure from metrics solely used in LCAs. Incorporating issues such as quality
of life presents particular measurement challenges. In spite of the quantification challenges of
rating systems, it is crucial for structural engineers to understand the overarching objectives,
possible conflicts, and their own role in such systems.
5.4.1 Buildings
Green building rating systems have proliferated globally since the formation of the World
Green Building Council in 1999 [44]. In general, green building rating systems encourage
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1405.indd 84 11/08/15 6:55 PM

5.4 GREEN DESIGN RATING SYSTEMS 85
sustainable building practices through the use of market forces. The typical voluntary nature of
these systems ensures that requirements are realistically and economically feasible, while also
continually requiring improvements to help advance sustainable practices and objectives. There
are numerous green building rating systems that tend to be country specific (e.g., CASBEE,
Japan; BREEAM, U.K.; GreenStar, Australia/New Zealand; LEED, North America; DGNB,
Germany).
This section will focus on LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) and DGBN
(German Sustainable Building Council) as they represent the spectrum of LCA integration
within rating systems. LEED does not currently require LCA and is focusing on requirements
that will transition the construction industry to LCA in the long-term. On the other hand, DGNB
has already incorporated LCA into their system. This section illustrates common sustainability
themes and issues associated with rating systems and buildings and how they affect structural
engineers.
The predominant rating system used globally is the LEED system, and thus worth some exami-
nation in how it measures sustainability of structures. Created by the United States Green Build-
ing Council, LEED (LEED for New Construction, Version 3, 2009) is currently (LEED NC
2009/v3) adopted in many countries outside the USA and has versions for different building
types. The points-based system is built upon five performance areas: sustainable sites, water
efficiency, energy and atmosphere, materials and resources, and environmental quality [45].
The categories are then subdivided further into credits with each category that have different
total weighting and potential scores. The weight of the categories and the credits are based on
an important weighting scheme. The credits of main concern for structural engineers are found
in the materials and resources (MR) category, which deal with building reuse (MR Credit 1),
construction waste management (MR Credit 2), material reuse (MR Credit 3), recycled content
(MR Credit 4), regional materials (MR Credit 5), rapidly renewable materials (MR Credit 6),
and certified wood (MR Credit 7). The structural engineer’s specification of supplementary
cementitious materials (e.g., fly ash, ground granulated blast furnace slag) is directly captured in
MR Credit 4 – recycled content [45]. Other structural issues affecting the overall sustainability
are indirectly captured in the rating system (e.g., MR Credit 1, building reuse).
A significant change from current and past versions of LEED to LEEDv4 is the move towards
LCA in the Materials and Resources credits. LCA underpins two new proposed credits: “Build-
ing Life-Cycle Impact Reduction, Option 4: Whole Building Life Cycle Assessment” (MRc1)
and “Building Product Disclosure and Optimization – Environmental Product Declarations”
(MRc2). The first confers improvement of the proposed design compared to a reference design,
when measured on particular LCA metrics, and only requires embodied impacts (operational is
covered by the energy performance credits). The second confers the production of Environmen-
tal Product Declarations (EPDs) for a given number of building products, including recognition
of EPDs for structural products. Together, these account for up to five points in the LEED scor-
ing system, compared to the one point attainable from recycled content and regional materi-
als—the attributes in the current system that LCA essentially supplants. These attributes now
appear in the proposed “Building and Product Disclosure and Optimization – Sourcing of Raw
Materials” (MRc3) and the points available have been reduced significantly from four points in
current system [46]. Moreover, these credits have moved from construction-phase credits, under
the responsibility of the general contractor, to design-phase credits, under the responsibility of
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1405.indd 85 11/08/15 6:55 PM

the design team. Numerous LCA case studies have shown that structure accounts for a signifi-
cant portion of the embodied environmental impacts; the structural engineer may now have a
much greater role to play in the design team for projects pursuing LEED certification. However,
most of the proposed LEEDv4 limits structural materials in credit calculations to 30%, thereby
directly impacting the role of the structural engineer in influencing the final score of the rating
system.
In contrast to LEED, the German Sustainable Building Council (DGNB) employs LCA at its
core. Similar to LEED, the DGNB system has six criteria areas as follows: ecological quality,
economical quality, social and cultural quality, technical quality, process quality, and location
quality [47]. The criteria groups are awarded a weighting of 22.5, 22.5, 22.5, 22.5 and 10.0%
respectively, with location quality residing outside the final evaluation. A unique aspect of
the DGNB system is that it requires LCA in accordance with ISO 14040 and 14044 utiliz-
ing the German Ökobau.dat LCI database. Life-cycle aspects of the structure are captured
through the evaluation criteria of greenhouse gas potential, ozone depletion potential, ozone
formation potential, acidification potential, and fertilization potential during the production,
maintenance, deconstruction, and disposal of building. As found in a study by the Institute
of Structural Engineers on the relevance of structural engineering in rating systems, a sur-
vey respondent attested that “the structure does contribute largely to the LCA, because it is
mostly the largest building element by volume” and “alternatives can be assessed using the
LCA method” [15]. However, unlike LEED, the DGNB system is used almost exclusively in
Germany.
The LEED and DGNB systems show the evolution of LCA as a more integrated methodology
within green building practice.
5.4.2 Infrastructure and bridges

Bridges and infrastructure are also increasingly designed based on green rating systems. These
rating systems aim to meet sustainability objectives similar to green building rating systems
(i.e., the triple bottom line, which accounts for social, economic, and environmental objectives),
and should be understood by structural engineers working in these fields.
A few of the currently available bridge and infrastructure rating systems include the Insti-
tute for Sustainable Infrastructure Sustainable Infrastructure Rating System (Envision) [48],
Greenroads [6], CEEQUAL [49], and the IS Rating Tool from the Infrastructure Sustainability
Council of Australia [50]. The Institute for Sustainable Infrastructure’s Envision system is a
performance-based, scalable tool composed of five criteria groups including quality of life,
leadership, resource allocation, natural world and climate, and risk [48]. Greenroads, developed
by the University of Washington and CH2M Hill, is a rating system more specifically focused
on roadways and bridges [6]. Athena Institute’s Impact Estimator for Highways is a LCA–based
tool for the analysis of roadway material manufacturing, construction, and maintenance of road-
ways [51]. The Consortium on Green Design and Manufacturing at the University of California,
Berkeley, developed an LCA-based tool for pavement: PaLATE (Pavement Life-cycle Assess-
ment Tool for Environment and Economic Effects). For structural engineers in the field of infra-
structure and bridge design, there is an increasing requirement for fluency in sustainable design
parameters as illustrated through the numerous green rating systems.
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1405.indd 86 11/08/15 6:55 PM

5.5 EMERGING TRENDS 87
5.4.3 Cities and the urban scale

While the expansion of building, bridge, and infrastructure green rating systems is laudable, it
remains to be seen if object-specific (e.g., a single building) tools are capable of meeting global
sustainability objectives [52]. The refinement of rating systems to include life-cycle analysis, as
is the case with the DGNB, is a significant achievement in providing quantitative results for rating
systems. However, the challenge of achieving sustainable goals requires system-wide analysis.
The motivation for transition towards system-wide analysis can be illustrated through a simple
example. A common criterion of green building rating systems is the reduction of operational
energy use. Despite this improvement in the environmental performance of the single object
(i.e., the building), it is possible that this reduction is not compatible with larger sustainabil-
ity objectives (e.g., climate change stabilization [9]) if system-wide trends (e.g., increased
housing size per person) and system-wide effects (e.g., suburbanization) are not quantified.
For infrastructure, a similar case can be made for environmental improvements made to roads
and bridges for automobile use, while ignoring the larger issue of transitioning towards more
sustainable forms of transportation (e.g., walking, biking, mass transit). Consequently, system-
wide analysis is emerging as the next frontier in the refinement of rating systems to achieve
sustainability objectives.
Numerous frameworks for systems-based sustainable design already exist and will be reviewed
here to present a general overview. The Swiss Federal Institute of Technology in Zürich devel-
oped the 2000 Watt Society, which is a system-wide framework where all individuals in the
developed world meet their needs using only 2000 watts without lowering their standard of
living [53]. The 2000 watts are to cover all aspects of an individual’s life including living, work-
ing, transportation, infrastructure, and so on. Expanding upon single building rating systems,
the United States Green Building Council has developed the LEED Neighborhood Development
[54]. While this rating system expands upon LEED to include issues such as community con-
nections and transportations, it does not provide a single quantitative result such as the 2000
Watt Society. A major challenge in system-wide analysis is that many issues such as transporta-
tion modes available are beyond the control of the design team for a stand-alone project such
as a single new building. However, these issues must be addressed if sustainability, rather than
merely improving the environmental performance of an item, is to be achieved.
5.5 Emerging trends

Systems-based thinking requires that environmental improvements are correlated to sustain-
ability goals. As previously discussed, it is not sufficient to look at stand-alone items (i.e., one
residential building) without understanding the larger impacts and emerging trends that will
inevitably influence whether sustainability objectives can be met. In particular, trends in the
built environment are important as such developments may remove any operational efficiency
improvements being made.
A fundamental trend directly affecting sustainable design is the increase in home size. In the
USA, there was a 10.9 and 7.3% increase in square meters for average residential homes and
apartments, respectively, between 1993 and 2001 [3]. The U.S. Energy Information Administra-
tion (EIA) also predicts an increase in electricity production of 84% between 2008 and 2020
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1405.indd 87 11/08/15 6:55 PM

driven by increased energy demand in non-OECD countries [4]. Transportation is also expected
to play a critical role over the coming decades, and the U.S. EIA states that this sector will
increase demand for liquid fuel more than any other sector with an annual increase of 1.4%
in global transportation energy from 2008 to 2035 [4]. These emerging trends, and many oth-
ers, must be fully understood if environmental improvements to buildings and structures are to
achieve overarching goals.
5.6 Conclusion
Sustainability is a new design criterion and simultaneously an area of opportunity for structural
engineers. This chapter has outlined sustainability goals, LCA, case studies answering common
structural engineering questions, green design rating systems, and emerging trends in assessing
environmental performance of the built environment.
To date, sustainability in the built environment focused predominately on operational energy

use, and thus may appear to be of minor relevance to structural engineers. However, the trend
to conduct full system LCA reveals the increasing importance of engineers. As the operational
impacts decrease, the embodied impacts (e.g., from structural materials) increase as a percent-
age of total impacts. Thus, structural engineers are of increasing importance in achieving sus-
tainability goals.
This chapter illustrates that system-wide analysis throughout a product’s entire life-cycle is an
essential requirement to meet environmental objectives. Achieving sustainability goals requires
moving beyond simple assumptions and utilizing verified assessment methods. LCA has proven
itself as a robust, extensive, and usable methodology for evaluating environmental performance
across industries, and in particular, the construction sector. As LCA becomes an increasing part
of the design process for sustainable projects, structural engineers can capitalize on their ana-
lytical knowledge to use LCA to provide structures with the best environmental performance.
Sustainability offers structural engineers the unique opportunity to expand their influence, while
structural engineers can offer their analytical skills to continue improving sustainable design.
References
[1] United Nations. 1987. Our Common Future: The World Commission on Environment and
Development. Oxford University Press, Oxford, 374.
[2] American Society of Civil Engineers. 2006. Code of Ethics [Online]. Available at: http://
www.asce.org/code_of_ethics/ [accessed on March 31, 2015].
[3] U.S. Energy Informatin Agency. 2001 Residential Energy Consumption Survey: Square
Foot Measurements and Comparison [Online]. Available at: http://www.eia.gov/emeu/
recs/sqft-measure.html. [accessed on March 31, 2015].
[4] IEA. 2011. World Energy Outlook. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and
Development/International Energy Agency, Paris, France.
[5] Sartori , I., Hestnes, A.G. 2007. Energy use in the life cycle of conventional and low-energy
buildings: a review article. Energ. Build., 39(3): 249–257.
[6] Greenroads. Greenroads Rating System [Online]. Available at: http://www.greenroads.
org/ [accessed on March 31, 2015].
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1405.indd 88 11/08/15 6:55 PM

REFERENCES 89
[7] Bolla, V., Capek, A., Jung, D., Lock, G., Popova, M., Savova, I., Tronet, V. (Eds.) 2011.
Sustainable development in the European Union: 2011 monitoring report of the EU sus-
tainable development strategy, Luxembourg.
[8] Curran, M.A., 2006. Life Cycle Assessment: Principles and Practice. US Environmental
Protection Agency, Cincinnati, OH.
[9] Metz, B., Davidson, O.R., Bosch, P.R., Dave, R., Meyer, L.A. (eds.). 2007. Contribution
of Working Group III to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on
Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New
York, NY, USA, 851.
[10] United Nations. 1998. Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on
Climate Change. United Nations, New York, NY, USA.
[11] European Commission. 2011. A Roadmap for moving to a competitive low carbon econo-
my in 2050, Brussels.
[12] Architecture 2030. 2010. The 2030 Challenge [Online]. Available at: http://
architecture2030.org/2030_challenge/the_2030_challenge [accessed on March 31, 2015].
[13] ISO. 2006. ISO 14040 – Environmental management – Life cycle assessment – Principles
and framework. International Organization for Standardization, Geneva, Switzerland.
[14] ISO. 2006. ISO 14044 - Environmental management – Life cycle assessment – Requirements
and guidelines. International Organization for Standardization, Geneva, Switzerland.
[15] Anderson, J., Thornback, J. 2012. A guide to understanding the embodied impacts of
construction products. Construction Products Association, London.
[16] Bare, J. Tool for the reduction and assessment of chemical and other environmental
Impacts (TRACI). US Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati, OH, USA.
[17] Hendrickson, C.T., Lave, L.B., Matthews, H.S. 2006. Environmental Life Cycle Assess-
ment of goods and Services: An Input-Output Approach. Resources for the Future, Wash-
ington D.C., 262.
[18] Carnegie Mellon University Green Design Institute. Economic Input-Output Life Cy-
cle Assessment (EIO-LCA) [Online]. Available at: http://www.eiolca.net [accessed on
March 31, 2015].
[19] BSRIA. Embodied Carbon: The Inventory of Carbon and Energy [Online]. Available at:
https://www.bsria.co.uk/information-membership/bookshop/publication/embodied-car-
bon-the-inventory-of-carbon-and-energy-ice/ [accessed on March 31, 2015].
[20] United States Life Cycle Inventory Database. National Renewable Energy Laboratory
[Online]. Available at: http://www.nrel.gov/lci/ [accessed on March 31, 2015].
[21] European Commission – Joint research Centre. 2010. European reference life cycle
database – version II. European Commission, Directorate-General Joint Research Centre,
Institute for Environment and Sustainability (JRC-IES), European Platform on Life Cycle
Assessment (EPLCA), Brussels, Belgium.
[22] “Ökobau.dat. Bundesministerium für Verkehr, Bau und Stadtentwicklung [Online].
Available at: http://www.nachhaltigesbauen.de/baustoff-und-gebae [accessed on
March 31, 2015].
[23] Curran, M.A., Notten, P. 2006. Summary of Global Life Cycle Inventory Data Resources.
[24] National Institute of Standards and Technology. BEES: Building for Environmental
and Economic Sustainability [Online]. Available at: http://www.nist.gov/el/economics/
BEESSoftware.cfm [accessed on March 31, 2015].
[25] Athena Sustainable Materials Institute. EcoCalculator [Online]. Available at: http://www.
athenasmi.org/about-asmi/overview/ [accessed on March 31, 2015].
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1405.indd 89 11/08/15 6:55 PM

[26] PE International. GaBi Life Cycle Assessment Software [Online]. Available at: http://
www.gabi-software.com/america/index/ [accessed on March 31 2015].
[27] LEGEP. LEGEP-Software: A tool for integrated life-cycle analysis [Online]. Available at:
http://www.legep.de/?lang=en&page_id=2 [accessed on March 31, 2015].
[28] PRE Product Ecology Consultants. SimaPro LCA Software [Online]. Available at: http://
www.pre-sustainability.com/simapro-lca-software [accessed on March 31, 2015].
[29] ifu Hamburg. Umberto [Online]. Available at: http://www.umberto.de/en/ [accessed on
March 31, 2015].
[30] GreenDelta. 2013. openLCA [Online]. Available at: http://www.openlca.org/ [accessed on
March 31, 2015].
[31] Anderson, J.E., Silman, R. 2009. A life cycle inventory of structural engineering design
strategies for greenhouse gas reduction. Struct. Eng. Int., 19(3): 283–288.
[32] Kaethner, S. C., Burridge, J. A. 2012. Embodied CO2 of structural frames. Struct. Eng.,
90(5): 33–40.
[33] Guggemos, A.A., Horvath, A. 2005. Comparison of environmental effects of steel- and
concrete-framed buildings. J. Infrastruct. Syst., 11(2): 93–101.
[34] Masanet, E., Stadel, A., Gursel, P. 2012. Life-Cycle Evaluation of Concrete Building
Construction as a Strategy for Sustainable Cities. Portland Cement Association, Skokie,
IL, USA.
[35] Fernandez, N.P. 2008. The Influence of Construction Materials on Life-Cycle Energy Use
and Carbon Dioxide Emissions of Medium Size Commercial Buildings, Victoria Univer-
sity of Wellington.
[36] Marceau, M.L., VanGeem, M. G. 2008. Life Cycle Assessment of an Insulating Concrete
Form House Compared to a Wood Frame House. PCA R&D SN3041 Series, Portland Ce-
ment Association, Skokie, IL, USA.
[37] Kofoworola, O.F., Gheewala, S.H. 2009. Life cycle energy assessment of a typical office
building in Thailand. Energ. Build., 41(10): 1076–1083.
[38] Wu, H.J., Yuan, Z.W., Zhang, L., Bi, J. 2012. Life cycle energy consumption and CO2
emission of an office building in China. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess., 17: 105–118.
[39] Stephan, A., Crawford, R.H., de Myttenaere, K. 2012. Towards a comprehensive life cycle
energy analysis framework for residential buildings. Energ. Build., 55: 592–600.
[40] Junnila, S., Horvath, A., Guggemos, A.A. 2006. Life-cycle assessment of office buildings
in Europe and the United States. J. Infrastruct. Syst., 12(1): 10–17.
[41] Siantonas, T., Fieldson, R. 2008. Comparing methodologies for carbon footprinting distri-
bution centres, The Construction and Building Research Conference of the Royal Institu-
tion of Chartered Surveyors, RICS, London, United Kingdom.
[42] Comber, M., Poland, C., Sinclair, M. 2012. Environmental impact seismic assessment:
application of performance-based earthquake engineering methodologies to optimize
environmental performance. Struct. Cong., 2012: 910–921.
[43] Yang, F. 2011. Integrating life cycle and carbon assessments: what life cycle assessment
can teach structural engineers and design and specification. Struct. Cong., 2011: 495–506.
[44] World Green Building Council. [Online]. Available at: http://www.worldgbc.org/
[accessed on March 31, 2015].
[45] United States Green Building Council. Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design:
New Construction and Major Renovations [Online]. Available at: http://www.usgbc.org/
leed/rating-systems/new-construction [accessed on March 31, 2015].
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1405.indd 90 11/08/15 6:55 PM

REFERENCES 91
[46] United States Green Building Council. LEEDv4 for Buidling Design and Construction:
Ballot Version [Online]. Available at: http://www.usgbc.org/leed/v4 [accessed on
March 31, 2015].
[47] German Sustainable Building Council. Neubau Büro- und Verwaltungsgebäude, Version
2012 [Online]. Available at: http://www.dgnb.de/de/ [accessed on March 31, 2015].
[48] Institute for Sustainable Infrastructure. Envision: Sustainable Infrastructure Rating
System [Online]. Available at: http://www.sustainableinfrastructure.org/rating/index.cfm
[accessed on March 31, 2015].
[49] CEEQUAL Ltd. CEEQUAL [Online]. Available at: http://www.ceequal.com/ [accessed
on March 31, 2015].
[50] Infrastructure Sustainability Council of Australia. IS Rating Tool. [Online]. Available
at: http://www.isca.org.au/is-rating-scheme/is-overview/is-rating-tool [accessed on
March 31, 2015].
[51] Athena Sustainable Materials Institute. Athena Impact Estimator for Highways [Online].
Available at: http://www.athenasmi.org/our-software-data/impact-estimator-for-high-
ways/ [accessed on March 31, 2015].
[52] Humbert, S., Abeck, H., Bali, N., Horvath, A. 2007. Leadership in energy and environ-
mental design (LEED) – a critical evaluation by LCA and recommendations for improve-
ment. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess., 12(1): 46–57.
[53] 2000 Watt Society. [Online]. Available at: http://www.2000watt.ch/ [accessed on
March 31, 2015].
[54] United States Green Building Council. LEED for Neighborhood Development [Online].
Available at: http://www.usgbc.org/DisplayPage.aspx?CMSPageID=148 [accessed on
March 31, 2015].
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1405.indd 91 11/08/15 6:55 PM

BackBack
to table contents
sed_1405.indd 92 11/08/15 6:55 PM

93
Chapter
6
Asset Management
José C. Matos, Prof.; Dr.; Civil Engineering Department, Guimarães, Portugal.

Luís Neves, Dr.; Nottingham Transportation Engineering, University of Nottingham,
Nottingham, UK. Bruno Gonçalves, Dr.; Production and Systems Department, Guimarães,
Portugal. Contact: jmatos@civil.uminho.pt; luis.neves@nottingham.ac.uk; bsg@dps.uminho.pt
6.1 Introduction
The increase in the number of ageing infrastructures in Europe, North America, and Japan
over the last three decades, has led to the development of a set of tools that allow a more
consistent and optimized management procedure. Asset management can be defined as the
systematic activities and practices used by an organization to manage its infrastructures, by
optimizing performance, risk, and expenditures over the structure’s entire life cycle. These
tools and procedures are fundamental in reducing costs during the use of the structure, as
well as in extending their service life, and minimizing decommissioning and replacement
expenditures.
Although the methods and principles described in this chapter can be applied to any infrastruc-
ture, their emphasis is placed on large stocks, owned or managed by a single entity, either public
or private. In fact, in this case, the potential benefits are larger and clearly justify the required
investment. In this context, the most advanced civil asset management systems can be found
associated with transportation networks, in particular, for bridges and pavements. Nevertheless,
significant developments can also be found in other areas, including water and oil transportation
systems, airport pavements, ports, and buildings among others.
The management of such stocks requires a clear definition of objectives, in terms of perform-
ance, risk, and costs, as well as a long-term strategy to achieve these objectives. An asset man-
agement system must be based on three fundamental modules: database, performance prediction
models, and optimization. The first is an inventory of the infrastructure network and contains
all relevant information regarding each infrastructure, including design information, past main-
tenance actions, and performance evaluations results. The second includes models for predict-
ing future performance, considering the effects of deterioration, use, and maintenance actions.
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1406.indd 93 11/08/15 9:19 PM

94 CHAPTER 6. ASSET MANAGEMENT
The third is an optimization tool that helps the decision maker in defining optimal policies and
updating these policies as new information become available.
Asset management involves a combination of methods and tools to effectively manage infra-
structures. Asset management (and respective methods and tools) implies a standardization of
inputs and outputs in the management system, concerning information (gathering and flow)
and decision making. The awareness of these inputs and outputs and their parameterization and
structuring is a key element in the design phase of any infrastructure. The structural engineer
plays a predominant and active role in the design phase defining these inputs and outputs that
will rule the management philosophy during the infrastructure lifetime. Since the design phase,
the structural engineer should instill to the management team that the economics of an infra-
structure are far beyond the initial investment. Mastering the methods and tools of asset manage-
ment will allow the structural engineer to foresee the economics beyond the initial investment,
that is, the economics of the infrastructure’s entire service life. This will provide the structural
engineer with the vision that infrastructure management is the seeking of the best possible trade-
off between investment, maintenance, repair, upgrade, serviceability, and safety. The goal is to
apply this vision in the design phase, and the structural engineer is the main player.
6.2 WLC: a tool for asset management

Asset management procedures are supported by whole-life costing (WLC) models, which con-
sist in determining the total cost of any infrastructure from its initial conception to the end of
its service life. In the past, construction designs aimed at minimizing the initial costs and the
alternative of lowering initial cost alone was selected. Rapidly, operators discovered that run-
ning costs too impact the budget significantly. The WLC approach is more suitable for this
problem because it encompasses the total cost over the infrastructure lifetime. This cost is
distributed among the following components: economic, environmental, and societal. While
the first indicates the spent money, the others are, respectively, characterized by the impact on
the surrounding environment and society. These two latter costs are, consequently, more dif-
ficult to quantify.
By definition, WLC is “a tool to assist in assessing the cost performance of construction work,
aimed at facilitating choices where there are alternative means of achieving the client’s objec-
tives and where those alternatives differ, not only in their initial costs but also in their subsequent
operational costs” [1]. For operators, a WLC tool offers a first-level support in the decision-
making process for effective choice between several competing alternatives and a second-level
support for continuous management of infrastructures. Although it can be done in any stage of
a project, the maximum benefit of applying WLC is achieved when applied in the early stages
(e.g. 80–90% of the cost of running, maintaining, and repairing an infrastructure is determined
in the design stage [2,3]). In the second level, WLC may be used as a management tool allowing
the identification of the actual costs related to infrastructure operation. Compiling this informa-
tion with data from operation and inspections, WLC models may be used to estimate future
running costs, which is an important input for budgeting purposes.
Invariably, there is always risk associated with new projects. Thus, risk assessment is incor-
porated into WLC models to strengthen them and to provide more reliable outputs and more
confident decisions from the decision-maker. This implies the use of risk assessment tech-
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1406.indd 94 11/08/15 9:19 PM

6.3 WHOLE-LIFE COSTING: A REVIEW 95
niques in WLC ranging from simple deterministic approach methods to uncertainty assessment
(e.g. sensitivity and break-even analysis), to extremely sophisticated methods based on prob-
abilities, artificial intelligence, and a hybrid of both.
6.3 Whole-life costing: a review

Nowadays, it is much more important to be aware of the total investment than only the initial
investment needed for an infrastructure during its entire lifetime. This means that all type of
costs along the structure’s lifetime must be considered since the early design stage, such as the
ones related to design, construction, inspection, maintenance, repair, upgrade, environmental
and social impacts, and demolition. As for costs, it is very important to assign to each element
of a structure, a condition state. This is due to the need of ranking the infrastructure (and its
components) according to pre-defined attributes (e.g. degradation condition, budget needed
to repair/upgrade, level of urgency to repair/upgrade, remaining service lifetime). Obtaining
such condition states may be easy for the technical part of an infrastructure (e.g. by inspection,
non-destructive and destructive tests), but for certain others it is difficult (if not impossible)
to implement precise metrics of obtaining condition states (e.g. effects of an infrastructure
in the environment and society). In addition, there is a need to convert those condition states
into normalized condition indexes, and furthermore it is necessary to translate those condition
indexes to proper (or equivalent) monetary values. As an example, an index to support the
decision-making at design phase for products and processes, based on weighed attributes such
as environment, health and safety, cost, technical feasibility, and sociopolitical factors was
developed in Ref. [4].
To predict costs and the time they will occur is a hard task, and the computed total cost will not
have a high degree of accuracy. Nevertheless, it is important to know all the costs over an infra-
structure’s lifetime, and there exist techniques that allow the comparison of several alternatives
by being aware of those costs. For this intend, the time value of money must be considered. The
principle is that an amount of money today represents an equivalent (but different) amount of
money in the future (and vice versa) due to the existence of interest (or discount) rates.
The present value analysis is widely used to convert all costs over the infrastructure’s lifetime
into current money costs. This analysis takes into consideration the instant of time when cost
occurs and the adopted interest rate (or discount rate). When comparing projects using this anal-
ysis, the one with lower total costs (lower NPV [net present value]) should be selected. There
are more analyses taking into account the time value of money for comparison and evaluation of
alternative projects, such as those described in Ref. [5]:
1. Equivalent annual cost (EAC) converts all the costs to a uniform EAC, rather than a single-
time NPV. The alternative with minimum EAC should be selected.
2. Discounted payback period (DPP) is defined as the time needed for the annual savings
to accumulate in order to pay back the invested amount. The alternative with lower DPP
should be selected.
3. Internal rate of return (IRR) is defined as the percentage earned on the capital invested (in
each year) after the repayment of the total capital invested. The alternative with maximum
IRR should be selected.
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1406.indd 95 11/08/15 9:19 PM

4. Net savings (NS) is defined as the difference between the present worth of the income gener-
ated by the investment and the invested amount. The alternative with maximum NS should
be selected.
5. Savings to investment ratio (SIR) is defined as the ratio of the present worth of the income
generated by an investment to the initial investment capital. The alternative with maximum
SIR should be selected.
In general, WLC models use the NPV approach for evaluation of alternatives (almost all WLC
models adopt the NPV approach [5]). These models use a very simple equation to evaluate the
alternatives, such as the model presented by the American Society for Testing and Materials [6]:
NPV = C + R − S + A + M + E, where C = investment costs; R = replacement costs; S = resale
value at the end of the studied period; A = annually recurring operating, maintenance, and repair
costs (except energy costs); M = non-annually recurring operating, maintenance, and repair
costs (except energy costs); E = energy costs. Several derivations of this model were carried out
by researchers in order to adapt the model such that a best match to the real-world problem is
achieved. Nowadays, WLC models also include in a much more explicit form, the costs related
to environment and society. Environmental considerations too are taken into account in recent
WLC models thanks to the awareness of the impact of an infrastructure on the surrounding envi-
ronment among the scientific community. As a result, several standards and regulations have
been established and are mandatory nowadays. On the other hand, society as a cost should also
be considered in WLC models. There is no consensus among the scientific community regard-
ing this problem. By far, this component is the least developed as of now.
Uncertainty and risk are intrinsic to WLC. It deals with the future and the future is of course
unknown. Several data may be forecast within known limits (associated to a treatable risk), but
some of the data predicted, even by experts based on all information available, could simply
result in a guess (it is not just a matter of risk but uncertainty instead—e.g. environmental behav-
iour such as seismic activity may occur unexpectedly). Thus, treatment of uncertainty and risk in
information and data is vital for successful implementation of a WLC model. In this way, WLC
models incorporate risk assessment techniques to deal with risk and uncertainty. Techniques
such as sensitivity analysis are being used including probability-based techniques and simula-
tion models. Recent WLC models apply the fuzzy set theory (FST) to deal with uncertainty.
WLC software is available with different characteristics ranging from simple spreadsheet to
sophisticated commercial software. Table 6.1 presents a comparison of some applications of
WLC models in terms of availability, models, risk analysis, and scope of application [5].
6.4 Costs and condition

By definition, WLC deals with present and future costs spread across all phases of the infra-
structure lifetime. These costs may be of several natures from economic to environmental and
societal. Depending on the project, these types of cost will have different weights in the final
WLC model. Economic costs are the most tangible and easy to understand, and there are several
costs of this nature during an infrastructure’s lifetime, such as:
1. Initial costs: These costs embrace the project development costs including the design and
other professional fees, and the construction costs.
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1406.indd 96 11/08/15 9:19 PM

6.4 COSTS AND CONDITION 97
Software Availability Models Risk analysis Scope of application

ACEIT 5.x Commercial; NPV Yes Integrated suite of analysis tools;
Windows WLC decision-making; generic CBS
Ampsol Free; NPV No Basic WLC calculations only;
web-based generic CBS
AssetDesk Commercial; None No WLC management;
1.1 Windows activity-based CBS
BLCC 5.1 Free; NPV Yes WLC decision-making;
platform- NS generic CBS: single energy and
independent SIR water cost items and unlimited items
IRR for other categories
DPP
BridgeLCC Free; NPV Yes WLC decision-making;
2.0 Windows specific CBS: suitable only to ana-
lyze bridges
CAMSLCC Free; NPV No WLC decision-making;
2.2 Spreadsheet generic CBS: single cost item per
cost category
CASA Free; NPV Yes WLC decision-making;
Windows generic CBS
EDCAS 3.1 Commercial; NPV No WLC decision-making;
Windows generic activity-based CBS
PipeCost Free; NPV Yes WLC decision-making;
Windows generic CBS: single cost item per
cost category
RelexLCC Commercial; NPV Yes WLC decision-making;
7.3 Windows user-defined CBS: unlimited cost
items per category
CBS = cost breakdown structure.
Table 6.1:- Existing WLC software and its characteristics [5]
2. Maintenance and repair costs: Maintenance relates to the costs involving regular interven-
tions to take care of the infrastructure, while repair relates to costs involving replacement
of items of minor values (or having relatively short life) [7]. Maintenance is a special case
because there are different sources of maintenance data that may lead to different costs in
maintenance depending on the source used.
3. Replacement costs: This refers to costs of restoring the initial function of the infrastructure
by replacing those infrastructure elements having a shorter life cycle than the one planned
for the entire infrastructure and not being maintenance or repair costs [7].
4. Refurbishment and alteration costs: These costs are usually related to changing the func-
tion of the infrastructure or modernization purposes [7]. Handling these costs may lead to
lifecycle changes, which may be very difficult to evaluate.
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1406.indd 97 11/08/15 9:19 PM

5. Operating costs: These costs relate to cleaning procedures, dispended energy, general rates,
insurance, and other necessary costs for operating the infrastructure [7].
6. Taxes: Taxes play a crucial role in WLC models owing to their direct influence on the time
value of money.
7. Denial-to-use costs: Represent the extra costs during the construction or occupancy periods
(or both). These costs may reflect an income delay being relatively easy to compute, or may
reflect penalties due to negative effects in society and/or environment (these costs being
harder to quantify).
8. Salvage value: This is the difference between the infrastructure value (at the end of its serv-
ice life) and the disposal costs.
The concept of cost breakdown structure (CBS) is widely used and its main objective is to define
all costs at a satisfactory detailed level. The CBS includes all costs the project will incur at dif-
ferent phases. A common example of a CBS for a general construction project is presented in
Table 6.2 [4]. This process requires a lot of analysis and efforts because of the need to identify
as precisely as possible all costs the project is likely to incur during its lifetime.
Taking into account the general three cost components of a WLC model (infrastructure, environ-
mental and society), the infrastructure costs, although complex to compute, are straightforward
to define, as they are direct costs directly imputed to the asset owner and explicitly included in
the business model. Extra complexities arise when trying to assess and translate environmental
and societal impacts into equivalent costs. The life-cycle environmental impact assessment aims
to evaluate the significance of potential environmental impacts. It is divided into two different
parts; the first (and mandatory) is the classification and characterization phase and the second
(and optional) is the normalization, ranking, weighting, and grouping phase [8].
According to ISO 14044 [9], category indicators for environmental assessment may be chosen
between the intervention and the endpoint. Thus, existing methods for life-cycle environmental
assessment are grouped into two main types: (a) mid-point methods (also known as problem-
oriented methods) in which the objective is to determine the category indicator related to the
environmental impact (e.g. global warming potential) and (b) endpoint methods (also known as
damage-oriented methods) in which the objective is to determine environmental damage indica-
tors at the level of the ultimate societal concern (e.g. damage to human health) [8]. Examples
of impact categories for mid-point approaches may be depletion of abiotic resources, impacts
of land use, climate change, stratospheric ozone depletion, human toxicity, eco-toxicity, photo-
oxidant formation, acidification, and eutrophication [10]. Of course, other categories can be
included depending on the type of project and infrastructure and on the scope of the life-cycle
environmental assessment.
For the endpoint approaches, the damage categories may be defined according to several group-
ing criteria: biotic (living organisms in nature), abiotic (non-living elements of nature), human
population and also man-made environment [11]. There is also an impact pathway approach that
links the environmental processes from the pollutant emission process through transport with
the end of the chain, meaning the impact on various receptors (e.g. human beings or ecosystems)
[12]. This approach also permits the translation of the environmental impacts into monetary val-
ues. A European project (ExternE) developed a tool to support the quantification and valuation
of the environmental impacts of electricity generation technologies [12]. A detailed description
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1406.indd 98 11/08/15 9:19 PM

sed_1406.indd 99
BackBack
to table
Capital/initial cost Operation cost Maintenance cost Occupancy cost Residual value
to table
General Financing cost Energy Main structure Client occupancy Resale value
cost
Land Finance for land Cleaning External decorations Demolition and site
contents
purchase and clearance
ofofcontents
construction
6.4 COSTS AND CONDITION
Fees on Loan charges Insurance Internal decorations Renovation/refurbishment

acquisition cost
Construc- Security and health Finishes, fixtures and
tion cost fittings
Taxes Manpower Plumbing and sanitary
services
Staff Management and Heat source
building administration
Land charges (rates) Ventilation and air
treatment system
Equipment associated with Electrical installations
occupier’s occupation
Gas installations
Lift and conveyor
system
External works
Table 6.2: General example of a cost breakdown structure (CBS) [4]
99
11/08/15 9:19 PM
of several mid-point and endpoint approaches and a comparison between them can be found
elsewhere [8]. Examples of mid-point approaches are (a) EDIP97; (b) CML 2001—Dutch
Handbook on LCA; and (c) TRACI (The Tool for the Reduction and Assessment of Chemical
and other Environmental Impacts). Examples of endpoint approaches are: (a) EDIP2003, (b)
Eco-Indicator 99, (c) Environmental Priority Strategies (EPS) 2000, (d) Swiss Eco-Scarcity
Method (Eco-Points), and (e) LIME.
In addition to life-cycle environmental assessment tools, other approaches try to consider envi-
ronmental concerns and their translation of effective costs into life cycle analysis. The life-cycle
costing (LCC) becomes useful in environmental decision-making (with its monetary unit and
extended scope), but fails in its practical usefulness because of being constrained by the lack
of reliable data, conceptual confusions, and limited ability to make rational decisions under
uncertainty [13].
With respect to life-cycle social assessment, contrarily to life-cycle environmental and economic
analysis, there is no framework to perform this task. In fact there is no framework, there is no
standard and there is no consensus among the scientific community on how to do it. A general
framework was proposed by UNEP-SETAC Life Cycle Initiative to integrate social aspects into
life-cycle analysis [14] and a suite of standards is under development by the European Committee
for Standardization (CEN) on Sustainability of Construction works [15]. There exist two trends
about the integration of social costs in life-cycle assessment. Some authors affirm that is possible
and feasible, and others do not [16]. According to Ref. [16], social impacts rely on relations and are
very local dependent, which means there is a need for developing local (or regional), social indica-
tors and not a global approach to the life-cycle social analysis. Nevertheless, some approaches to
overcome this problem were developed [16–18]. The fact is that social impact is the less developed
component of WLC models, and there are key issues to be solved such as the problem of relating
societal impacts with the functional unit of the system, the problem of obtaining site-specific data,
and the problem of the selection and proper quantification of social indicators [19].
6.5 Models and scenarios

Civil engineering infrastructures are assets related to large life cycles, in general, 50 years or
more, with an enormous environmental and societal impact, and a key in the business model
of most owners and managers. In this context, it is fundamental to define measures of perform-
ance that allow the continuous monitoring of the condition of the infrastructure, permitting the
identification of deterioration mechanism long time before they can impair the use of the infra-
structure itself. Although very difficult to quantify, these measures should also consider both
environmental and societal performance of the evaluated infrastructure.
Different infrastructures require different indicators, but significant aspects are common for a
manifold of infrastructures. In fact, considering the extension and number of elements compris-
ing one infrastructure network (e.g. number of bridges in a highway or kilometres of pavements
in a transportation network), as well as, the limited available budget, the performance must be
evaluated by considering inexpensive and expedite methods, frequently based on visual inspec-
tions and/or simple non-destructive tests.
For pavements, the so-called pavement condition rating is generally adopted that quantifies the
pavement’s overall performance based on measurements of roughness, surface distress, skid
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1406.indd 100 11/08/15 9:19 PM

6.5 MODELS AND SCENARIOS 101
resistance, and deflection [20]. For bridges, usually a discrete condition index, related to visible
defects detected in a visual inspection, is used. However, this index cannot be considered as an
accurate measure of the remaining life of a bridge as it does not directly measure the deteriora-
tion or its effects on safety. Alternatively, indicators of performance, based on more consistent
measures, including the safety index are presented [21]. Nevertheless the costs associated with
the periodic evaluation of these indicators are too high for current infrastructures, and so a com-
bination of both is recommended.
Predicting future deterioration and performance is one of the major challenges in asset manage-
ment. In fact, civil engineering infrastructures are unique, in the sense that no similar structures,
under the same environmental stresses, same load and material properties, exist. Considering
that deterioration depends on all these factors, it is clear that accurate predictions are impossible
and that uncertainty in future performance must be explicitly taken under consideration.
The prediction of future performance can be, in principle, evaluated considering either structural
models or statistical models (Fig. 6.1). Structural models are similar to those used during design,
but it must be considered that material properties and geometry will change over time due to
deterioration processes (e.g. corrosion of reinforcement bars, ingression of chloride in concrete
structures). These models, although familiar to engineers and consistent with design practices,
have three major limitations. Firstly, the prediction of component deterioration is related to
a large uncertainty that propagates to the performance prediction. Secondly, the use of these
models involves the detailed information of each infrastructure, which is frequently unavailable.
Thirdly, this analysis is complex and expensive, requiring a different model for each infrastruc-
ture, making it inapplicable to stocks containing large number of infrastructures.
Statistical models are much less familiar to engineers. These models are based on the use of
simple analytical and/or soft computing algorithms, adjusted to the observed performance dete-
rioration in large stocks of similar infrastructures. The main advantages of these models are their
simplicity, the direct use of inspection data, and the uniformity over the entire asset, as the same
model, with different parameters, can be used for all infrastructures.
Improvement
Repair 2 New specifications

Repair 1
Initial Time
condition
Condition
Expected
performance
Unacceptable level
T1 intervention T2 intervention TD
Deterioration
Fig. 6.1: Deterioration model (Units: –)
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1406.indd 101 11/08/15 9:19 PM

Among the statistical models, Markov chain models have gained importance over the last decades
[22]. These chains are of stochastic nature and represent transitory probability matrices. These prob-
abilities express the possibility of a certain element to move from condition state i to condition state
j during the time interval Δt. Markov chain models have been applied in different areas for predict-
ing the evolution of systems between discrete states and have been included in WLC models [22].
The main limitations of these models are the associated “lack of memory” as future performance is
predicted based only on the last inspection results and the homogeneity that defines the transition
probability, as this value is based on results from the last inspection and for a fixed time interval,
thus disregarding the infrastructure age and the time interval since the last transition.
In the same line of thought (prediction and forecasting), new techniques are being implemented
to deal with risk and uncertainty. The application of such sophisticated techniques to WLC
models is recent. Examples of such techniques are the artificial neural networks (ANNs) and
the FST. ANNs are a specific application of the artificial intelligence technology. The objective
is to imitate the human brain processes: how it learns new information and how it organizes the
information. ANNs may be trained to make decisions. They have advantages over traditional
methods in cases where the degree of complexity is so high that the process cannot be explicitly
expressed in mathematical terms due to oversimplification [23]. Suitable applications of ANNs
in WLC models are: (a) ANNs can classify and rank risk factors at any stage of the infrastructure
life cycle and (b) ANNs can be used as a risk-forecasting tool at the operation stage.
The FST is suitable for situations where uncertainty is complex and there is a lack of infor-
mation. Although dealing with imprecise information and complex uncertainty, fuzzy logic is
based on sound quantitative mathematical theory [23]. Suitable applications of FST in WLC
models are: (a) when probabilistic data for risk assessment are extremely rare and insufficient,
the utilization of subjective judgement data based on expert’s experiences and fuzzy concepts;
(b) use of fuzzy membership curves to model uncertainty ranges in risk factors and whole-
life estimates; (c) use of FST in assessing construction and operational risks; (d) use of FST
in assessing and estimating service life risks; (e) use of fuzzy linguistic variables to describe
imprecise whole-life risk factors; (f) use of subjective fuzzy probability to represent risks and
estimates; (g) use of fuzzy sets to represent whole-life costs when historical data are not avail-
able to define the underlying statistical distribution.
6.6 Data acquisition systems and model updating

The WLC model relies on the collection and treatment of infrastructure data by application of
several methods, analyses, and tools. Accordingly, the quality of the outcome of a management
system is strongly dependent on the quality of available data. These data usually contemplate
information about structural performance but sometimes they may include information about
environment (e.g. excess of rock salt on pavement) and society impacts (e.g. presence of traffic
due to maintenance actions). There are several techniques for in-field data collection, commonly
divided into four major groups: visual inspection techniques, photographic and optic methods,
non-destructive (and destructive) evaluation methods, and smart sensors [24]:
1. Visual inspection: This technique is suitable for buildings, highways, bridges, and other in-
frastructures. It is fundamentally dependent on the observation of the structure by a trained
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1406.indd 102 11/08/15 9:19 PM

6.6 DATA ACQUISITION SYSTEMS AND MODEL UPDATING 103
inspector who, through comparison of the observed state of the infrastructure with descrip-
tions or photographs of pre-defined deterioration states, evaluates the infrastructure per-
formance. The inspection can be carried out using basic equipment as input manual (writing
down notes on infrastructure element’s condition, afterwards entered into a computerized
management system) and audio dictation (information recorded in audio format which is
then transcribed). Recently, advances in portable computer technology has allowed the evo-
lution to more advanced methodologies such as handheld computers (allows a one-step
input method because data may be directly stored in the management system) and wearable
computers (suitable when hands-free condition is needed by the inspector). The equipment
necessary for performing a visual inspection is, in general, quite simple, such as measuring
tapes, cameras, portable computers, and recorders. Performing measures may contemplate
support movements, elevation changes, deflections, misalignments, cracks, dents, and cor-
rosion. Visual inspection may be most useful in buildings and bridges. Although inexpen-
sive, it is subjective and prone to errors.
2. Photographic and optic methods: Suitable for bridges, highways, and underground utili-
ties. The condition is assessed by analysis of images. Examples of required equipment
are video/digital/scan cameras, closed-circuit television, and mechanical gyroscope. It may
measure roughness, cracks, and damaged areas. It is a fast and accurate method and safe for
inspectors.
3. Non-destructive evaluation: This group of methods is suitable for any type of infrastruc-
tures, as it permits accurate evaluation of geometry, material properties and deterioration
progression, among others. There are several commercially available, manifold of equip-
ments for non-destructive testing of existing infrastructures, including infrared thermogra-
phy, laser, ultrasonic sensors, or ground penetration radar. These are accurate methods for
assessing particular aspects of the infrastructure performance and can be extremely useful
as a complement to visual inspections. However, these techniques are costly when com-
pared to others.
4. Smart sensors: These methods consist in applying small self-contained battery-powered
transducers to continuously measure structural displacements, strains, rotations, and ac-
celeration of key elements. They allow for real-time data collection and processing and are
extremely efficient in monitoring bridges or buildings. They present a high cost and are
usually considered in special infrastructures when significant damage is observed.
Improving the quality of inspections is a fundamental task in asset management. In fact, inspec-
tions are often the single link between management system and infrastructures, and errors and
inaccuracies in inspection can result in inadequate policies or, in some cases, exposure of users
to inadmissible risks.
In order to assure the quality of inspections, two major aspects must be guaranteed. Firstly,
and probably most important, is the adequate training of inspectors. It is fundamental to guar-
antee that initial and continuous training is provided and that used procedures are frequently
tested. Recent experience has shown that the implementation of a quality management system
for inspections has significantly improved the results of inspections, reducing the scatter in
obtained evaluations. The second aspect is the development of inspection procedure less prone
to errors. In this respect, some tools have been developed, such as check and deficiency lists,
in order to avoid errors from inspectors and to standardize the inspection process. Examples of
such lists (Fig. 6.2) are the BUILDER [25] and the RECAPP [26].
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1406.indd 103 11/08/15 9:19 PM

Fig. 6.2: Check list example
The evolution of the management and inspection systems aims to maximize the amount and
quality of data gathered in the field and the ease to upload, retrieve, and analyse such data in real
time and anywhere. Taking advantage of the growing capabilities of mobile devices and soft-
ware evolution, the inspection process tends to be normalized, in order to avoid epistemic errors.
The “Mobile Model-Based Bridge Lifecycle Management System” [27] presents a management
system with four dimensional (4D) capabilities extended to mobile devices. The communication
between inspector (mobile device) and database (management system) is, in part, automatic
and correlated with the inspector’s position (due to Geoinformatics technologies available in
the system, such as Geographic Information Systems [GISs], and tracking methods, such as the
Global Positioning System [GPS]).
After collecting data, it is important to update the WLC with the most recent data available.
Logically, this updating process will occur over the infrastructure lifetime. This means that
WLC models must be able to deal with dynamic series of data. A suitable method for updating
dynamic series of data is the Bayesian inference. This technique updates the estimated probabil-
ity of a hypothesis as new data are available. In this technique, as more data are collected, prior
statistical distribution will be defined more precisely and more reliable will be the estimation of
probability of future data points. This method is used for updating the transition probabilities
usually associated with Markov chains [28].
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1406.indd 104 11/08/15 9:19 PM

6.7 OPTIMIZATION TECHNIQUES AND DECISION 105
6.7 Optimization techniques and decision

After inspections, evaluations, and prediction of future performance, it is fundamental to define
long-term strategies for keeping structures safe and serviceable, minimizing the associated
costs. Decisions on asset management must be taken considering the overall network, acknowl-
edging that choices must be made, and some infrastructures take priority over the others. In this
respect, it must be clearly understood that WLC models do not take decisions, they only provide
informed advice, and the final decision must always be made by the infrastructure manager.
The minimization of maintenance and repair costs can be defined as an optimization procedure,
considering performance constraints. For this, two aspects must be considered. Firstly, a robust
optimization algorithm must be defined. It should be noted that the algorithm will be used by
infrastructure managers or operators with little or no experience in optimization. Therefore, the
capacity of the algorithm to always converge to a solution close to optimal is fundamental. On
the other hand, the algorithm should find which maintenance actions to apply and when, but the
precise timing is of little significance, as no scheduling can be defined for time intervals less
than weeks or even months. The other challenge is the definition of the optimization problem,
which must clearly define the objectives (e.g. minimizing cost and maximizing performance)
and constrains (e.g. minimum acceptable performance).
There are, fundamentally, two types of optimization algorithms: local and global (Fig. 6.3).
Local algorithms start from an initial solution and iteratively generate new improved solutions
until a local optimum is found. As advantages, these methods are faster in reaching a solution
and precise, in the sense they find the exact optimal, rather than a point close to optimal. As dis-
advantages, although they are very effective in finding a local optimum, the use of these methods
does not always lead to a global optimum, as they can easily be trapped into local minima. Thus,
although suitable to find local optima, local search algorithms may be very unsatisfactory in
dealing with scenarios with multiple local optima, especially when robustness is fundamental.
Global methods are more robust because only information regarding the objective function is
necessary, the initial starting point is not important and often generated randomly, and the global
f(x)
Local min. Global min. x
Fig. 6.3: Local versus global minima (Units: –)
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1406.indd 105 11/08/15 9:19 PM

optimum is found with a higher probability. The main drawback of these methods is the compu-
tational cost, which grows significantly with the number of design variables.
Traditional local optimization methods apply measurements for parameter estimation [29]. A
common method for local search is the sequential quadratic programming (SQP) algorithm,
generalized from the Newton method in which the current point is found by minimizing a quad-
ratic model of the problem. Conjugated gradients have also been used in WLC models with
success.
Several global search algorithms were developed in the last decades. Examples of global search
methods are:
1. Genetic algorithms (GA) is defined by an algorithm that acts in one population of search
points and generates new populations using randomized operators that mimic those of natu-
ral evolution, such as the selection, crossover, and mutation [30].
2. Simulated annealing (SA) is based on an analogy between the annealing of solids and the
problem of solving optimization problems. This algorithm was applied by several authors
for optimization of civil engineering structures [31].
3. Evolutionary strategy (ES) is also a search procedure that mimics the natural evolution of
species in natural systems [32]. This algorithm has two distinct types of selection proce-
dures, respectively, the comma and the plus strategy.
4. The ant system (ASO) [33] and the particle swarm (PSO) [34], in which the algorithms
mimic the social behaviour of animals in a flock.
5. The probabilistic global search Lausanne (PGSL) [35,36], in which it is assumed that bet-
ter points are likely to be found in the neighbourhood of families of good points, being the
search intensified in regions containing good solutions.
Global search algorithms may find better global optima but may be ineffective with respect to
time consumption. Thus, several authors developed combined methods to overcome this inef-
ficiency. The coupled local minimizer (CLM) is a hybrid method [37] that combines the advan-
tage of local algorithms (relative fast convergence) with global algorithms (parallel strategy
and information exchange). In the same way, various hybrid EAs such as the GA-SQP and the
ES-SQP applied to large-scale structural problems were developed [38].
The optimization definition problem poses more challenging difficulties. If future performance
could be defined without uncertainty, the problem could be posed as either a single objective
problem (e.g. minimize cost respecting a minimum performance threshold for all structures)
or as a multi-objective problem (e.g. minimize cost and maximize performance). However, as
described above, the future performance of existing infrastructures is associated with significant
uncertainty.
If uncertainty in future performance is considered, the problem becomes significantly more

complex, as the objectives and thresholds must be defined probabilistically. In terms of cost, the
objective is usually to minimize the life-cycle mean cost. However, the financial risk, related to
unexpected costs in a short period of time, could also be considered in the analysis. In terms of
performance, the objective is usually to reach the best mean performance, over the entire stock,
guaranteeing that the probability of a structure reaching a low performance level is sufficiently
small. Moreover, it must be considered that not all infrastructures in a network have similar
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1406.indd 106 11/08/15 9:19 PM

6.8 CONCLUSION 107
importance. In fact, the redundancy of the network (e.g. alternative routes of similar length) can
significantly reduce the impact of works in one infrastructure, while others are critical to the
network.
6.8 Conclusion
Asset management procedures are on the increase in the last few years, especially in devel-
oped countries, due to the increase of old infrastructure stock and the existent budget limits for
maintaining such stock. These procedures are supported in WLC models. The objective of such
models is to obtain the maximum performance of the asset during a specific period of time and,
at the same time, minimizing costs related to maintenance and repair.
Several mathematical tools for generation of scenarios and for optimization are implemented.
These tools are served by data obtained from the stock of infrastructures. Accordingly, they are
tested and further implemented to help infrastructure managers in establishing the right decision
at the right time.
However, there still exist several obstacles that must be overtaken. One of these difficulties
resides in the accuracy of collected data and the way these data are processed. Others are related
to using algorithms for predicting scenarios and optimization and to the way uncertainties are
considered in these models.
Recently, some authors introduced both environment and societal costs in WLC models [39–
43]. In fact, these two components are increasing in importance when compared to traditional
economic costs, especially in developed countries. Accordingly, these costs, although more dif-
ficult to be quantified, are tentatively introduced in such models.
Within this chapter, a compendium of all algorithms is made, which are implemented in WLC
models. A special focus is made on uncertainty and how this component is introduced in such
algorithms. Additionally, a resume of costs is made from economic, societal, and environmental
sources, which are integral to these models.
References
[1] BSI BS ISO 15686-1:2000. 2000. Buildings and Constructed Assets: Service Life Plan-
ning: General Principles. British Standard Institution.
[2] Kirk, S.J., Dell’Isola, A.J. 1995. Life Cycle Costing For Design Professionals. McGraw-
Hill Book Company, New York.
[3] MacKay, S. 1999. Building for life. The Building Economist. pp. 4–9.
[4] Khan, F.I., Sadiq, R., Veitch, B. 2004. Life cycle iNdeX (LInX): a new indexing proce-
dure for process and product design and decision-making. J. Clean. Prod. 12(1): 59–76.
[5] Kishk, M., Al-Hajj, A., Pollock, R., Aouad, G., Bakis, N., Sun, M. 2003. Whole life cost-
ing in construction – a state of the art review. RICS Foundation Res. Pap., 4(18): 1–39.
[6] ASTM E917-83. 1983. Standard practice for measuring life-cycle costs of buildings and
building systems. Designation: E917-83, American Society for Testing and Materials.
[7] Kirk, S.J., Dell’Isola, A.J. 1995. Life Cycle Costing for Design Professionals. McGraw-
Hill Book Company, New York.
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1406.indd 107 11/08/15 9:19 PM

[8] Gervásio, H. 2010. Sustainable Design and Integral Life-Cycle Analysis of bridges.
Doctoral of Philosophy Dissertation, University of Coimbra, Institute for Sustainability
and Innovation in Structural Engineering, Portugal.
[9] ISO 14044. 2006. Environmental management – Life cycle assessment – Requirements
and guidelines. International Organization for Standardization, Geneva, Switzerland.
[10] Guinée, J.B., Gorrée, M., Heijungs, R., Huppes, G., Kleijn, R., Koning, A. de, Oers, L.
van, Wegener Sleeswijk, A., Suh, S., Udo de Haes, H.A., Bruijn, H. de, Duin, R. van,
Huijbregts, M.A.J. 2002. Handbook on Life Cycle Assessment. Operational Guide to the
ISO standards. I: LCA in Perspective. IIa: Guide. IIb: Operational Annex. III: Scientific
Background. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, The Netherlands, ISBN 1-4020-
0228-9, 692 pp.
[11] Jolliet, O., Brent, A., Goedkoop, M., Itsubo, N., Mueller-Wenk, R., Peña, C., Schenk, R.,
Stewart, M., Weidema, B. 2003. Final report of the LCIA Definition study. Life Cycle
Impact Assessment Programme of the Life Cycle Initiative.
[12] European Commission (EC). 1995. DG XII, Science, Research and Development, JOULE.
Externalities of Fuel Cycles “ExternE” Project. Report no. 2 – Methodology, EUR16521.
[13] Gluch, P., Baumann, H. 2004. The life cycle costing (LCC) approach: a conceptual
discussion of its usefulness for environmental decision-making. Build. Environ., 39:
571–580.
[14] Griebßammer, R., Benoît, C., Dreyer, L., Flysjö, A., Manhart, A., Mazijn, B., Méthot, A.,
Weidema, B. 2006. Feasibility Study: Integration of Social Aspects into LCA. Freiburg,
Germany. Global Reporting Initiative. Available from: www.grig3.org/guidelines.html/.
[15] prEN 15643-3. 2009. Sustainability of construction works—Sustainability assessment of
buildings—Part 3: Framework for the assessment of social performance. CEN/TC 350.
[16] Spillemaeckers, S. 2007. The Belgian social label: A governmental application of
Social LCA. Available from: web.fu-berlin.de/ffu/calcas/Spillemaeckers_Belgian.pdf
(last accessed on 19 February 2009).
[17] Dreyer, L., Hauschild, M., Schierbeck, J. 2006. A framework for life cycle impact
assessment. Int. J. LCA, 11(2): 88–97.
[18] Hunkeler, D. 2006. Societal LCA methodology and case study. Int. J. LCA, 11(6):
371–382.
[19] Kloepffer, W. 2008. Life cycle sustainability assessment of products (with comments by
Helias A. Udo de Haes, p. 95). Int. J. LCA, 13(2): 89–95.
[20] Deighton, R., Sztraka, J. Pavement Condition dTV. Technical Guide, (Volume 3). Deight-
on and Associates Ltd., Bowmansville, Ontario, July 1995.
[21] Ryall, M.J. 2010. Bridge Management, 2nd edn. Harding, J.E., Gerard, P., Ryall, M.
(eds.). Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford.
[22] Ng, S.K., Moses, F. 1996. Prediction of bridge service life using time-dependent reliability
analysis. Third International Conference on Bridge Management, University of Surrey,
Guildford, UK, April 14–17, pp. 26–33.
[23] Boussabaine, A., Kirkham, R.J. 2004. Whole Life-Cycle Costing: Risk and Risk Responses.
1st edn, Blackwell Publishing Ltd., Oxford, UK, ISBN 1-4051-0786-3.
[24] Ahluwalia, S.S. 2008. A framework for efficient condition assessment of the building infra-
structure, Doctoral of Philosophy Dissertation, University of Waterloo, Ontario, Canada.
[25] BUILDER. 2002. BUILDER User Guide, U.S. Army, Engineering Research and
Development Centre – Construction Engineering Research Laboratory (ERDC-CERL),
Champaign, IL, USA, May 2002.
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1406.indd 108 11/08/15 9:19 PM

REFERENCES 109
[26] RECAPP. 2006. RECAPP® 1.0 Training Manual. Physical Planning Technologies Inc.,
Toronto, Canada.
[27] Hammad, A., Zhang, C., Hu, Y., Mozaffari, E. 2006. Mobile model-based bridge lifecycle
management systems. J. Comp. Aided Civil Infrastruct. Eng., 21: 530–547.
[28] Hu, Y., Kiesel, R., Perraudin, W. 2002. The estimation of transition matrices for sovereign
credit ratings. J. Banking Finan., 26(7): 1383–1406;
[29] Sanayei, M., McClain, J.A.S., Wadia-Fascetti, S., Santini, E.M. 1999. Parameter
estimation incorporating modal data and boundary conditions. J. Struct. Eng., 125(9):
1048–1055.
[30] Holland, J. 1975. Adaptation in Natural and Artificial Systems. University of Michigan
Press, Michigan.
[31] Kirkpatrick, S., Gelatt, C.D., Vecchi, M.P. 1983. Optimization by simulated annealing.
Science, 220: 671–679.
[32] Rechenberg, I. 1994. Evolutionsstrategie. Frommann-Holzboog, Stuttgart.
[33] Dorigo, M., Di Caro, G. 1999. The ant colony optimization meta-heuristic. In: New
Methods in Optimization. Corne, D., Dorigo, M., Glover, F. (eds.), McGraw-Hill,
Maidenhead, UK.
[34] Eberhart, R.C., Kennedy, J. 1995. A new optimizer using particles swarm theory. Sixth
International Symposium on Micro Machine and Human Science, Nagoya, Japan, 39–43.
[35] Raphael, B., Smith, I.F.C. 2003. A direct stochastic algorithm for global search. J. Appl.
Math. Comput., 146(2–3): 729–758.
[36] Robert-Nicoud, Y., Raphael, B., Burdet, O., Smith, I.F.C. 2005. Model identification of
bridges using measurement data. Comput. Aid. Civil Infrastruct. Eng., 20: 118–131.
[37] Suykens, J.A.K., Vandewalle, J. 2002. Coupled local minimizers: alternative formulations
and extensions. 2002 World Congress on Computational Intelligence – International Joint
Conference on Neural Networks IJCNN, Honolulu, USA, 2039–2043.
[38] Lagaros, N.D., Papadrakakis, M., Kokossalakis, G. 2002. Structural optimization using
evolutionary algorithms. Comput. Struct., 80(7–8): 571–589.
[39] Steen, B. 2005. Environmental costs and benefits in life cycle costing. Manag. Environ.
Qual., 16(2): 107–118.
[40] Sterner, E. 2002. Green procurement of buildings: estimation of life-cycle cost and envi-
ronmental impact, Ph.D. dissertation thesis, Department of Mining Engineering, LuleXa
University of Technology.
[41] Bennett, M., James, P. 1997. Environment-related management accounting: current
practice and future trends. Green. Manag. Int., 97(17): 32–52.
[42] van der Veen, M. 2000. Environmental management accounting. In: Economics of Envi-
ronmental Management. Kolk, A., (ed.), Pearson Education Ltd., Harlow, UK, 155–75.
[43] Spitzer, M., Elwood, H. 1995. An introduction to environmental accounting as a business
management tool: key concepts and terms. EPA, Washington, DC.
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1406.indd 109 11/08/15 9:19 PM

BackBack
to table contents
sed_1406.indd 110 11/08/15 9:19 PM

111
Chapter
7
Sustainability and Bridges
Andrew J. Martin, Civil Eng.; COWI A/S, Kongens Lyngby, Denmark. Martin J.D. Kirk,
Civil Eng.; Arup, London, UK. Contact: ajmn@cowi.dk, martin.kirk@arup.com
7.1 Introduction
How should bridges be considered with regard to sustainability? Should it be by maximizing the use
of recycled materials and minimizing CO2 emissions and the use of water? Alternatively, should it
be by taking its impacts on local communities during their planning and execution into account? Or,
might it be by designing bridges to minimize the need for maintenance and repair during their intended
service lives? None of these approaches is necessarily right or wrong, but none on its own sufficiently
addresses the breadth and complexity of the challenge posed by sustainability and sustainable thinking
to all those involved with bridges—as owners, designers, constructors, maintainers, and users.
This chapter seeks to identify the attributes of a sustainable approach to bridges and how such an
approach could be achieved in practice. Firstly, a view of the relevance and importance of sus-
tainability to bridges is presented. Then, the fundamental component aspects of sustainability
that relate to bridges will be identified and discussed, under the headings of environment, soci-
ety, and economics. The life cycle of a bridge is then examined, with the purpose of identifying
how and when the competing priorities of these “aspects” can be brought together to give inte-
grated and comprehensive solutions. Three case studies are then presented to illustrate practical
examples of sustainability in action in real bridge projects. An annotated selected bibliography
of relevant references is presented as Further Reading at the end of this chapter.
The current work does not propose to offer a “one size fits all” template for a sustainability approach
to bridges. All bridges are unique and as such—whether small or large—each deserves a propor-
tionate level of individual consideration in terms of sustainability. Also, from a global perspective,
it would be highly presumptive to suggest standard solutions to sustainability issues, regardless of
location and irrespective of local concerns and priorities. Instead, it is hoped that a unifying theme
will emerge, namely the importance of broad-based structured thinking and informed, responsible
and accountable decision-making for delivering sustainable solutions to bridge projects.
In this way, bridge engineers and others can make a meaningful, tangible, and accountable
response to the challenge of sustainability made 25 years ago in the frequently cited “Brundtland
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1407.indd 111 12/08/15 5:44 PM

112 CHAPTER 7. SUSTAINABILITY AND BRIDGES
Report” of “Meeting the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future genera-
tions to meet their own needs” [1].
7.2 Bridges and sustainability

Bridges of all types and sizes are key components of the physical infrastructure that connects
and underpins society in all regions of the world. As such, bridges are also large investments
by public and private organizations in society and are valuable assets for our collective future
prosperity. Bridges consume large quantities of materials in their construction, which have a
significant impact on the environment and on their location. Also, most are conceived for the
long-term and so are typically designed and specified with the intention that they have service
lives of 75–100 years or more. These considerations among many others illustrate the relevance
and importance of sustainability in relation to bridges.
A central theme to the sustainability of bridges is ensuring that a bridge performs as intended
for its full anticipated service life, and perhaps longer. Most of the direct impacts of bridges on
the environment (material use, energy, greenhouse gas emissions (GGEs)) take place during its
construction, although maintenance and renewal of certain components will be required from
time to time.1 It is therefore important that the design of a new bridge takes reasonable account
of the functional demands of the future and also that the construction is carried out to the stan-
dard necessary to achieve the intended level of durability.
Premature loss of durability performance or loss of operational functionality will require either
significant remedial repair or strengthening work, or perhaps even complete replacement of
the bridge. In a future world of scarcer resources and ever greater focus on the environmental
consequences of human actions, it may not be as acceptable as it has been in the past to replace
or make significant repairs to prematurely unserviceable bridges, although there will almost cer-
tainly be no other alternative. Bridges and infrastructure in general will become even more valu-
able assets and investments, in environmental as well as in economic terms, and with this, the
engineering profession will become more accountable to society for its actions and decisions.
To date, a significant amount of effort towards sustainable structures has been focussed on the
environmental aspects of construction materials and how they are used. However, the areas of
economics and society must not be ignored. Many of the issues in these fields are already famil-
iar to bridge engineers. Sustainability asks that each is given proportionate and timely consider-
ation, rather than the focus being placed on “first cost” alone. Engineers are used to dealing with
multifaceted and multidisciplinary design problems and are therefore well positioned to take on
the mind-set of balancing the numerous and varied demands of sustainability.
7.3 Aspects of sustainability related to bridges

The most common aspects of sustainability, which relate to bridges, are presented in Table
7.1 and are described in outline in this section under the broad headings of “Environment”,
“Society” and “Economics”.
1
This is in contrast to a typical commercial building where, historically, up to 80% of these impacts occur during its
40- to 50-year service life. Improvements to building design in recent years have reduced this ratio but the overall burden
from operational impacts remains.
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1407.indd 112 12/08/15 5:44 PM

7.3 ASPECTS OF SUSTAINABILITY RELATED TO BRIDGES 113
Environment Society Economics

• Materials • Aesthetics • Lifetime costs
• Energy • Design • Local effects
• Emissions • Diversity • Employment
• Transportation • Access • Long-term value
• Waste • Noise
• Land use • Health, safety, and welfare
• Biodiversity • Community issues
• Water
Table 7.1: Aspects of sustainability related to bridges
Each of these aspects should be given due consideration when a new bridge is being planned
or when an existing bridge is being appraised in terms of its future life. As will be described
later, this should be done in a balanced way, looking at the aspects together and seeking to mini-
mize negative impacts and maximize positive outcomes. An annotated selected bibliography of
sources providing further information is presented in the Further Reading section.
7.3.1 Environment
Materials, energy, and emissions
The materials from which a bridge is constructed are a major sustainability issue, which includes
consideration of where the raw materials are sourced from, of embodied energy (EE) and of
GGEs associated with their extraction, processing, manufacture, and fabrication. The most com-
mon materials used in the construction of modern bridges are concrete and steel, both of which
place a significant burden on the environment. Other materials such as timber, aluminium, and
composites can be used in appropriate situations, each material having its own tariff of associ-
ated environmental impacts.
In concrete construction, the use of blended cements, in which waste materials are used as part-
replacement for Portland cement, is well established. These offer the advantages of reduced
demand for new-won raw materials and lower EE and GGE impacts per ton of finished product.
The most commonly used cement replacement materials are fly ash and blast furnace slag, both
waste products from other industries, and there is active research into other suitable materials.
The demand for aggregates for use in construction creates a need for quarrying that has sig-
nificant environmental impacts. Alternatives to new-won aggregates are therefore beneficial,
including crushed recycled concrete and secondary materials arising from mineral extraction.
In steel construction, the quantities of iron ore and scrap used in steelmaking vary between dif-
ferent products and different manufacturers. Steel is a readily recyclable material with a high
recovery rate from demolition and waste. However, although the use of scrap gives a saving in
raw materials, the EE and GGE impacts of steelmaking are repeated in the recycling process.
The developments of carbon steels with higher yield strengths offer the possibility of savings
in steel quantities, particularly for long-span and cable-supported bridges, but these steels fre-
quently have associated cost implications. In suitable environments, weathering steel provides
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1407.indd 113 12/08/15 5:44 PM

an option where painting is not required. Stainless steel has been used as the main structural
material for a small number of bridges. More commonly, where steel is used as reinforcement
in concrete structures, stainless steel can give improved long-term durability in areas subject to
aggressive environments (e.g. road salt spray) or where access for inspection and maintenance
is difficult, dangerous, or impossible.
Timber was one of the first materials to be used to build bridges. It has a high strength to
weight ratio and has the environmental advantage of being renewable. Timber construc-
tion is also well suited to prefabrication. The long-term durability of timber depends on
how well it is protected from water in the environment. This can be achieved by structural
detailing and by preservatives. Timber is well suited for smaller, more lightly trafficked
bridges. However, examples exist of timber bridges with longer spans designed for modern
traffic loads.
Aluminium offers advantages to bridge designers where self-weight is at a premium, in particu-

lar in moving or moveable bridges, and where live loading is relatively low, such as footbridges
and cycle bridges. For these reasons, aluminium is frequently used for mobile inspection and
maintenance gantries installed on larger bridges. Aluminium is resistant to corrosion in normal
environments, although care must be taken at junctions with other metals to prevent bi-metallic
corrosion. The manufacture of aluminium uses large quantities of electrical energy and usually
takes place in locations where cheap hydroelectric power is available.
The place of composite materials in bridges has grown steadily over the past 30 years. Compos-
ites can be used as the main structural material, but they also have applications in lightweight
enclosures to provide protection from the environment to steel or concrete structures beneath
and to provide safe working platforms for inspection and maintenance. Composites have been
used with success in the strengthening and repair of existing structures and as reinforcement and
pre-stressing in new concrete structures.
Transportation
Transportation to the site of the components and materials used in bridge construction has
impacts in terms of energy use and emissions. These can be reduced by sourcing construction
materials locally where possible, especially bulk materials such as aggregates for concrete. The
indirect transportation impacts of using alternative materials instead of newly won aggregates
should be taken into account when considering their direct benefits.
Economic globalization and technical advances in transportation imply that it is both physically
possible and economically advantageous to prefabricate major structural components or even
complete structures in one location and then to transport them great distances for assembly and
erection. However, it is important that due account is taken of the environmental aspects of
transportation when such arrangements are proposed.
Waste
Planning for the construction or rehabilitation of a bridge should include planned consideration
of issues concerning waste. Minimization of construction waste gives direct cost savings and
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1407.indd 114 12/08/15 5:44 PM

is a significant way by which the negative environmental impacts of construction materials can
be reduced. The generation of hazardous waste should also be avoided. Where waste cannot
be eliminated, plans should be made for its proper treatment and disposal. The potential for all
construction waste to be reused or recycled should also be maximized.
A major source of waste on construction sites arises from the use of bulk, loose, or unbound
materials, for example aggregates, cement, and road surfacing. Although this cannot be entirely
eliminated, reductions in waste can be achieved by prefabrication of components in conditions
where material use can be better controlled.
Land use
In general, the area of land used by a new bridge should be minimized. New infrastructure
wherever possible should be located to avoid using land of special value, such as previously
undeveloped ‘green field’ sites, high quality agricultural land, land protected for environmen-
tal or historical reasons and land in areas of outstanding natural beauty. Wherever possible,
the reuse of previously developed and derelict land should be maximized. The Medway Via-
duct (UK) is an example of bridge constructed partly on contaminated land [2]. The alignment
of the viaduct dictated that the approach spans on the south side should cross a disused tip
containing asbestos waste. The tip was capped to contain the waste and an innovative piling
technique was developed to allow construction of the bridge foundations without excavation
and without the associated risk of releasing free asbestos dust into the atmosphere.
Biodiversity
All construction work should take due account of the surrounding flora and fauna, both on land
and in watercourses, rivers, and the sea, and seek to minimize the impact of the works on the
species affected and on their habitats.
Although the construction of new infrastructure can frequently be seen as the enemy of the natu-
ral world, the application of one particular type of bridge can help minimize the negative impact
of a new road or railway. “Land bridges” (also called “eco-ducts”) have wide decks that carry
soil and vegetation, thus providing a green corridor, which maintains the connection between
the natural habitats on either side that would have otherwise been lost. The movement of wild
animals both large and small is thus allowed to continue.2
The proposed 42 km Qatar-Bahrain Causeway is an example of a major bridge project where
biodiversity has been an important consideration [3]. Minimization of long-term changes to sea
currents and salt transport were important considerations in setting the alignment of the fixed
link. Mitigation methods were also developed for the protection of marine species (e.g. seagrass,
coral, fish, turtles, dugongs, and dolphins) including use of the embankments and bridge piles
as new habitats for marine life.
The construction of Bingley South Bog Viaduct (UK) used an innovative approach to construct
a 200 m long highway viaduct across an environmentally sensitive natural peat bog [4]. For this
structure, a “jetty”-type incremental construction method was used to erect the precast concrete
2
Significant work has been carried out in the Netherlands on the interaction of nature and infrastructure, including the
design of “land bridges” and other facilities for use by wildlife (see Further reading).
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1407.indd 115 12/08/15 5:44 PM

deck, which minimized the footprint of construction activities in the bog. Precast concrete was
chosen in preference to steel for the bridge deck, in part to reduce the risk of pollution to the bog
arising from maintenance activities during the lifetime of the bridge.
Water
The construction of bridges that cross watercourses, rivers, estuaries, and sea straits presents
a threat to the environment during construction. Bridges also provide an environmental threat
in service when considering the potential for pollution from spillages on the carriageway and
how they are managed. For long bridges, including multi-span viaducts and long-span cable-
supported bridges, there are significant structural and practical consequences in providing con-
tinuous positive drainage from gullies in the carriageway back to land. In the past, it has been
the practice to discharge carriageway run-off directly into the water below. However, the conse-
quences of pollution following a significant carriageway spillage may make reconsideration of
this practice desirable in the future.
Depending on the use of road de-icing salts, or their equivalent, there is tremendous scope to use
sustainable urban drainage systems (SUDS) such as by retaining rainfall in underground storage
basins for later use.
7.3.2 Society
Aesthetics and design
The design of a bridge should take into account the visual aspects of its appearance in its set-
ting and surroundings, whether this is an urban, semi-urban, or rural location. Several issues
are involved including form, scale, span arrangement, material finishes, and details. This is
particularly important as, by their long design lives, bridges usually become semi-permanent
features in the local landscape or townscape. Consideration of human scale and interaction is
important for bridges intended for pedestrian use. The input of an architect to the design team
may be beneficial in appropriate cases, in terms of both overall appearance and consideration
of details.
Diversity and access
Bridge design should take the needs of all potential users into account. In particular, the design
of footbridges and of footways for highway bridges should make adequate provision for the
disabled and mobility impaired, most readily by avoiding steep gradients and steps. In many
jurisdictions, such issues are the subject of statutory regulations or guidelines.
The objective of infrastructure is to provide connections. However, it also has the power to
divide by cutting across existing communities. Bridges are an important means by which the
connections between those living on either side of a major road or railway can be maintained
or, where they have been severed in the past, be reinstated. A successful example of this is the
Hulme Arch Bridge (UK) [5] where an iconic bridge was used as part of an urban regeneration
scheme to reconnect a local road, and thereby reconnect two halves of a community, which had
been cut by the construction of a motorway link road 30 years before.
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1407.indd 116 12/08/15 5:44 PM

Noise
Noise and vibration from road and rail traffic can have a significant impact on the quality of life
in the local community and these should be addressed in the bridge design. The provision of
mitigating measures such as noise barriers may be appropriate in populated areas.
Health, safety, and welfare
The health, safety, and welfare of all those who use, construct, operate, or maintain bridges are
important aspects of the contribution of bridge engineers to society and to sustainability. These
issues are most commonly the subject of laws and regulations.
It is good practice for the engineer to seek ways in which risks to the health and safety of work-
ers can be avoided at source during design. In the UK, and elsewhere, this approach is a legal
requirement [6]. Typical examples include maximizing prefabrication in order to minimize the
number of man-hours spent working at heights on site, or the substitution of potentially harmful
construction materials with more benign alternatives. Designing bridges with safe access for
inspection and maintenance activities is also of high importance.
By their nature, many bridge construction sites have difficult access and may also be in remote
locations, so the provision of adequate welfare facilities for the workforce is particularly
important.
Community issues
Responsibility for the design of bridges rightly belongs in the hands of qualified professional
engineers. However, there is a place for the local community to have a voice in the design
process, where this is appropriate, over issues such as aesthetics and the planning of criti-
cal construction activities. An example of this is provided by the replacement of Ballingdon
Bridge in Sudbury (UK). Public involvement in the decision to replace a life-expired highway
bridge allowed the client to find an acceptable solution to a politically, environmentally, and
technically sensitive and complex problem, in a situation where there were significant con-
cerns about environmental impact, aesthetics, and transport severance during the construction
phase [7].
Maintenance of good community relationships with the local population is important through-
out any construction project. In particular, the impact of construction on the daily lives of site
neighbours should be given careful consideration.
7.3.3 Economics
Lifetime costs
Cost is a major driving influence in the development of all new bridges. Indeed, it may be argued
that cost is the primary influence as all such schemes must be affordable to their clients at the
outset; otherwise, their construction cannot be justified. It is, however, important that costs are
taken into account considering the whole life of the bridge and not just its initial construction
cost. This is most readily done by considering the net present value (NPV) of each aspect of the
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1407.indd 117 12/08/15 5:44 PM

bridge during its lifetime, including construction, routine operation and maintenance, planned
major maintenance (painting, renewals of bearings and movement joints, etc.), and end-of-life
demolition.
Consideration of costs will affect decisions on other sustainability issues concerning a bridge.
It is here that a balanced approach is necessary to understand what level of sustainable perfor-
mance is desired and what can be achieved, taking into account the available financial resources.
Local effects
The construction of new infrastructure can have both temporary and permanent effects on the
local economy and care should be taken to avoid the negative impacts that may arise.
Roads and railways by their nature are linear and thereby have the power to block physical com-
munication across their alignments. The effects on communities have already been mentioned
but those on the local economy and businesses also need to be considered. Bridges in new infra-
structure offer the opportunity to maintain existing linkages or create new ones for the benefit of
the transportation of workers and of goods. The construction of civil engineering works has the
potential to be disruptive. If not minimized or mitigated, such disruption could have a permanent
detrimental effect on the viability of local businesses.
Construction projects offer opportunities to local businesses and it is important to maximize these
opportunities during design and procurement, in order to maximize local economic benefits. A
striking example is the construction of the Second Hooghly Bridge (India) where, in response to
a client requirement, the steelwork for a major cable-stayed highway bridge was designed to be
executed using rivets rather than by bolting in order to maximize employment in the local work-
force [8]. The construction of the bridge therefore had a direct positive effect on the local economy.
Employment
The construction of a new bridge creates the opportunity to generate employment and to increase
the level of skill among the local workforce. Larger projects give greater opportunities for steps
to be taken towards these ends through training schemes and partnerships with local government
agencies. However, globalization in the construction industry means that construction activities
may be spread around the world, with prefabricated parts being transported significant distances
to site prior to final assembly and erection. This particularly applies to structural steelwork.
Resisting the economic benefits offered by global procurement for the sake of local workers
presents a significant challenge to all concerned.
Long-term value
As has previously been mentioned, bridges are significant investments by society, not least in
financial terms. The need for premature or unplanned maintenance, repair, strengthening, or
replacement of a bridge will mean that the necessary funding will need to be diverted from other
purposes. As key links in infrastructure, the resilience of bridges to extreme events also needs
to be given due consideration in design. The importance of ensuring that a new bridge gives the
expected long-term value anticipated at its inception is a core aspect of sustainability.
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1407.indd 118 12/08/15 5:44 PM

7.4 THE LIFE-CYCLE OF A BRIDGE 119
7.4 The life-cycle of a bridge

It is essential to see the various aspects of sustainability involved and to understand their inter-
relationships within the context of the whole life of a bridge, from initial inception to final
decommissioning and disposal. In this section, possible approaches to the more important
decisions with regard to sustainability are discussed within the framework of the bridge life
cycle.
7.4.1 Inception, feasibility, and option selection

In the early stages of a bridge project, decisions are made that define the character of the project
and the nature of the opportunities that lie ahead during its development. As has already been
emphasized, a key aspect of the sustainability of a bridge is its ability to deliver the anticipated
level of service for the defined service life. The degree to which this can be achieved will depend
greatly on the decisions made at the beginning of the project and their future consequences.
Bridge engineers, and others in related disciplines, have the technical knowledge with which to
advise the planners of infrastructure projects on the feasibility of different alternatives during
route selection. It is important that the right choice of crossing is made for particular obstacles
(e.g. viaduct versus embankment, bridge versus tunnel). Although this has been a traditional
role for bridge engineers, the input from specialists in other disciplines is needed in order that
the “aspects” identified earlier in this chapter can be given due and proportionate consideration
as alternative proposals are considered and developed. In particular, such active interdisciplin-
ary collaboration increases the chance that otherwise unseen “win-win” solutions will be iden-
tified and developed. Proactive dialogue is also important in this respect. It surely makes sense
that disciplines that have traditionally worked in an auditing role to assess the impacts of an
already defined scheme (e.g. environmental impact) should be invited to participate “upfront”
in the creation of the scheme and take a positive role in seeking innovative multidisciplinary
solutions.
Two fundamental sustainability aspects of option selection for a bridge are its environmental
impact and its cost. Both should be considered on a full life-cycle basis and should be based on
a set of defined assumptions about the construction and through-life interventions associated
with the bridge.
Environmental impact can be determined for the construction materials in terms of their resource
depletion, EE, and GGEs using typical values of unit impacts taken from established and veri-
fied databases. Materials used for planned maintenance and renewals during the full lifetime of
the bridge should also be taken into account (e.g. carriageway resurfacing, which may take place
several times). The quantities of the various materials to be used are required for this analysis.
This presents a difficulty, in that detailed quantities are not available until the detailed design
has been completed. However, feasibility designs for alternative bridge schemes will generate
approximate quantities, which should be sufficiently accurate to allow options to be compared
on an equal basis. Data on quantities can then be updated and re-evaluated as more accurate
information becomes available during design, giving better assurance to the choices and deci-
sions previously made. The assessment of environmental impacts of construction materials must
also include the impact of transportation from the “factory” to the site and the impact of the
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1407.indd 119 12/08/15 5:44 PM

activities that take place on site before the materials reach their final location in the bridge
(e.g. on-site handling and lifting).
Economic impacts should be assessed on the same basis as environmental impact with respect
to assumptions regarding initial construction and full life interventions for maintenance and
renewals. As previously noted, this can readily be done by the calculation of NPV of each set
of actions and comparison of the totals. However, NPV cost calculations can be misleading if
a realistic discount rate is not used. In particular, an artificially high discount rate will give an
unduly optimistic picture of future costs.
An increasing number of tools and methodologies for quantifying sustainability are becom-
ing available for use by bridge owners and designers. Among those developed specifically for
bridges are an approach for quantifying sustainability principles in bridge projects [9] and tools
for bridge life cycle optimization (life-cycle cost [LCC], life-cycle assessment [LCA], bridge
aesthetics, and cultural values) [10].
7.4.2 Design and specification

Once a preferred option has been identified for a bridge and the sustainability objectives of the
project agreed, then detailed design and specification of the bridge can commence. Design and
specification are key factors in achieving resource-efficient and durable structures. Also, at this
stage, there will be the opportunity to maximize the use of sustainable construction materials
and to verify the life cycle impact of the preferred solution.
Water, especially water containing dissolved carriageway de-icing salts, is the enemy of struc-
tural durability for both steel and concrete structures. Places where rainwater or carriageway
run-off can collect become sites for corrosion in steel structures. Likewise, surfaces saturated
with water promote the deterioration of concrete structures by both physical and chemical pro-
cesses. In many cases, these problems can be avoided at the design stage by good detailing
practice. For example, the incorporation of “drip” details on the bottom edges of cantilever slabs
is effective in preventing water running back down and across the faces of adjacent structural
elements and thereby their subsequent saturation.
Specifications should be written to promote the use of sustainable construction materials and
practices, although there is a point at which over prescription can become uneconomic. For
example, the availability of recycled concrete for use as aggregate is highly geographically
dependent so an absolute requirement for its use in locations of low availability will have unsus-
tainable cost and environmental implications (e.g. transport).
The following may seem self-evident, but it is included here as a reminder that the provision of
safe structures is a cornerstone and prerequisite of sustainability. Responsibility for the struc-
tural safety of a bridge, in both its completed condition and during construction, should only
be given to a suitably qualified and experienced engineer. It is common for a design statement
or similar report to be prepared defining the requirements for the design of the bridge, which
includes items such as purpose, loading, constructability, environmental considerations, and
sustainability (e.g. how aspects such as those listed in Table 7.1 will be addressed). The best
practice for an independent checking engineer is to verify that the design meets the require-
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1407.indd 120 12/08/15 5:44 PM

7.4 THE LIFE-CYCLE OF A BRIDGE 121
ments of the design statement and confirms the adequacy of the drawings without reference to
the designer’s own calculations. This is particularly important for large, complex, and unusual
structures.
7.4.3 Construction
The intention of the design for a sustainable bridge will not be realized in practice unless the
principles and solutions identified earlier in the project are achieved on site. This has two
aspects—the construction work itself and the way in which the construction work is carried out.
Adequacy of the construction work to produce a durable structure should normally be achieved
through appropriate specification by the designer and by adequate supervision of execution by
the constructor.
The way in which the construction work is carried out has much broader implications with
regard to sustainability, particularly with respect to environmental and social aspects. Many
of these will frequently be covered by statutory requirements but the construction contract and
procurement method also has an important role to play. Relationships with the local community
are particularly important with respect to the impact that the construction work will have on
people’s daily lives and long-term health, particularly in terms of noise, dust, transportation,
and general disruption.
When selecting a contractor for the construction of a bridge, there is the opportunity to gain commit-
ment from the prospective contractors to adopt sustainable practices across the broad range of issues
presented in this chapter (e.g. see Case Study 3 in Subsection 7.5.3). Selection of a contractor to
build a bridge on the criterion of cost alone is unlikely to achieve sustainable outcomes in this regard.
Whilst it may be hoped that sustainable practices will become the norm in the future, the wording of
construction contracts will remain an important means by ensuring that they are delivered.
It is essential that the client and contractor adopt a realistic programme. All too often, the con-
tractor finds himself forced to provide multiple sets of formwork and falsework so that construc-
tion can be carried out on a number of different work-fronts simultaneously, in order to achieve
a short construction programme. A more sustainable option would be to use less construction
equipment, consequentially extending the programme. This is, however, very much dependent
on the client being willing to agree to a later project completion date.
7.4.4 Operation and maintenance

Sustainability in the operation and maintenance of bridges depends on timely inspection and
the implementation of suitable remedial measures. There is no such thing as a maintenance-free
construction material and most modern bridge owners have inspection and maintenance regimes
in place. However, although preventative maintenance can avoid more serious problems devel-
oping in the long term, it is frequently seen as an expense without a tangible return. This way of
thinking goes against the principles of sustainability.
Bridges generally do not have significant direct operational impacts (e.g. power usage), with
the possible exception of moving bridges. Where operational impacts do exist, they should be
minimized by design.
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1407.indd 121 12/08/15 5:44 PM

7.4.5 Assessment and strengthening

Assessment and strengthening are well-developed fields of bridge engineering and are important
in terms of sustainability. The increasing weight of goods vehicles on the roads during the last
four decades has required the strength of many existing bridges to be assessed. Physical deterio-
ration because of durability problems has also led to many structural assessments being carried
out. The same has applied to many bridges supporting railways where increased loading and
physical deterioration have also been significant. Structural standards and methodologies have
been developed by many bridge owners to allow a realistic picture of the capacity of a bridge to
be assessed and this is important in the sustainable direction of resources towards remedial work.
Hand in hand with increased loading and physical deterioration has come the need for bridges to
be strengthened and also, in some cases, widened. In cases where future increased requirements
can be foreseen, new bridges can be constructed with them in mind. For example, if a new road
is constructed with dual two-lane carriageways to meet current requirements, but where the best
estimate of predicted traffic growth will require dual three-lane carriageways in 20 years’ time, it
may be considered sustainable to build the overbridges to span three-lane carriageways in order
to avoid the need for future demolition and reconstruction.3
It is a sustainable practice that, where possible, provision for known future modification should
be taken account of in the design of a new bridge, even if this is only by means of passive mea-
sures or by not allowing arbitrary decisions in the present to prevent future change.
7.4.6 Demolition
As has already been stated, most modern bridges are designed to have a service life of 100 years
or more. There are also many old bridges in service today that have been in use for at least a cen-
tury and in many cases much longer. By virtue of their size and value, bridges are not frequently
demolished. Rather, if over time they begin to fail to meet prevailing requirements, for reasons
of cost, they are more usually repaired, strengthened, or widened.
However, when bridge demolition is carried out, it is important that this is done safely. The design
of new bridges should take into account their eventual demolition in terms of safety and also in
terms of how readily their constituent materials can be separated and recycled for other uses.
7.5 Case studies

Three case studies are presented, taken from recent and ongoing projects, each of which gives a
practical example of sustainable outcomes and of sustainable thinking in action.
• Capilano River Bridge replacement. How a bridge construction project can deliver a range
of important sustainability outcomes.
3
The judgement of this issue is made more complex because the unchecked growth of road transport powered by the
internal combustion engine is not in itself considered to be sustainable itself. In any case, prediction of long-term future
traffic demand—and hence the need for this approach—is also difficult.
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1407.indd 122 12/08/15 5:44 PM

7.5 CASE STUDIES 123
• Queensferry Crossing. How sustainability was integrated into the development of a major
bridge and infrastructure project.
• Bridges for the Queen Elizabeth Olympic Park, London. How a major contribution to sus-
tainability may be achieved by considering a project in its broadest context.
7.5.1 Case study 1—Capilano River bridge replacement (Canada)

The Capilano River Bridge carries a major highway link across the Capilano River between
North and West Vancouver in British Columbia, Canada. The project to replace part of the
existing crossing and upgrade the bridge presented significant technical, organizational, and
constructional challenges to the owner, consulting engineer, and contractor [11]. The project
also illustrates how a bridge construction project can deliver a range of important sustainability
outcomes.
The existing Capilano River Bridge comprised two separate structures. The original bridge,
which carried the narrow westbound carriageway, was a steel through truss bridge with a 76 m
span, constructed in 1930, which had been lengthened by the addition of a second 55 m span
in 1949. Additional traffic capacity was provided in 1956 by the construction of a three-lane
girder bridge immediately alongside the existing structure. By 2009, the physical condition of
the steel truss bridge was assessed to be beyond economic repair. The bridge was also consid-
ered to be functionally obsolete as the two-lane westbound carriageway formed a bottle neck
for traffic, which numbered over 25 000 vehicles a day. Provisions for pedestrians and cyclists
were also poor. The steel truss bridge therefore needed to be replaced. Funding for the project
became available at short notice in early 2009 with the condition that substantial completion
was achieved by 31 March 2011, giving an exceptionally short 2-year period for all design and
construction activities.
Major challenges
• To replace the existing steel truss bridge, on the existing alignment, without interruption to
traffic.
• To complete the project within a 2-year programme to meet project funding availability.
• To protect the natural environment in the Capilano River, including accommodating a re-
striction limiting construction work in the river to a 2-month “fish window” each summer.
• To carry out major construction work on a restricted site in the heart of a residential area
and a commercial area.
• To accommodate further programme restraints arising from a moratorium on construction
work during February and March 2010, during the period of the Olympic and Paralympic
Games in Vancouver and neighbouring Whistler, between which the highway crossing the
Capilano River Bridge formed a key link.
Solutions
• Sliding the existing 1300 ton steel truss bridge sideways onto temporary supports to make
space for construction of the new bridge, whilst creating a temporary construction detour
for westbound traffic (see Fig. 7.1). The bridge slide was completed during one overnight
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1407.indd 123 12/08/15 5:44 PM

Fig. 7.1: Capilano River Bridge during bridge slide (Image Courtesy: British Columbia Ministry
of Transportation and Infrastructure)
possession between 19 and 20 June 2010, with westbound traffic being temporarily diverted
in contra-flow onto the eastbound carriageway. The truss bridge was reopened to traffic in
its new location the next morning.
• Limiting construction work in the river for the detour structure to the one temporary pier
required for the bridge slide solution, constructed during the summer 2009 “fish window”.
Alternative solutions for the detour using proprietary panel bridge systems required more
temporary piers in the river bed.
• Provision of a new bridge with three wider traffic lanes, a dedicated lane for public trans-
port transit buses and a shared pedestrian footpath/cycleway.
• Designing the new bridge deck with steel plate girders, which could be launched into
position, thus minimizing the construction work to be carried out in the river.
• Collaboration planning between owner, consultant, and contractors to meet tight programme
deadlines, including streamlining technical and environmental approvals, advanced plan-
ning, and early construction works.
Sustainability outcomes
Environment
• Reducing construction material usage, by reusing the existing truss bridge as the temporary
construction detour.
• Recycling of materials from the truss bridge and temporary detour route once the project
was complete.
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1407.indd 124 12/08/15 5:44 PM

• Minimization of adverse ecological impacts on the Capilano River.

• Reduction in emissions and fuel consumption due to traffic, by reducing congestion through
the provision of an additional traffic lane on the new westbound bridge.
Society
• Improved road safety by the provision of wider traffic lanes, a shared footpath/cycleway,
better highway lighting and upgraded safety barriers.
• Improved public transportation by the provision of a dedicated lane for transit buses.
• Increased pedestrian and cycle traffic opportunities, encouraged by the provision of the
footpath/cycleway.
• Improved aesthetics created by the low profile of the new bridge.
• Improved air quality for the local community because of decreased traffic congestion.
• Minimization of construction impacts on local residents.
Economics
• Direct cost savings of approximately CAN$ 500,000 by sliding the existing truss bridge to
become the temporary construction detour.
• Utilization of the available project funding within challenging time constraints.
• Minimization of whole-life costs of the new bridge by reducing maintenance require-
ments (weathering steel girders, integral abutments without bearings and movement
joints).
• Reduced economic disruption due to traffic delays caused by congestion.
• Maximization of long-term value of the new bridge by including passive provision to allow
widening when the existing eastbound bridge reaches the end of its useful life.
Commentary
The replacement of the life-expired steel truss spans of the Capilano River Bridge serves as
an example of a challenging bridge engineering project that delivered a solution that fulfilled
a number of diverse but interdependent challenges. In terms of sustainability, the decision to
slide the old bridge to form the construction detour added significant value to the project both
economically and in terms of benefits to the environment and society. Without the bridge slide,
the project would still have yielded benefits. However, the outcomes achieved were signifi-
cantly greater because of the imagination and innovative approach of those involved with the
project.
Key project participants
Bridge owner: British Columbia Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure
Structural engineer: Buckland & Taylor Ltd
General contractor: Neelco Construction Inc.
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1407.indd 125 12/08/15 5:44 PM

7.5.2 Case study 2—Queensferry Crossing (Scotland, UK)

On completion in 2016, the Queensferry Crossing (formerly called the Forth Replacement Cross-
ing [FRC]) will be a critical link in the road infrastructure of Scotland by providing a replace-
ment route for vehicles to the neighbouring Forth Road Bridge. The scheme includes a major
cable-stayed bridge with three towers supporting two adjacent 650 m long navigation spans and
an innovative arrangement of crossing stay cables (Fig. 7.2). There are also an approach viaduct,
major link roads, and junction upgrades at connections to the road network [12–14].
The planning and design of the new crossing prior to its tender as “design and build” construc-
tion contract gave the owner, Transport Scotland, the opportunity to be proactive with regard
to sustainability, in particular in response to the sustainable development policies and commit-
ments of both the Scottish and UK governments. A key outcome of this was the publication
by Transport Scotland of the “Forth Replacement Crossing Sustainable Development Policy”,
which contained statements on its vision, policy, and objectives for sustainability [15]. The
policy statement contained in the document was as follows:
The Forth Replacement Crossing project will place Sustainable Development (SD)
principles—that embrace sustainable economic growth, equality and social inclu-
sion, environmental quality, climate change, and protection of the natural and cultural
heritage—at the centre of its management, planning, and delivery. The project’s sustain-
ability objectives will define our priorities for the use of resources, carbon management,
sustainable communities, and environmental management and will focus on our efforts
to embed sustainability in the key aspects of the project.
This statement clearly reflected both the ambition and the determination of the bridge owner
with regard to embedding sustainability and sustainable development in the project.
Fig. 7.2: Queensferry Crossing cable-stayed bridge (right) and the existing Forth Road Bridge
(left) (artists impression) (Image courtesy: Transport Scotland ©)
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1407.indd 126 12/08/15 5:44 PM

Sustainability appraisal
The practical realization and integration of the sustainability policy into the project took place
through a sustainability appraisal process undertaken by Transport Scotland and its consultants.
This was a dynamic process that took place over 18 months during the development of the
employer’s requirements for the “design and build” contract and the specimen design of the
scheme. The sustainability appraisal was built around a framework of sustainability objectives,
targets, and indicators developed during an initial high-level workshop. In addition to the cli-
ent’s project team and consultants, the participants in the workshop included key stakeholders
from elsewhere in the client organization.
The sustainability objectives looked at the project from a life cycle perspective—consider-
ing design, contract preparation, tendering, construction, and operation—and were framed
wherever possible in objective terms (i.e. SMART—Specific, Measurable, Achievable,
Realistic, and Time-bound). In total, 17 sustainability objectives were defined, comprising
between them 41 targets and 81 indicators. The sustainability objectives are summarized
in Table 7.2.
Each sustainability objective was assigned to a “sustainability champion” from within the proj-
ect team, who was given responsibility for seeing that the objectives and targets were integrated
into the approach and outputs of the many and various disciplines involved in defining the proj-
ect and preparing the contract documentation. This process was supported by regular meetings
of the sustainability champions to report on progress against the indicators and to share ideas.
• To design, build and operate a reliable crossing

• To contribute to the improvement of cross-Forth access to economic opportunities
• To contribute towards the development of cross-Forth Public transport opportunities
• To minimize the scheme footprint and severance of land
• To adopt sustainable resource management in design and construction
• To ensure that community engagement takes place at all key stages in the project process
• To improve local accessibility and reduce community severance
• To provide a scheme that accommodates the needs of disabled people
• To contribute to the promotion of healthy lifestyle opportunities and social inclusion
• To provide a safe design for both vehicle travellers and non-motorized users
• To reduce, reuse and recycle materials and products where practicable
• Seek to minimize embodied energy and carbon associated with key materials and their
transport to site
• To minimize carbon emissions once the scheme is open to traffic
• To protect and enhance the natural heritage including local biodiversity
• To protect the landscape, historic environment and natural heritage
• To reduce noise and air emissions
• To protect water quality, geomorphology and maximize the use of sustainable drainage
systems for environmental and hydrological benefit
Note. For details of the targets and indicators relating to the sustainability objectives, see Appendix 2 of Ref. [16].
Table 7.2: Queensferry Crossing—sustainability objectives
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1407.indd 127 12/08/15 5:44 PM

Design innovations that addressed sustainability issues were also sought out and reported. The
outcome of the sustainability appraisal was reported in the “Forth Replacement Crossing Sus-
tainability Appraisal and Carbon Management Report” [16].
Resources, energy, and carbon
In parallel with the sustainability appraisal, two other significant sustainability initiatives were
undertaken, both related to the project sustainability objectives and the details of which are
reported in the appendices to Ref. [16].
A “sustainable resource management framework” was developed with the aim of establishing a
coordinated approach to the supply, management, and use of materials and other resources on
the project. Seven key stages of the project were identified in the framework (material specifica-
tion, material and resource sourcing, transportation of materials, workforce travel, storage and
handling of materials, use of resources and materials, and disposal of materials) and objectives
and indicators were established for each.
An “energy and carbon assessment” was also carried out, including an audit of the energy and
carbon footprint of the specimen design. The assessment had the joint objectives of allowing
comparison of the impacts of options during scheme development, the comparison of contractor
designs presented at tender and ongoing monitoring and accounting.
Commentary
The Queensferry Crossing illustrates how a bridge owner with a commitment to sustainable
development embedded the principles of sustainability within a major project to construct a
world-class bridge and its associated works. The project offers considerable learning opportuni-
ties for all involved with bridge projects and has been comprehensively reported in the public
domain [16].
Bridge owner: Transport Scotland (an agency of the Scottish Government)
Consultants: Jacobs Arup JV, Natural Capital
7.5.3 Case study 3—Bridges for the Queen Elizabeth Olympic Park,
London (UK)
London hosted the Olympic and Paralympic Games in 2012 with the majority of the events
being held in the new Queen Elizabeth Olympic Park (Fig. 7.3). In addition to providing major
venues such as the Olympic Stadium, Basketball Arena, Velodrome, and Aquatics Centre, the
park required extensive infrastructure including more than 30 bridges and underpasses, 20 km of
highways and landscaping [17]. The London Games have been described as one of the most sus-
tainable Games ever and has allowed a semi-derelict industrial area of London to be upgraded.
A large number of temporary structures have been used, with designs catering for the clear and
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1407.indd 128 12/08/15 5:44 PM

Fig. 7.3: Queen Elizabeth Olympic Park (Image courtesy: M. Kirk/Arup ©)
differing objectives both during the Games and afterwards in “legacy”. After the Games, many
of the structures and venues will be either removed or downsized.
Major infrastructure redevelopment
With 5 years until the opening of the park, the Olympic Delivery Authority (the body tasked
with delivering the new park) had formed a positive sustainability plan developed during prepa-
ration of the overall scheme for planning approval in 2007 [18].
The mission was to “deliver venues, facilities and infrastructure and transport on time and in a
way that maximises the delivery of a sustainable legacy within the available budget” [19].
With such a big infrastructure project involving redevelopment of the railways, new venues,
new structures, bridges, highways, and housing, the sustainability aspirations were crystallized.
Starting with five key themes of climate change, waste, biodiversity, inclusion, and healthy
living, sustainability aspirations were extended to the widest possible view and considered the
following topics [19]:
• Carbon
• Water
• Waste
• Materials
• Biodiversity and ecology
• Land, water, noise, and air
• Supporting communities
• Transport and mobility
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1407.indd 129 12/08/15 5:44 PM

• Access
• Employment and business
• Health and well-being
• Inclusion (easy access for all)
Real and measurable targets
Having set aspirations to deliver the ‘greenest’ Games ever, positive and measureable targets
were set. These included Refs. [20,21]:
• The aspiration was to reduce carbon dioxide emissions in permanent buildings by 50%, and
58% reduction was achieved. This included providing a new combined cooling, heating,
and power plant.
• The target was to reduce potable water use by 40%, and 60% reduction was achieved by
recycling of rainwater and reuse of both grey and treated black water.
• The target was to achieve 90% in reuse, recycling, or recovery of demolition materials and
98% was achieved. Extensive soil cleaning and washing or bio-remediation was carried out
for excavated material [22].
• The target was to achieve 25% recycled aggregate and 42% was achieved.
• 45 ha of new bio-diverse habitats to be delivered and 25 were provided during the Games
and 45 should be achieved in the long term (in legacy).
• All timber was to be obtained from legal and sustainable sources and was achieved.
• The target was to deliver 50% by train or waterways rather than by road, and 67% was
achieved.
These targets were achieved through a positive attitude towards sustainability between all par-
ties concerned with the design and construction. Indeed, sustainability clauses were included
within the contracts [20].
Bridge specifics
Consider now the bridges in further detail in relation to major gains in the sustainability
topics [23].
Carbon—minimize embodied carbon emissions
• The carbon footprint of the bridges was estimated. The most effective way to reduce use of
embodied carbons is to minimize the size and material quantities of the bridges. As a starter,
reuse of and modification to existing bridges was considered.
• With the majority of the bridges being for pedestrian use, the bridge width requirements
were studied carefully. Pedestrian flow studies were carried out, which predicted the den-
sity of the crowd flow during the Games in line with the Games event schedule. Some
bridge widths needed to be considerably wider during the Games reaching up to 60 m width
[23]. It was therefore realized that splitting the bridges into temporary and permanent com-
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1407.indd 130 12/08/15 5:45 PM

ponents gave opportunities not only to recycle or reuse the temporary section, but it also
afforded additional area for landscaping and planting.
• A few bridges did not require permanent portions and were purely provided for the Games.
After the games, the temporary bridges will either be used elsewhere or recycled. One of
these was created by reusing a modified version of a bridge provided for construction of
the works. Plans are in hand to relocate the bridge to an alternative location within the
Park [24].
Waste—reduce and recycle
• Approximately 2700 ton of crushed concrete was recycled from the site for use within the
abutment and wing-wall facings and contributed to achieving the intended target.
Materials—use environmentally and socially responsible materials
• The concrete mix was developed to include both secondary/recycled aggregate and either
ground granulated blast furnace slag or pulverized fuel ash as a cement replacement.
• All timber used was from sustainable sources.
Biodiversity—provide habitats for birds, bats, and reptiles
• A high quality habitat has been achieved for flora and fauna with nesting places attached to
bridges and within the embankments. This has included fitting more than 130 bird and bat
boxes. The bird boxes were formed from waste pipe offcuts.
• The reduction in the width of bridges will have a positive impact on improvement and re-
establishment of the park’s natural ecology. This has also been improved by detailing the
bridges with cantilevers and inclined webs, and the careful design of lighting level under
the bridges. Shade-tolerant plants have been selected for the river edges below bridge decks.
Removal of temporary bridge components will reduce shading considerably in legacy.
Transport—sustainable transport via water or rail
• The site was adjacent to waterways linking the River Thames and to railways linking to
Stratford and Liverpool Street stations in central London. This afforded the opportunity to
limit the use of the road network and keep carbon use for material delivery to a minimum.
Whilst the highways were used for many items, both the railways and waterways were used
to enable the desired target to be achieved overall.
Inclusion—disabled and mobility impaired fully included within the design
• To deliver against the accessibility targets, the Olympic Park is designed generally to pro-
vide gradients of 1:60 but no more than 1:20 in publicly accessible areas [25]. This has a
tremendous effect on the landscaping and ramp lengths.
Sustainability assessment
Reviews were taken with a positive attitude to sustainability and records of the reviews
were kept. This enabled an independent assessment to be carried out by CEEQUAL. This
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1407.indd 131 12/08/15 5:45 PM

is an evidence-based Sustainability Assessment and Awards Scheme for civil engineering,

infrastructure, landscaping and the public realm in the UK [26]. This scheme can be used world-
wide but similar schemes should also exist.
Separate submissions were made for the different contracts. For example, the bridge design and
construction for the stadium bridges have achieved the highest possible “Excellent” award with
a score of 95% [23].
Commentary
A prime point of learning from this project was that although limited gains in sustainability
may be achieved when considering building bridges alone, but when a full account is also
taken of the approaches, embankments, and infrastructure, significant gains may be made.
As the world populations increase, so the requirement for new infrastructure increases; it
is for the engineer to promote more efficient use of our world’s resources. Further details
of sustainability studies on the Queen Elizabeth Park are available at the websites listed as
references [27].
Client: Olympic Delivery Authority
Delivery Partner: CLM (formed from CH2M Hill, Laing O’Rourke and MACE)
Lead infrastructure/bridge consultants: Arup and Atkins
7.6 A sustainability checklist for bridges

A checklist to assist in the development and review of sustainability options for bridges is pre-
sented in Table 7.3. This is for guidance and is not intended to be exhaustive.
7.7 Conclusion
Sustainability is a broad subject with far-reaching consequences in day-to-day lives, and the
global construction industry is not the least among the sectors of human activity, which is giving
attention to sustainability issues. Bridges are one of many discrete but interrelated fields within
that sector. It is hoped that this chapter has provided an overview of sustainability in relation to
bridges.
Our understanding of these issues is incomplete and the means by which we incorporate sustain-
ability into bridge engineering are still being developed. However, a key to achieving sustainable
bridges will be the willingness by all concerned—and perhaps by bridge engineers in particu-
lar—to look beyond the traditional boundaries of their own technical disciplines and to seek more
integrated, better solutions that address the multiple challenges with which they are presented.
Above all, bridge engineers will need to be able to communicate better regarding sustainability
and their work for their clients, project collaborators, and to the public at large.
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1407.indd 132 12/08/15 5:45 PM

7.6 A SUSTAINABILITY CHECKLIST FOR BRIDGES 133
Aspect Prime party Action Remarks

Fundamental Owner, Carry out environmental Consider independent certification
Designer impact assessment (EIA) through CEEQUAL or similar
sustainability rating system.
Carry out a sustainability
assessment using proprietary tools
or from first principles, including
embodied carbon calculations
Fundamental Designer Minimize structural Use continuous rather than
sections and the use of simply-supported spans. This will
materials. Design all also limit use of expansion joints
sections to their limit and water/de-icing salt ingress
points. Minimize pier sizes to
reduce likelihood of flooding on
river banks if piers are in a river
Fundamental Owner Accept that additional The challenge: the owner may not
upfront costs may arise for necessarily gain direct benefits for
being sustainable being sustainable but society does
Fundamental Owner, Reuse and modify Save material
Designer existing structures where
realistically practicable
Transport Owner, Bridges with provision Discourage individual diesel/pet-
Designer for rail, bus, electric cars, rol car use
cyclists and pedestrians (in-
cluding mobility impaired/
disabled) to be encouraged
Transport Owner, Bridges that will last for Encourage use of public transport,
Designer 120 years rather than 20 shared driving such as by using
years priority lanes
Transport Designer, Materials to be brought Limit use of direct supply by lorry
Contractor in by rail and water rather
than road where possible
Materials Designer, Use recycled aggregate, Use waste by-products of manu-
Contractor pulverized fuel ash (PFA) facture and minimize use of
or ground granulated blast cement
furnace slag (GGBS)
Materials Designer, Reuse existing steelwork Primarily for standard section
Contractor sections sizes and hence small spans
Materials Contractor Provide materials from Consider carefully if materials are
local sources to be sourced from the other side
of the world
Table 7.3: A sustainability checklist for bridges (continued)
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1407.indd 133 12/08/15 5:45 PM


Materials Designer Timber to be from sustain- This generally precludes
able sources hardwoods
Materials Designer Use of weathering or May be some benefit to remove
stainless steel in place of requirements for painting and
painting repainting
Materials Designer Use of stainless steel rein- Extend durability life of rein-
forcement forced concrete structure
Construction Owner, Compare short-and long- Provide a temporary reusable
Designer term needs or recyclable structure if func-
tionality is only required in the
short term (e.g. wide deck width
required for a major special event)
Construction Owner, Avoid too tight a time table Greater reuse of formwork/false-
Contractor for construction work
Construction Contractor Reduce quantities of Avoid transportation impacts and
exported and imported fill landfill tax (if applicable)
to a minimum
Environment Designer, Provide local flora Translocate surface topsoil and
Contractor plant to other location to compen-
sate for areas of lost vegetation
Environment Contractor Avoid works during breed- May extend construction pro-
ing season of local wildlife gramme
Environment Owner, Consider not providing Give scope for retrofit if safety
Designer deck lighting but make pas- requirement for lighting changes
sive provision if installation
becomes necessary later
Environment Designer Limit width of bridges or Maximize light under bridge to
use box structures with promote plant growth and mini-
large cantilevers mize requirement for artificial
lighting
Environment Designer Provide habitats for flora Provide bird and bat boxes
and fauna Provide badger tunnels if route
displaced by bridge
Society Owner, Choose site location to Use of a brownfield site so that
Designer benefit the local area and greenfield sites are available for
society other uses
Maximize benefits to local people
and trades
Society Designer Limit noise to local resi- Provide functional and aesthetic
dents noise barrier
(Continued)
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1407.indd 134 12/08/15 5:45 PM

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 135

Society Designer Improve the landscaping Provide aesthetic structure and
and include planting earthworks layout
Society Owner, Allow for access and stop- Ensure walkway slopes limited
Designer ping places for mobility
impaired
Water Designer Use low water cement ratio Use high strength concrete
reduction and high strength concrete
Water Designer Recycle rain water Use SUDS and rainwater-harvest-
reduction ing systems
Maintenance Owner Limit use of de-icing salts Extend life of concrete
Maintenance Designer Use of dehumidification for Carefully consider running costs
steelwork boxes and cables
Table 7.3: A sustainability checklist for bridges
Acknowledgements
The authors acknowledge the part played by colleagues, project co-collaborators, and friends in
stimulating their thinking on sustainable development. In particular, the authors acknowledge
the work and achievements of the owners, engineers, contractors, consultants, and all other par-
ties involved in the projects used in the Case Studies. Permissions to use copyright images in the
figures are gratefully acknowledged.
References
[1] World Commission on Environment and Development. 1987. Our Common Future.
Oxford University Press, Oxford.
[2] Martin, K., Bennett, S., Kirk, M. 2003. Channel tunnel rail link section 1: Medway
viaduct. Proc. ICE Civil Eng., 156: 36–39.
[3] Ostenfeld, K.H. 2009. An Integrated Multidisciplinary Approach to Design of Major
Fixed Links, IABSE Venice Symposium Report, Volume 97.
[4] Thomas, G. 2005. A650 Bingley Relief Road – South Bog Viaduct, Concrete, November/
December 2005, 65–67.
[5] Hussain, N., Wilson, I. 1999. The Hulme Arch Bridge, Manchester. Proc. ICE Civil Eng.,
132: 2–13.
[6] United Kingdom. 2015. The Construction (Design and Management) Regulations.
[7] Parker, D. The ballad of Ballingdon Bridge, New Civil Engineer, 10 August 2000.
[8] Holgate, A. 1997. The Art of Structural Engineering: The Work of Jörg Schlaich and his
Team, Edition Axel Menges, Stuttgart/London, 156–169.
[9] Spencer, P.C., Hendy,C.R, Petty, R. 2012. Quantification of sustainability principles in
bridge projects. Proc. ICE Brid. Eng., 165: 81–89.
[10] Salokangas, L. (ed.). 2013. ETSI Bridge Life Cycle Optimisation Stage 3, Aalto Univer-
sity, Science + Technology 4/2013, Helsinki.
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1407.indd 135 12/08/15 5:45 PM

[11] Johnson, M., Queen, D. 2011. Owner, consultant and contractor collaboration for rapid
delivery of the marine drive transit priority project, Transportation Association of Canada
Annual Conference, Edmonton, Alberta, 11–14 September 2011. http://www.tac-atc.ca/
english/annualconference/tac2011/docs/m2/johnson.pdf.
[12] Carter, M., Kite, S., Hussain, N., Minto, B. 2010. Design of the Forth replacement
crossing, Scotland. Proc. ICE Brid. Eng., 163(BE2): 91–99.
[13] Curran, P., Elnegaard, J., Patsch, A., Bolton, I., Goldie, I. 2011. Forth replacement
crossing – tender design, IABSE Symposium, London, September 2011.
[14] Carney, C.T., Nowak, D. Forth Replacement Crossing – Construction Proposals, IABSE
Symposium, London, September 2011.
[15] Transport Scotland. Forth Replacement Crossing Sustainable Development Policy, January
2009, http://www.transportscotland.gov.uk/files/documents/projects/forth-replacement/
frc_-_sustainability_development_policy_-_January_2009.pdf.
[16] Transport Scotland. Forth Replacement Crossing Sustainability Appraisal and Carbon
Management Report, November 2009, http://www.transportscotland.gov.uk/strategy-
and-research/publications-and-consultations/j11364-00.htm.
[17] Baird, D., Thurston, M., Triggs, C., Corrigan, H., Samaras, S. 2011. Delivering London
2012: Structures, bridges and highways. Proc. ICE, Civil Eng., 164: 23–29.
[18] Nimmo, A., Frost, J., Shaw, S., McNevin, N. 2011. Delivering London 2012: master
planning. Proc. ICE Civil Eng., 164: 13–19.
[19] Olympic Delivery Authority. Sustainable Development Strategy (Publication code:
LOSD/4/07), ODA, London, January 2007, http://learninglegacy.independent.gov.uk/
documents/pdfs/sustainability/22-sustainable-development-strategy-sust.pdf.
[20] Epstein, D., Jackson, R., Braithwaite, P. 2011. Delivering London 2012: Sustainability
strategy. Proc. ICE, 164: 27–33.
[21] Olympic Delivery Authority. Delivering change (3-pre-games-sustainability-report_Neu-
tral.pdf), ODA London 2012, website, April 2012. http://learninglegacy.independent.gov.
uk/documents/pdfs/sustainability/5-london-2012-post-games-sustainability-report-inter-
active-12-12-12.pdf.
[22] Hellings, J., Lass, M., Apted, J., Mead, I. 2011. Delivering London 2012: geotechnical
enabling works. Proc. ICE, 164: 5–10.
[23] Baird, D., Kirk, M., Dhanipersad, S., Cook, S. 2011. Bridges, short and long term solu-
tions for the London 2012 Games, IABSE Symposium, London, September 2011.
[24] Kvist, E. Bridge linking Greenway to Stratford to be relocated to Olympic Park. Ne-
wham Recorder, 16 November 2012. http://www.newhamrecorder.co.uk/news/bridge_
linking_greenway_in_stratford_to_be_relocated_to_olympic_park_1_1695380#.
[25] Olympic Delivery Authority. 2012. Inclusive Design Standards, ODA, London, http://
learninglegacy.independent.gov.uk/documents/pdfs/equality-inclusion-employment-and-
skills/62-inclusive-design-standards-eies.pdf.
[26] Burgess, C., Connolly, S., Jorgensen, R. 2012. Achieving CEEQUAL Excellent in the
Olympic Park, ODA, London, June 2012, http://learninglegacy.independent.gov.uk/pub-
lications/achieving-ceequal-excellent-on-the-olympic-park.php.
[27] The London Organizing Committee of the Olympic Games and Paralympic Games. Learn-
ing Legacy. http://learninglegacy.independent.gov.uk/themes/sustainability/index.php.
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1407.indd 136 12/08/15 5:45 PM

FURTHER READING 137
Further reading
In this section, a selection of published material relevant to sustainability and bridges is
presented. This is not a comprehensive review of information contained in the literature, but it
intends to provide a starting point for further reading and investigation.
General
The following provide an overview of sustainability in relation to civil engineering, infrastruc-

ture and bridges.
• Head, P.R. 2009. Entering an ecological age: the engineer’s role. Proc. ICE Civil Eng., 162:
70–75.
• Willets, R., Burdon, J., Glass, J., Frost, M. 2010. Fostering sustainability in infrastructure
development schemes. Proc. ICE Eng. Sustainability, 163(ES3): 159–166.
• Fenner, R.A., Ainger, C.M., Cruikshank, H.J., Guthrie, P.M. 2006. Widening engineering
horizons: addressing the complexity of sustainable development. Proc. ICE Eng. Sustain-
ability, 159(ES4): 145–154.
• Silman, R. 2007. Sustainable engineering – a philosophical perspective. Struct. Eng., 85(9):
38–42.
• Institution of Structural Engineers (UK). 2011. Sustainability for bridge engineers – part 1.
Struct. Eng., 89(5): 12–13.
• Institution of Structural Engineers (UK). 2011. Sustainability for bridge engineers – part 2.
Struct. Eng., 89(5) 14–15.
• Martin, A.J. 2004. Concrete bridges in sustainable development. Proc. ICE Eng. Sustain-
ability, 157(ES4): 219–230.
• Steele, K., Cole, G., Parke, G., Clarke, B., Harding, J. 2003. Highway bridges and environ-
ment – sustainable perspectives. Proc. ICE Civil Eng., 156: 176–182.
• Daniel, R.A. Environmental considerations for structural material selection for bridges, Euro-
pean Bridge Engineering Conference – Lightweight Bridge Decks, Rotterdam, March 27–28,
2003.
• Collings, D. 2006. An environmental comparison of bridge forms. Proc. ICE Brid. Eng.,
159(BE4): 163–168.
• Spencer, P.C., Hendy, C.R., Petty, R. 2012. Quantification of sustainability principles in
bridge projects. Proc. ICE Brid. Eng., 165: 81–89.
• Salokangas, L. (ed). 2013. ETSI Bridge Life Cycle Optimisation Stage 3. Aalto University,
Science + Technology 4/2013, Helsinki.
Sustainable concrete
• Swamy, R.N. 2001. Holistic design: key to sustainability in concrete construction. Proc.
ICE Struct. Build., 146(4): 371–379.
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1407.indd 137 12/08/15 5:45 PM

• Desai, S. 2011. Sustainable concrete construction and engineering. Struct. Eng., 89(9):
30–33.
• Oyawa, W.O. 2004. Eco-materials for developing countries. Struct. Eng. Int., 14(3): 208–
212.
• Nielsen, H.O. 2002. Demo project green bridge, Proc. XVIII Nordic Concrete Research
Meeting, Helsingør, Denmark, June 2002, 41–43.
• Mathiesen, D., Berrig, A. 2002. Centre for Grøn Beton – Demobro. Teknologisk Institut,
Beton, Denmark, (In Danish).
Cements
• Price, W. 2009. Cementitious materials for the twenty-first century. Proc. ICE Civil Eng.,
162: 64–69.
Concrete aggregates
• Marsh, B. 2006. One Coleman Street – A Case Study in the Use of Secondary Materials
in Concrete. Institute of Concrete Technology Yearbook 2006–7, Institute of Concrete
Technology, Camberley, UK, 45–55.
Steel
• Dolling, C.N., Hudson, R.M.. 2003. Weathering steel bridges. Proc. Institut. Civil Eng.
Brid. Eng., 156(BE1): 39–44.
• Sobrino, J.A. 2006. Stainless steel road bridge in Menorca, Spain. Struct. Eng. Int., 16(2):
96–100.
Timber
• Lawrence, A. 2008. Modern timber bridges – an international perspective. Struct. Eng.,

86(18): 26–31.
• Ekeberg, P.K., Søyland, K. 2005. Filsa Bridge, Norway – a record-breaking timber bridge.
Proc. Institut. Civil Eng. Brid. Eng., 158(BE1): 1–7.
• Gerold, M. 2006. Economy and efficiency of modern timber bridges – life expectancy and
costs of maintenance. Struct. Eng. Int., 16(3): 261–267.
Aluminium
• Siwowski, T. 2006. Aluminium bridges – past, present and future. Struct. Eng. Int., 16(4):
286–293.
• Radbeck, C., Dienes, E., Kosteas, D. 2006. Aluminium structures – a sustainable future?
Struct. Eng. Int., 16(4): 339–344.
Composites
• Head, P. 2004. New bridge technology for sustainable development. Proc. ICE Brid. Eng.,
157(BE4): 193–202.
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1407.indd 138 12/08/15 5:45 PM

FURTHER READING 139
• Firth, I., Cooper, D. 2002. New materials for new bridges – Halgavor Bridge, UK. Struct.
Eng. Int., 12(2): 80–82.
Environment and biodiversity
Assessment and mitigation of environmental issues for the major bridge forming the Hong-
Kong Shenzhen Western Corridor are described in:
• Lee, J.K.T., Yiu, S.F.L., Lau, J.Y.Y., Li, M.S.M., Chan, S.Y., Kwan, S.C.F., Wan, M.M.O.,
Wong, C.H.Y. Hong-Kong – Shenzhen Western Corridor: Environmental Challenges from
EIA Study to Construction. http://ev.hkie.org.hk.
Extensive work has been carried out in the Netherlands into land bridges and the optimal aspects
of their design to promote their successful use by animals.
Rijswaterstaat (the Netherlands): Nature Across Motorways, Rijswaterstaat, Delft, 1995.Where

it is not possible to avoid particular areas of natural habitat, translocation may be a viable alter-
native to destruction.
• Box, J., Stanhope, K. 2010. Translocating wildlife habitats: a guide for civil engineers.
Proc. ICE Civil Eng., 163: 123–130.
Aesthetics and design
The following give practical advice on the aesthetics and appearance of bridges.
• Leonhardt, F. 1982. Brücken - Bridges. DVA, Stuttgart.

• Gottemoller, F. 1998. Bridgescape – The Art of Designing Bridges. John Wiley & Sons,
New York.
• Highways Agency (UK). 1996. The Appearance of Bridges and Other Highway Structures.
HMSO, London.
Further relevant discussion can be found in:
• Menn, C. 1996. The place of aesthetics in bridge design. Struct. Eng. Int., 6(2): 93–95.
• Walther, R. 1996. Engineers, architects and bridge design. Struct. Eng. Int., 6(2): 77–79.
• Gimsing, N.J. 1999. Bridge aesthetics and structural honesty, IABSE Symposium, Rio de
Janeiro.
Issues relating to the landscape design of a major infrastructure project are discussed in:
• Armour, T. 2003. Channel tunnel rail link section 1: landscape design. Proc. ICE Civil Eng.,
156: 54–59.
Health, safety, and welfare
The following document describes how health and safety can be incorporated into construction
through the design process. Although it is written in terms of legal requirements in the United
Kingdom, the principles are worthy of more general consideration.
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1407.indd 139 12/08/15 5:45 PM

• United Kingdom. 2015. The Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 2015,
TSO, London.
Community participation
Experiences of community participation and of community relations during the construction of

major infrastructure projects are given in:
• Bordoley, S., Gilham, A., Abbott, J. 2002. Adding a Social Dimension to Engineering
to Aid the Sustainable Development Process, International Sustainable Development Re-
search Conference, University of Manchester, UK.
• Gambrill, B. 2003. Channel tunnel rail link: community relations during implementation.
Proc. ICE Civil Eng., 156: 24–27.
Employment
• Martins, L., Bowsher, K., Eley, S., Hazelhurst, G. 2011. Delivering London 2012: work-
force diversity and skills. Proc. ICE Civil Eng., 164: 40–45.
Demolition
• Clarke, R. 2010. Role of the structural engineer in demolition. Struct. Eng., 88(11): 28–33.
Decision-making
• Faber, M.H., Rackwitz, R. 2004. Sustainable decision making in civil engineering. Struct.
Eng. Int., 14(3): 237–242.
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1407.indd 140 12/08/15 5:45 PM

141
Chapter
8
Structural Reassessment for Lifetime
Extension
Christian Bucher, Prof.; Center of Mechanics and Structural Dynamics, Vienna University
of Technology, Wien, Austria, Maik Brehm, Dr. Ing.; Division Director Structural Mechanics,
Merkle & Partner GbR, Heidenheim, Germany, Contact: christian.bucher@tuwien.ac.at;
me@maikbrehm.com
8.1 Introduction
As existing structures are modified, as engineering knowledge advances, and as the require-
ments to extend life increase, it must be demonstrated that operations can continue safely and
economically. There is a general recognition not only in structural engineering but actually also
across all industrial sectors that this reassessment process is different from the design process.
As a minimum, the known conditions and the specific functional requirements of existing struc-
tures need to be taken into account (with design uncertainty factors removed where site-specific
parameters are available from as-built information and inspections). Nowadays, several highly
specific rules and guidelines for certain problems are available. However, most of them are nei-
ther general enough to use in another context, nor do they reflect the complete state of the art.
Due to an increasing number of ageing structures, there is a high potential to save a substantial
amount of money with a more comprehensive approach. This section presents a framework for
the cost optimal reassessment of existing structures consistent with the available information
and such that any requirement for the safety of the structure is achieved. It is formulated as
general as possible so as to be useful for each reassessment problem. The guideline presented
here should help engineers, managers and owners to undertake their assessment of existing
structures. Of course, the specific knowledge about the particular object being reassessed and
the numerical and experimental assessment methods are indispensable. The following sections
are based on a review paper [1], from which several passages are taken.
In contrast to Chapter 6, where the cost optimal continuous assessment and maintenance of the
structure during its normal lifetime is addressed, this section concentrates on the reassessment
of existing structures in the case of serious doubts on its safety level. Therein, three main sce-
narios can be distinguished:
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1408.indd 141 12/08/15 5:45 PM

142 CHAPTER 8. STRUCTURAL REASSESSMENT FOR LIFETIME EXTENSION
1. Completing the design life of a structure or serious unexpected damage has been identified
by maintenance actions
2. Significant decrease of the structure’s resistance (e.g. by extraordinary events, such as earth-
quakes, flooding, and accidents) and
3. Significant change of use (e.g. conversion of the building, for example a bridge designed for
passenger trains needs to be used for heavy trains).
Hence, the information provided in this section needs to be considered along with the recom-
mendations given in Chapter 6, if an in-depth investigation of the structure may be justifiable.
In particular, the current section provides the general philosophy and a summary of current best
practice with respect to reassessment across various industrial sectors. In addition, advanced
methods useful for the reassessment of structures are briefly discussed.
8.2 General philosophy

Independent of the kind of structure, every reassessment consists of three main steps:
1. Triggering and preliminary investigation: Includes the reason to initiate the reassessment
process as discussed before. Furthermore, a collection and first review of data from avail-
able documents and monitoring is required. If necessary, simple measurements can be
arranged.
2. In-depth investigation and reassessment: This is the main step of the reassessment proc-
ess, which involves a combination of numerical assessment, experimental assessment,
measurements, and inspections to increase the knowledge about the object. To balance cost
and benefits, the process should be organized in steps from coarse assumptions to more
exact assumptions, from little effort to significant effort, with the simpler approaches being
exhausted before more complex and expensive steps are taken.
3. Conclusion and consequences: In this step, the best solution for the reassessed structure
based on the results of the second step has to be identified considering all cost-benefit as-
pects (e.g. economic, ecological, social, and individual aspects).
Within each step, various decisions are necessary, which can result in a fairly complex decision-
making process. In order to avoid subjective decisions, a cost-benefit analysis or cost analysis
is recommended, tagging each future event with all advantages and disadvantages in monetary
units. These cost-benefit relations should be considered in each step, which can be reused and
updated within the assessment process.
The quality and success depend on the current state of the art (codes, standards, generally
accepted technical guidelines, etc.), the individual expertise, and the experience of the assessor.
Furthermore, some additional aspects should be considered:
• The process of collecting information, updating the understanding of the object’s perform-
ance through analysis, and devising repair and strengthening measures is a decision process
that aims to identify the most effective investigations and modifications required to satisfy
the new requirements for the use of the structure and to remove any doubts with regard to its
condition and future performance. It is important that this process is optimized, considering
the total service life costs by integrating the cost-benefit analysis.
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1408.indd 142 12/08/15 5:45 PM

8.3 BEST PRACTICE 143
• Responsibilities: The owner is responsible for the structure and has to initiate the reassessment.
It is recommended that the expertise and experience of engineers be engaged for certain tasks.
Hence, the responsibilities are distributed between the engineers and the client or owner. In
general, the engineers have to advise and explain the preferred solutions, but the client makes
the decision in collaboration with the relevant authority. Only if the decision is not in accord
with common societal and safety rules, the engineer is allowed to assume higher authority.
Rapid decisions by the engineer to ensure safety aspects are also justifiable.
• Reporting results: At each stage, when a decision has been made, the results have to be
summarized in a report for the owner. In particular, the report must contain all the necessary
information on the safety and conclusions with recommendations for the next decision-
making step. Additionally, a final report must summarize the main results of the reassess-
ment. The results should be stored in a database to simplify the exchange of information
with other projects.
• Reuse of results: Since for many objects each design is redesign, the reuse of results can
avoid double work and consequently save money. There is a considerable advantage if
many similar kinds of objects having similar environmental conditions and exposure lev-
els (e.g. offshore structures, standardized bridges, pipelines) are present. The benefits can
almost be multiplied by the number of objects, while the costs for the reassessment are
lower for additional objects. Worldwide, Europe-wide, or company-wide databases should
be used to save and recall the data. Furthermore, the results of a reassessment should not be
restricted to the reassessment itself. They are also useful in updating the asset management
(see Chapter 6).
8.3 Best practice

Nowadays, many industrial sectors have established their own strategies for the reassessment
and life extension of existing facilities and structures. A common approach is a step-by-step
reassessment from basic visual inspection to a detailed numerical assessment (e.g. structural
reliability analysis). The general aspects for the reassessment of existing structures can be found
in the JCSS guideline [2]. However, each industrial sector has developed its own concept for
reassessment. The most advanced and common codes are ISO 2394(1998) [3] and ISO 13822
(2010) [4]. The flow chart, shown in Fig. 8.1, summarizes the best practice of all industrial sec-
tors to one framework for the reassessment of existing structures, applicable to all structures of
all industrial sectors. Additionally, special standards and codes should be established to reflect
the special requirements of each industrial sector at the specific reassessment stage. ISO 19902
(2007) [5] and underpinning American Petroleum Institute recommended practices providing
such an example for offshore structures under extreme environmental loading. However, all
the general principles given in Section 8.2 have to be taken into account. Section 8.4 is rec-
ommended for a more detailed explanation regarding specific advanced methods useful in the
reassessment process. In the following, all specific reassessment steps depicted in Fig. 8.1 are
explained:
(a) Reassessment initiator: A reassessment initiator, also called a trigger, is the motivation to
activate the reassessment procedure. Fundamentally, the need for a reassessment is based on
a significant decrease of the structure’s resistance, a significant change of use, completing
the design lifetime or the observation of severe damage.
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1408.indd 143 12/08/15 5:45 PM

Assessment initiator
is triggered (a)
History data and simple Review system, actions

measurements (b) and conditions of object (b)
Trigger
confirmed?
(c)
i = 0 Yes
Further experimental Refine system, actions
assessment (g) and resistances (d)
Refine uncertainties
and/or target safety level (e)
Numerical assessment
at level Li (f)
Yes
All requirements
met? (f)
No
i=i+1 Yes
L < Lmax?
(f)
No
Object not
fit-for-purpose (f)
Reduction of
Restoration
exposure level (h) (i)
Object
Demolish object
(j) fit-for-purpose
Preservation of Preservation of this

similar objects (k) and similar objects (k)
Cost-benefit analysis
(l)
Fig. 8.1: Flow chart of an assessment for structures (adapted from Ref. [1])
(b) Review system, actions and condition: The current system, actions, and condition have to
be compared with the original design performance (or previous assessment of this or other
similar objects, wherever applicable). The information is available from original design
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1408.indd 144 12/08/15 5:45 PM

8.3 BEST PRACTICE 145
data, construction data, history data (e.g. structural health or condition monitoring data,
special events), analyses, and simple visual inspection and measurements (e.g. size of
components). Code revisions since the design should be considered. Assessment records
and a database of similar reassessments should also be examined, wherever relevant/
available.
(c) Trigger confirmed or assessment required? In the case where the preliminary investigations
show that a full assessment is not necessary, the procedure can be stopped, for example, if
doubts are not confirmed or the knowledge from a similar object can be used.
(d) Refine system, actions, and resistances: If new information from the first review (step b)
is available, the assumptions of actions, resistances, model, and system have to be revised.
In advanced levels of numerical assessment, it is possible to refine these assumptions by
increased knowledge from experimental assessments (step g) (e.g. measured thicknesses or
yield stress tests).
(e) Refine uncertainties or target safety levels: In the first level of calculation, L0, the latest
common codes and standards shall be used to determine the uncertainties of exposure and
resistance as well as the target safety level. Very often, these codes use a partial safety
factor approach. Within more advanced experimental assessments, the uncertainties and
safety levels can be revised based on increased knowledge or reduced uncertainty con-
cerning the actual composition of an existing object when compared with assumptions
necessary in design. The refinement of model and system assumptions has to be consid-
ered as well.
(f) Numerical assessment: Numerical assessments of the safety or reliability of the considered
structure are performed using the refinements in steps (d) and (e). A general overview regard-
ing probabilistic assessment can be found in Ref. [2]. There are several possible levels; the
first (reference) analysis should always be using current recognized codes. Although, based
on experience, the engineer may decide to jump from L0 to a significantly more sophisti-
cated numerical assessment, there are advantages in improving the understanding of the
performance of a structure in stages, working through the levels of assessment sequentially.
If the object does not pass the code requirements, a more advanced numerical assessment
can be applied taking account of real aspects of performance, often not included explicitly
in codes. Some possibilities are: considering non-linear as opposed to linear approaches and
investigating system performance of a whole structure and not just individual components.
The most advanced method is the system reliability analysis based on a generic approach.
Obviously, it is difficult to define a firm hierarchy of such methods. The range of more
advanced levels depends on the object and differs from one industrial sector to another. Risk
analysis and cost-benefit aspects shall be considered throughout. If a numerical assessment
demonstrates that all requirements are met, the object may be deemed fit for purpose. Addi-
tional experimental assessments may be required (see step g) to increase the knowledge of
the exposure level, resistance level, and model and system assumptions of the investigated
object, which finally leads to a loop with different numerical assessment levels, Li, with
increased accuracy. The highest level Lmax depends on the available numerical and experi-
mental assessment methods and cost-benefit relations. Assuming that all tools are used and
the object does not pass the numerical assessment, the loop ends and the object is declared
as NOT fit-for-purpose.
(g) Experimental assessment: Experimental assessment includes decisions about what should
be measured, which method has to be used and the subsequent interpretation of the results.
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1408.indd 145 12/08/15 5:45 PM

Obviously, it depends on the next numerical assessment step and the cost-benefit relation
(or may be needed to overcome particular uncertainties about the construction or condition
of the object). A pretest analysis might be useful to select measurement positions and sensor
types to profit optimally from the experiments. An overview of several experimental assess-
ment methods (e.g. visual inspection, non-destructive methods) can be found in Chapter 6
and in Ref. [1].
(h) Reduction of exposure level: If the structure is not fit-for-purpose, an option to keep it
operating in some form can be allowed by limiting the exposure level. To adopt this
approach, it has to be guaranteed that no higher exposure level is possible. This assurance
may be achieved operationally (e.g. by de-manning) or additional modification of the
object may be necessary with restoration or mitigation measures (step i). A typical exam-
ple is the introduction of a speed limit at road bridges to restrict vibrations. Condition
monitoring or structural health monitoring systems can help to observe the compliance of
such measures.
(i) Restoration: Restoration (sometimes known as mitigation) is defined as an essential or min-
imum set of retrofit steps that aid in extending the service or ultimate life for a specified time
period. The main restoration methods are the increase of resistance and the reduction of the
exposure level. After restoration or mitigation, an additional general assessment is neces-
sary to verify the performance of the new object for the new conditions. This information is
important to update the asset management (see Chapter 6).
(j) Demolition of object: The investigated object will be decommissioned and destroyed if it
cannot be shown, or made to be, fit-for-purpose. Therefore, aspects of environment-friendly
recycling or reuse of parts of the object have to be considered, and the health and safety
issues in demolition process are of particular importance. Any reused part needs an addi-
tional intensive experimental assessment and an advanced maintenance programme. The
reassessment data should be used to verify similar existing or further objects.
(k) Preservation: Preservation defines all activities that allow keeping the system in a state such
that a continuous safe and reliable operation is guaranteed during the entire service life.
This is of paramount importance for systems that are subjected to deterioration with usage
and age, as well as, for a further extension of lifetime. Preservation encompasses differ-
ent activities: information updating; reassessment; and, most notably, maintenance, ensur-
ing that the objects remain in the condition assumed in the fitness for purpose assessment
(see Chapter 6). If a reassessment has shown an object not to be fit-for-purpose, preserva-
tion of other similar objects is important to ensure they do not deteriorate below a safety
critical extent.
(l) Cost-benefit analysis: The results of a cost-benefit analysis can be used as input to the
decision processes. Such decisions have to be made during the whole reassessment process
(e.g. should the object be demolished or restored, or what kind of experimental assessments
are worthwhile performing). A cost-benefit analysis is a rational decision tool where the
optimal decision maximizes the total expected benefits minus the costs in the design or
remaining lifetime. All benefits and costs have to be expressed in monetary units and are
discounted to, for example, the time of decision. In the decision process, all information
and aims should be considered by weighting social, economic, and environmental aspects.
The assignment of costs with respect to several factors has been discussed in Chapter 6.
Alternatively, a pure cost analysis, like the WLC (whole-life cost) approach suggested in
Chapter 6, could be applied.
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1408.indd 146 12/08/15 5:45 PM

8.4 REVIEW OF METHODOLOGIES USEFUL FOR STRUCTURAL REASSESSMENT 147
8.4 Review of methodologies useful for structural

reassessment
8.4.1 Model calibration
Model calibration, also called model updating, is a set of numerical tools to calibrate or adjust
uncertain model input parameters to increase the correlation between numerically derived
model responses and experimentally obtained features. In many cases, the uncertain input model
parameters are related to geometry and material parameters of a finite element model. In the
context of vibration measurements, for example, typical experimentally obtained features are
modal parameters, such as natural frequencies, modal damping ratios and modal displacements.
The purpose of model calibration is the generation of a numerical model that represents not only
the involved features or measurements, but depending on the intended use, the updated model
should also be able, for example, to predict other loading scenarios under different conditions or
to estimate the residual lifetime of the realistic structure. A very comprehensive introduction to
model calibration can be found in Refs. [6–8].
The most important algorithms for a successful model calibration are the sensitivity analysis to
determine the most relevant parameters for the calibration, and the optimization algorithms, such
as gradient-based or nature-inspired algorithms, to perform an automatic parameter adjustment.
A comprehensive overview of sensitivity analysis methods can be found in Refs. [9–12], with
applications in Refs. [13] and [14]. Recommended optimization algorithms are genetic algo-
rithms [15,16], the CMA-ES [17], and particle swarm optimization [18,19] because of their flex-
ibility to be applied to various optimization problems. Examples for the application of a genetic
algorithm can be found in Ref. [20].
An important aspect of the optimization is the definition of a suitable objective function, which
evaluates the discrepancy between numerically derived and experimentally obtained features.
Typical objective functions are based on weighted Euclidean distances. More advanced objec-
tive functions based on information theory measures are reviewed in Ref. [6].
8.4.2 Optimal sensor placement

For the planning and execution of experiments, several aspects need to be considered to obtain
an experimental set-up that optimally suits pre-defined conditions. If possible, an initial numeri-
cal model should be used to investigate the structure in order to design the experiments most
suitably. One of the most important aspects is the optimal placement of sensors to increase the
benefit from the measured data. For example, in experimental modal analyses, it is important
to avoid sensor positions with a low signal-to-noise ratio. In case the structural behaviour is too
complex, automatic sensor placement strategies can be applied. A methodology to define opti-
mal sensor positions for vibration measurements is provided in Ref. [21].
Recommendations about measurement set-ups, measurement equipment and the choice of sen-
sors were collected from Refs. [22] and [23]. References [24] and [6] give a general introduction
regarding optimal sensor placement.
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1408.indd 147 12/08/15 5:45 PM

8.4.3 Uncertainty quantification and propagation methods

If the analysis of standard safety factors is not sufficient or not possible, uncertainties need to
be treated directly. Therefore, all uncertain input parameters of a calculation process need to
be defined by random variables with statistical properties describing a probability distribution.
Such random input variables could be material properties, geometry data, modelling parameters,
or loads. By knowing the function or relation between input and output values, it is then possible
to derive a set of random variables related to the output parameters of interest, such as stresses
and deflections, at certain positions of the structure.
This function or relation can be an analytical function or another mathematical description,

for instance, a solution obtained from a finite element model. An analytical derivation of
the relation between input and output parameters is advantageous to create an analytical
probabilistic model. Alternatively, sample-based stochastic structural analysis, as described
in Ref. [25], can be applied. This analysis relies on systematic sampling schemes (e.g.
D-optimal design, Koshal design, full factorial design [26]) or stochastic sampling schemes
(e.g. plain Monte Carlo sampling, Latin hypercube sampling [27][25]) to generate a certain
number of samples from the multivariate distributions of input parameters. For each input
parameter sample, a sample of output parameters can be determined by using the known
relation between input and output parameters. By performing a statistical analysis of the
obtained output parameter sets, the statistical properties of the output parameters can be
obtained. The effect of randomness on the identifiability of system parameters is discussed
in Ref. [28].
8.4.4 System reliability analysis

The system reliability analysis is an advanced numerical assessment method to evaluate struc-
tural safety in terms of failure probabilities. Similar to the uncertainty propagation methods
described in the previous subsection, the input parameters are random variables of uncertain
parameters related to material, geometry, or loading conditions. The random output parameter
is the limit state of the structure. Based on this random limit state function and a certain safety
margin, the resulting design space can be divided in a domain, where the structure is safe and
where the structure fails. Of course, a mathematical or numerical description of the relation
between input and output parameters is needed.
The calculation of the failure probabilities itself is a numerical integration in the region of the
design space, where the structure is unsafe and, therefore, fails. As typically very small fail-
ure probabilities are of interest, the application of standard numerical integration techniques
is limited due to a high computational effort to reach the required accuracy. Hence, alternative
methods have been developed. The first order reliability method (FORM) together with standard
optimization procedures assumes a linearization of the limit state function in a certain design
point. In addition, advanced sampling schemes, such as importance sampling, directional sam-
pling, and asymptotic sampling, have been developed.
An introduction to system reliability analysis can be found in Ref. [25], and in Chapter 6. The
probabilistic assessment is a prerequisite for the cost-benefit analysis, discussed below, and also
allows to link health monitoring immediately to structural safety evaluation.
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1408.indd 148 12/08/15 5:45 PM

8.5 CONCLUSION 149
8.4.5 Cost-benefit analysis

In addition to the explanations given in Chapter 6 related to the cost analysis, it could be advan-
tageous to analyse the benefits next to the costs of the reassessment, with respect to economical,
ecological, and social impact. Finally, the question whether a structure is worthy to be restored
or needs to be demolished has to be solved. Of course, each reassessment step causes costs and
generates benefits. Therefore, cost-benefit relations should be considered in each step of the
reassessment regarding short- and long-term effects in a life cycle cost analysis.
General information about cost-benefit analysis related to the reassessment of structures can be
found in earlier publications such as Refs. [1] and [2]. Life cycle consideration can be found in
Refs. [29] and [30]. Optimal maintenance planning is discussed in Refs. [31] and [32].
8.4.6 Structural health monitoring

Structural health monitoring is a tool to assess the current and to predict the future state of
health (condition) of a structure. Such tools are typically fully automated systems with the aim
to detect, locate, and quantify current state and predict future damage.
In the context of reassessment, these systems can be used to monitor exposure levels and the
progress of damage. Therefore, consequences due to rare future events can be controlled, which
offers more flexibility to prove the safety of the structures. Damage-tolerant designs too are
possible to optimize the use of particular structural parts. A typical example is the incomplete
information about previous load histories and high uncertainties about the quality of the material
for old steel bridges, which are important for fatigue analysis during reassessment. A structural
health monitoring system allows keeping structural parts in place until the remaining true life-
time is reached.
An overview of structural health monitoring methods is given in Refs. [33–37]. An example utiliz-
ing the experimental results from structural monitoring in a reliability analysis is given in Ref. [38].
8.5 Conclusion
This chapter gave a short review about the general philosophy, current best practice, and new
cutting-edge methods for the reassessment of structures. Special emphasis was placed on the
differences between the demands on new design, asset management, and reassessment.
As shown, binding and comprehensive codes for a general reassessment are not always avail-
able. A possible explanation is the interdisciplinarity of the reassessment process, which
combines advanced mathematical methods with engineering expertise under consideration of
cost-benefit relations. Hence, this review tried to define a general guideline for the reassess-
ment of structures across disciplines and industrial sectors. Of course, this guideline needs to
be supplemented by specific codes and guidelines related to the specific objects to be reas-
sessed. In addition, important references for further in-depth investigations were provided.
Finally, it is important to note that the extension of serviceability and usability of structures
through appropriate reassessment procedures provides most useful leverage to achieve higher
levels of sustainability in the built environment.
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1408.indd 149 12/08/15 5:45 PM

References
[1] Bucher, C., Brehm, M., Bolt, H. 2010. Framework for assessment and life extension of
existing structures and industrial plants. In: Safety and Reliability of Industrial Products,
Systems and Structures Soares, C.G. (ed.), CRC Press, 53–62.
[2] Diamantidis, D. (ed.) 2001. Probabilistic Assessment of Existing Structures. A Publication
of the Joint Committee on Structural Safety (JCSS), RILEM Publications Sarl, Cachan
Cedex, France.
[3] ISO 2394. 1998. General principles on reliability for structures.
[4] ISO 13822. 2010. Bases for design of structures – Assessment of existing structures.
[5] ISO International Standard. 2007. Petroleum and Natural Gas Industries – Fixed Steel
Offshore Structures. ISO/DIS 19902.
[6] Brehm, M. 2011. Vibration-based model updating: Reduction and quantification of un-
certainties, PhD Thesis, ISM-Bericht 1/2011, Institute of Structural Mechanics, Bauhaus
University, Weimar.
[7] Marwala, T. (ed.) 2010. Finite-Element-Model Updating Using Computational Intelli-
gence Techniques: Applications to Structural Dynamics. Springer-Verlag, London, UK.
[8] Friswell, M.I., Mottershead, J.E. 1995. Finite Element Model Updating in Structural
Dynamics. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Netherlands.
[9] Saltelli, A., Tarantola, S., Francesca, C., Ratto, M. 2004. Sensitivity Analysis in Practice:
A Guide to Assessing Scientific Models. John Wileys & Sons, Ltd., Chichester, UK.
[10] Saltelli, A., Ratto, M., Andres, T., Campolongo, F., Cariboni, J., Gatelli, D., Saisana, M.,
Tarantola, S. 2008. Global sensitivity analysis. The primer. John Wileys & Sons, Ltd.,
Chichester, UK.
[11] Fellin, W., Ostermann, A. 2006. Parameter sensitivity in finite element analysis with con-
stitutive models of the rate type. Int. J. Numer. Anal. Meth. Geomech., 30(2): 91–112.
[12] Oberguggenberger, M., King, J., Schmelzer, B. 2009. Classical and imprecise probabil-
ity methods for sensitivity analysis in engineering: a case study. Int. J. Approx. Reason.,
50(4): 680–693.
[13] Brehm, M., Zabel, V., Bucher, C. 2010. An automatic mode pairing strategy using an
enhanced modal assurance criterion based on modal strain energies. J. Sound Vibr., 329:
5375–5392.
[14] Keitel, H., Dimmig-Osburg, A. 2010. Uncertainty and sensitivity analysis of creep models
for uncorrelated and correlated input parameters. Eng. Struct., 32(11): 3758–3767.
[15] Holland, J.H. 1992. Adaptation in Natural and Artificial Systems – an Introductory Analysis
with Applications to Biology, Control, and Artificial Intelligence. MIT Press, Cambridge, UK.
[16] Goldberg, D.E. 1989. Genetic Algorithms in Search, Optimization and Machine Learning.
Addison-Wesley Longman Publishing Co. Inc., Boston, MA, USA.
[17] Hansen, N., Kern, S. 2004. Evaluating the CMA evolution strategy on multimodal test
functions. Proceedings of 8th International Conference on Parallel Problem Solving from
Nature PPSN VIII, Springer, Berlin, 282–291.
[18] Kennedy, J., Eberhart, R. 1995. Particle swarm optimization. Proceedings of IEEE In-
ternational Conference on Neural Networks, Volume IV, IEEE Press, Perth, Australia,
1942–1948.
[19] He, S., Wu, Q.H., Wen, J.Y., Saunders, J.R., Paton, R.C. 2004. A particle swarm optimizer
with passive congregation. BioSyst., 78: 135–147.
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1408.indd 150 12/08/15 5:45 PM

REFERENCES 151
[20] Ribeiro, D., Calçada, R., Delgado, R., Brehm, M., Zabel, V. 2012. Finite element model
updating of a bowstring-arch railway bridge based on experimental modal parameters.
Eng. Struct., 40: 413–435.
[21] Brehm, M., Zabel, V., Bucher, C. 2013. Optimal reference sensor positions using out-
put-only vibration test data. Mech. Syst. Sig. Process., 41(1–2): 196–225, doi:10.1016/j.
ymssp.2013.06.039.
[22] Wenzel, H., Pichler, D. 2005. Ambient Vibration Monitoring. John Wiley & Sons Ltd.,
England.
[23] Kuendig, C., Sabathy, M., Biro, T. 2009. System and sensor for monitoring purposes.
Proceedings of Final Workshop of European Research Project Details, December 9–11,
Lucca, Italy, 118–132.
[24] Franchi, C.G., Gallieni, D. 1995. Genetic-algorithm-based procedure for pretest analysis.
AIAA J., 33(7): 1362–1364.
[25] Bucher, C. 2009. Computational Analysis of Randomness in Structural Mechanics, CRC
Press, Taylor & Francis Group, London, UK.
[26] Myers, R.H., Montgomery, D.C., Anderson-Cook, C.M. 2009. Response Surface Meth-
odology: Process and Product Optimization Using Designed Experiments, 3rd edn, John
Wiley & Sons, Inc., Chichester, UK.
[27] Verma, A.K., Ajit, S., Karanki, D.R.. 2010. Reliability and Safety Engineering. Springer-
Verlag, London, UK.
[28] Bucher, C., Huth, O., Macke, M. 2003. Accuracy of system identification in the presence
of random fields. In: Applications of Statistics and Probability in Civil Engineering.
DerKiureghian, A., Madanat, S., Pestana, J. (eds.), Millpress, Rotterdam, The Netherlands,
427–433.
[29] Frangopol, D.M., Maute, K. 2003. Life-cycle reliability-based optimization of civil and
aerospace structures. Comput. Struct., 81: 397–410.
[30] Frangopol, D.M., Kallen, M., van Noortwijk, J.M. 2004. Probabilistic models for life-
cycle performance of deteriorating structures: review and future directions. Prog. Struct.
Engng Mater., 6: 197–212.
[31] Macke, M., Higuchi, S. 2007. Optimizing maintenance interventions for deteriorating
structures using cost-benefit criteria. J. Struct. Eng., 133(7): 925–934.
[32] Bucher, C., Frangopol, D.M. 2007. Optimization of combined lifetime maintenance strat-
egies. Computational Stochastic Mechanics 5, Deodatis, G., Spanos, P.D. (eds.), Mill-
press, Rotterdam, The Netherlands, 103–107.
[33] Carden, E.P., Fanning, P. 2004. Vibration based condition monitoring: a review. Struct.
Heal. Monitor. 3(4): 355–377.
[34] Farrar, Ch.R, Worden, K. 2007. An introduction to structural health monitoring. Philos.
Trans. R. Soc. A, 365: 303–315.
[35] Boller, C., Chang, F.-K., Fujino, Y. (eds). 2009. Encyclopedia of Structural Health
Monitoring. John Wiley & Sons, Chichester, UK.
[36] Wenzel, H. 2009. Health Monitoring of Bridges. John Wiley & Sons, Chichester, UK.
[37] Farrar, Ch.R, Worden, K. 2012. Structural Health Monitoring: A Machine Learning
Perspective, John Wiley & Sons, Chichester, UK.
[38] Bucher, C. 2009. Time-variant reliability analysis utilizing results from non-
destructive testing, Proceedings of IABSE Symposium Sustainable Infrastructure,
Bangkok, on CD.
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1408.indd 151 12/08/15 5:45 PM

BackBack
to table contents
sed_1408.indd 152 12/08/15 5:45 PM

153
Chapter
9
Sustainability through Disaster
Risk Reduction
Paul Grundy, Emeritus Professor Faculty of Engineering, Monash University, Melbourne,

Australia.
9.1 Introduction
A single disaster can deal a blow to life, livelihood, assets, and the fabric of society from which
it can take decades to recover. It can undo improvements in sustainable living gained over many
years and indeed set a community as large as a state back behind the starting point of its major
developments. The challenge for the structural engineer is to design and build structures and
infrastructure such that, in conjunction with other measures of building community resilience,
the risk of disaster is minimized.
An early definition of sustainable development is given in Ref. [1]: “Sustainable development

is development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future
generations to meet their own needs.”
By substituting “structures and infrastructure” for “development”, one arrives at a definition

suitable for an engineer. However, this substitution makes it clear that the engineer’s contribu-
tion to sustainability through disasters is just one component of a multidisciplinary approach.
This chapter addresses disasters arising from natural hazards. Disasters arising from human
conflict are excluded, although these outweigh those due to natural hazards. We speak of natural
disasters, but in reality, natural disasters are man-made. Natural hazards occur only when they
overwhelm human communities, which are unprepared for the natural hazard and lack the nec-
essary resilience to reduce the impact to a manageable level.
9.2 The triple bottom line

A valuable enhancement to the concept of sustainability was made in 2006 [2]. While the ini-
tial concept focused on ecological issues—environmental degradation and dangerous deple-
tion of resources—in conflict with economic growth, the new concept saw sustainability as the
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1409.indd 153 20/08/15 12:33 PM

154 CHAPTER 9. SUSTAINABILITY THROUGH DISASTER RISK REDUCTION
interaction of environmental, economic, and

social domains with a positive outcome for
Social all three (Fig. 9.1). A development that has a
positive outcome in the three domains satis-
Bearable Equitable fies the triple bottom line.
Sustainable
Developments are proposed to provide per-
Environment Viable Economic ceived benefits to at least some of the com-
munity. Traditionally, proposals have been
first evaluated using economic criteria. Envi-
ronment and social constraints have been seen
Fig. 9.1: The three pillars of sustainable
as adding to the cost of developments. The
development
prime objective of the developer has been to
minimize the cost, often in the past only the
initial cost but more frequently now the life cycle cost. In many parts of the world, legislation
allows some environmental or social damage while preventing excesses. This does not comply
with the principle of the triple bottom line, where damage is not tolerated in any of the domains.
In the triple bottom line, the optimum sustainable development involves a compromise to jointly
maximize the environmental, social, and economic gains.
9.3 Acceptable risk

There is an uncertainty associated with sustainable design just as there is uncertainty in struc-
tural design. Ultimate limit state (ULS) design typically requires that a structure stands (while
not necessarily being serviceable) after experiencing a load or operating condition with an
annual probability of being exceeded of ~1:500 (equivalent to a return period of 500 years). The
load capacity or resistance of the structure is estimated using lower confidence limits for mate-
rial strength and fabrication and construction imperfections. Combined with the load effect, this
modelling results in an annual probability of failure in the range of 1/104 to 1/106. These values
are sometimes modified by an “importance factor”.
An idea of acceptable risk for disasters can be gained from what is considered acceptable in
various industries where human participation is voluntary and in other activities where the vic-
tims are innocent bystanders rather than participants. For the former, Ref. [3] is enlightening.
For the latter, the acceptable risk for large dams derived by the Australian National Committee
on Large Dams [4] provides guidance. (International standards of acceptable risk are similar.)
In each case, the acceptable risk is inversely proportional to the number of deaths. These bounds
on acceptable risk are shown in Fig. 9.2 [3–6]. While the estimate of deaths is reasonably
accurate, the estimate of annual probability of exceedance is a somewhat subjective estimate,
strongly affected by the spatial distribution of catastrophic events.
Figure 9.2 reveals the huge task of disaster risk reduction. Natural hazards cannot be changed.
They might even grow more intense in the future due to climate change. The consequences can
be changed. The challenge is to achieve a reduction in loss of lives by, say, two orders of magni-
tude through the combined actions of community preparedness and education, spatial planning
in development, retrofitting of vulnerable structures and infrastructure, and improved disaster
management practice. Structural engineers have a significant and cooperative role.
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1409.indd 154 20/08/15 12:33 PM

9.4 BASIC FEATURES OF NATURAL HAZARDS LEADING TO DISASTER 155
Industry bounds acceptable/marginal (Whitman, 1984)

10–1
Merchant ANCOLD unacceptable zone Key to disasters
shipping 1 Indian Ocean Tsunami 2004
Mobile Natural 2 Wenchuan Earthquake 2008
10–2 rigs 4 disasters 3 Tropical Cyclone Nargis 2008
Fixed 6
Annual probability of loss
rigs 7 3 4 Victorian bushfires 2009

8
10–3 5 Haiti Earthquake 2010
2 1
5 6 Chile Earthquake 2010
10–4 7 New Zealand Earthquake 2011
Dams 8 East Japan EQ/Tsunami 2011
10–5 Existing design
ALARP zone
Commercial New design
10–6 aviation
ANCOLD acceptable zone Voluntary risk
10–7 Involuntary risk

1 10 102 103 104 105 106
Number of deaths
Fig. 9.2: Acceptable probability of loss versus number of deaths per event (Units: –)
9.4 Basic features of natural hazards leading to disaster

There are two key features of natural hazards leading to disaster:
1. The intensity of the hazard (wind speed, water level, ground acceleration, etc.) can signifi-
cantly exceed the value assumed for the ULS design.
2. Events can be large scale, with many lives, structures, dwellings, and industries simultane-
ously at risk of loss—the so-called synchronous failure.
These key features require modifications and extensions to conventional structural design meth-
odology in order to partially mitigate their effects.
9.4.1 Excessive hazard intensity

A common feature of many natural disasters is the fact that the peak intensity of the natural
hazard exceeds the value used in the ULS design by a large margin. For example:
The sea wall at the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station was designed for a 5.8 m high
tsunami. On 11 March 2011, the tsunami height was 14.0 m.
The highest recorded local peak ground acceleration (PGA) due to the East Japan earthquake on
11 March 2011 was 2.99g, whereas the design value was typically 0.4g.
The highest PGA recorded in the Canterbury earthquake at Christchurch on 22 February 2011
was 1.99g, whereas the design value was typically 0.2g. Soil liquefaction greatly exacerbated
the ground motions with a strong vertical component.
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1409.indd 155 20/08/15 12:33 PM

The highest recorded PGA in the Wenchuan earthquake in the vicinity of the major fault
exceeded 1.0g, whereas the design value was typically 0.4g.
The design PGAs in the above cases were typically based upon values with a 10% probability
of being exceeded in 50 years, which corresponds mathematically to an annual probability of
exceedance of 1/475. Similar observations can be made with regard to other natural hazards
such as floods, wind, storm surge, and forest wildfires. The apparent frequency with which the
design value is exceeded is associated with the many independent locations in a country where
the hazard can occur.
There are two complementary ways of addressing the problem of excessive hazard intensity.
The first is to reduce the probability of exceedance to (say) 1/2500. This is facilitated in a num-
ber of structural loading codes by the provision of data with this probability of exceedance,
particularly with regard to wind speed, wave height, PGA, velocity, or displacement. In existing
loading codes, these more extreme design loads are sometimes applied to buildings with a high
importance factor. This is an indirect recognition of potential disaster through failure.
Where these data are available, it will be found that the increase in design load is relatively
small compared with the amount by which the design load is exceeded in practice, such as the
examples cited above. Hence, a complementary action is proposed, described as the “What if?”
question:
What if the hazard intensity exceeds the design value so that the structure or infrastructure fails?
The answer lies in engineering and non-engineering robustness. The engineering robustness
leads to structures and systems not leading to loss of life, essential communication, and so on,
in spite of failure. Non-engineering robustness means that communities have the emergency
response measures effective in preserving life and other essential community operations in spite
of the loss of structures or infrastructure.
9.4.2 Synchronous failure

Synchronous failure, a term coined by the United Nations International Strategy for Disaster
Reduction (UN ISDR), applies to the simultaneous loss of a group of structures or systems when
they are all overwhelmed by the same natural hazard. The loss of 1% of a city’s housing in an
earthquake, for example, is a relatively minor disaster, dealt with by insurance and community
support. On the other hand, if 90% of the housing is lost, then lives, livelihoods, and governance
are lost. The community is in disarray. The social pillar of the triple bottom line (Fig. 9.1) has
little weight for an individual home, but is by far the most important component in synchronous
loss.
The combination of synchronous failure with excessive hazard intensity presents the structural
engineer with extreme challenges. Each of the disasters cited in Fig. 9.2 is such a combination.
While more conservative design loads combined with element and system robustness will miti-
gate the disasters, the mitigation will not be enough unless it is complemented by community
education and preparedness for disaster impact and post disaster recovery.
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1409.indd 156 20/08/15 12:33 PM

9.5 DESIGN FOR DISASTER RISK REDUCTION 157
9.5 Design for disaster risk reduction

The two principal areas of activity for an engineer in disaster risk reduction are:
1. Reconstruction after a disaster.

2. Retrofitting before disaster strikes.
Although the structure or infrastructure is of radically different design according to whether it is

an act of reconstruction or retrofitting, the design principles are the same, centred on the concept
of the disaster limit state (DLS).
9.5.1 Disaster limit state

The DLS, which is a design limit state more demanding than the ULS, was coined after the
devastating Indian Ocean earthquake and tsunami of 2004 [7]. Natural hazards of excessive
intensity, the issue of synchronous failure and robustness have to be dealt with for saving lives
in spite of structural or system failure and for maintaining post-disaster functionality.
The DLS is distinguished from the ULS by a more specific use of importance than is carried
by the importance factor, which sometimes appears in codes of practice for structure and infra-
structure design.
The recommended stages in DLS design are as follows:
1. Establish the survival category of the structure or infrastructure.

2. Set design parameters according to the survival category.
3. Incorporate robustness measures to minimize loss of life after failure.
4. Review consequences of hazard intensity exceeding design intensity.
5. Identify non-structural measures required to minimize disaster impact.
The last three stages are interactive rather than sequential in the design process.
Establish the survival category
The survival category is a more detailed way of incorporating the importance factor used in the
ULS design. Three categories are defined, as shown in Table 9.1.
Examples of structures and facilities in the highest survival category include hospitals; emer-
gency service centres; essential services (power, sanitation); communication links needed for
search, rescue and recovery (telecom towers, arterial routes and bridges); and buildings desig-
nated for emergency and post-disaster refuges.
Examples of structures and facilities in the high survival category include public buildings,
places of assembly, schools, dormitories, shopping centres, car parks, housing complexes, and
groups of buildings likely to experience synchronous failure.
Examples of structures and facilities in the standard survival category include isolated dwell-
ings where occupants can relocate after receiving warnings and light industrial and commercial
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1409.indd 157 20/08/15 12:33 PM

Performance criteria Design probability Additional risk reduction

Category
after the event of exceedancea measures
Early warning response drill;
security of equipment and fittings;
Highest Fully operational ~1/2500
emergency power supply;
emergency communications
Limited loss of life
High ~1/2500 security of equipment and fittings;
and injury
access to refuges; evacuation plan
Standard Failure acceptable ~1/500 access to refuges;
evacuation plan
a
Annual probability of exceedance of design hazard intensity
Table 9.1: Definition of survival category
buildings typically with a single storey. This category can generally be designed using the ULS
design principles.
Set design parameters
Acceptable risk of loss is determined by the survival category. As indicated in Table 9.1, the
design annual probability of exceedance is reduced for the high and the highest survival catego-
ries. This is necessary for the dimensioning and equipment of structures and infrastructure, but
it is not sufficient for the resilience required when disaster strikes.
In some cases, no satisfactory design solution can be found where the post-disaster performance
criterion can be met. This can occur where the facility is located in the path of potential land-
slides, volcanic pyroclastic flows or inundation from floods, storm surge, or tsunamis. In these
cases, the solution often lies in relocating the facility out of reach of these hazards.
Incorporate robustness measures
Robustness is an essential requirement of design regardless of the survival category. The engi-
neering requirements are less stringent for the standard survival category, but all systems require
robustness in emergency response. This reveals the two types of robustness required, physical
and community based.
Physical robustness is achieved where, in spite of significant damage and destruction, lives are
not lost, or are reduced to a level where a community can cope with the loss without trauma.
Excellent guidelines for structural robustness are provided in Ref. [8]. A simple example of
structural robustness is given in Fig. 9.3.
Many deaths in major earthquakes have been associated with floors collapsing onto each other,
primarily due to inadequate anchorage of the floor slabs to the supporting members on their
perimeters. Additional issues created by “strong beam/weak column” construction must also be
addressed.
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1409.indd 158 20/08/15 12:33 PM

9.5 DESIGN FOR DISASTER RISK REDUCTION 159
Carry 100%
bottom bars Slab hangs as
anchor a catenary
length past after bending
support failure
Fig. 9.3: Simple example of structural robustness
Community-based emergency robustness in emergency response is an essential complement

to engineering robustness. This is particularly due to the consequences of excessive hazard
intensity.
Effective disaster resilient engineering of structures and infrastructure requires engagement of

the engineer with the community in minimizing risk.
Just as redundant load paths are a feature of structural robustness, redundant lines of com-
munication (roads, telecommunications, power supply) are essential features of disaster risk
reduction. However, unlike the physical infrastructure, the community requires education and
training in the use of lines of communication in an emergency, in acting on early warning, and
in evacuation and refuge.
Review consequences of excessive hazard intensity
Hazard intensity exceeding the design parameters leads to the “What If?” question identified
above. The possible actions include higher levels of robustness in the physical environment
and in the community preparedness and, if all else fail, the possible relocation of structures and
infrastructure to sites less vulnerable to natural hazards. Some of these actions are listed in the
risk reduction measures.
Identify non-structural measures required to minimize disaster impact
Dialogue of engineers with community groups who are risk-aware and with community leaders
is essential for taking the necessary risk reduction action.
An obvious non-structural measure is the introduction of, and planning for, an early warning
system. Science and engineering provide great assistance in the detection of natural hazards
and the transmission of early warnings. A striking example from Japan is earthquake detection
and the transmission of warnings using sophisticated technology [9]. A warning of 2 seconds
delivered through a variety of media is sufficient to save up to 25% of potential lives lost, and a
warning of just 5 seconds can save up to 90% of potential lives lost.
The community needs education on how to respond to an early warning system. This is as
important as the warning system itself. It applies to all natural hazards.
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1409.indd 159 20/08/15 12:33 PM

9.5.2 Reconstruction
The usual slogan after a disaster is “Building Back Better”. In the urgent humanitarian
response to a disaster, this is difficult to achieve, especially in developing countries lacking
professional and construction skills to adapt traditional construction to resilient forms. This
applies particularly to housing. Engagement of the local community in rebuilding is essential
for success.
Buildings of adobe or fired clay brick masonry are built worldwide with little or no structural
performance requirements. Methodologies for earthquake-resistant adobe construction, which
can be used by indigenous artisans, have been developed [10]. These have been adopted in
many countries, especially in Latin America. Successful implementation requires support from
local tertiary institutes and professional engineers.
A common methodology for building back better in brick masonry construction is to confine the
walls in light reinforced concrete frames [11–13]. An example of this construction, following
the Yogyakarta earthquake (27 May 2006), is shown in Fig. 9.4. Figure 9.4a shows the con-
struction method where the columns are progressively concreted and tied into several courses
of brickwork at a time. Figure 9.4b shows a typical completed construction, with base course
and capping beams tied into the columns. Figure 9.4c shows poor quality concrete placement.
A bricklayer could perform all phases of the construction. It is clear that training in best
construction practice is needed to achieve the desired quality of construction.
9.5.3 Retrofitting
Retrofitting before disaster strikes is recognized to be more cost-effective disaster risk reduction
than rebuilding later. The obstacles to retrofitting are lack of motivation, usually through the
community failing to recognize the risk, lack of funding in the face of other economic needs,
and lack of suitable economic designs for retrofitting existing structures. Structural engineers
have a significant role in overcoming all these obstacles.
Retrofitting fragile structures is particularly challenging. Fragile structures are particularly at

risk from earthquakes, even if expected ground motions are mild. There have been successful
(a) (b) (c)
Fig. 9.4: Masonry infilled reinforced concrete frame construction in Yogyakarta. (a) Construction
stage, (b) finished product and (c) defective concrete
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1409.indd 160 20/08/15 12:33 PM

9.6 OBSTACLES TO SUSTAINABILITY IN DISASTER RISK 161
achievements in inserting base isola- Threaded bar @ 300 mm in hole

tion, sometimes to heritage masonry drilled through brickwork
structures, but brick masonry and
adobe structures are not amenable Nut used to clamp
form to brickwork Reusable steel form
to base isolation. Insertion of a rein-
forced concrete frame into brick Rubber seal
masonry walls is not feasible, but
strapping on a frame is. An example
of a strapped-on column is shown in
Fig. 9.5 [11].
Retrofitting methods such as that 6 mm ties @ 250 mm

Rebar 12 mm
shown in Fig. 9.5 need to be backed diameter Nuts may be replaced
up by laboratory testing, training in after stripping form
the construction methodology, and
engagement of local communities in Fig. 9.5: A proposal for “strapping on” a reinforced
the endeavour. concrete column to an existing masonry wall
9.6 Obstacles to sustainability in disaster risk

It is obvious from this discussion that the risk of loss of sustainability from the impact of over-
whelming natural hazards is much more significant than unsustainable individual construction
and operation projects. In the case of natural disasters, the social pillar of the triple bottom
line is much more significant than the pillars of environment and economics. A multidisci-
plinary approach is required. Engineers need to recognize sustainability from the social science
perspective.
A definition of sociological risk in terms of human vulnerability, and how it is estimated, has
been given in Ref. [14].
Hazard × vulnerability – capacity = risk (9.1)
In this context, risk is defined as social breakdown: loss of hope and meaningfulness in life.
There is an analogy between the sociological formula and that used for structural design. In the
context of Eq. 9.1, risk is the realization of disaster or loss. In structural engineering, this would
be defined as a failure.
The two principal factors compromising sustainability in the social context are awareness of risk
from natural hazards and the cost of disaster prevention and mitigation.
9.6.1 Awareness of risk

A feature of all the disasters listed in Fig. 9.2 is that in each case, the nation as a whole has suf-
fered from the natural disaster even though the impact is confined to one region of the nation.
For those who survived the disaster untouched, the awareness of risk is dimmed by the lack
of personal impact. Surviving victims in a region of impact rely on government and foreign
aid to build back better to reduce the impact of a future disaster in the same place. Survivors
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1409.indd 161 20/08/15 12:33 PM

in regions outside the area of impact respond variably to the need to increase preparedness,
retrofit, and improve emergency response. The variable response corresponds to the variable
understanding of disaster risk. Engineers bear a responsibility for raising community aware-
ness of disaster risk.
9.6.2 Cost of disaster prevention measures

It is well known that the benefit to cost ratio of building resilience in a community in surviving
natural hazards unscathed is very large compared with the cost of recovery after disaster strikes.
Ratios of up to 7:1 have been cited.
However, the cost applies to everywhere in the nation at risk, whereas the benefit applies to the
local regions where the disaster has impact. Even wealthy nations have difficulty in advancing
disaster prevention measures for areas at risk. In countries with developing or weak economies,
it is even more difficult to give priority to disaster risk reduction measures over other nation
building enterprises, no matter how justified in the long term.
The answer to this problem is at the grass roots. Schools need to have disaster risk awareness and
reduction measures in their curricula from primary level up. Local government engineers need
to be aware of their regional exposure to natural hazards as they go about building and maintain-
ing local infrastructure. Centralized government planning is necessary but not sufficient.
9.7 Conclusion
This chapter addresses the challenge of achieving sustainability where the risk of natural
disasters is significant. The main stages in understanding how to achieve sustainability are as
follows.
− Sustainability must be achieved in the three pillars of the triple bottom line of
developments—economic, environmental, and social.
− The social dimension is very large in the case of natural disasters compared with individual
structure and infrastructure projects, while the environmental and economic impacts remain
very large.
− Awareness of risk to life, livelihood, social cohesion, and physical infrastructure is key to
achieving sustainability in the face of disasters.
− A DLS is proposed for design, more stringent than the ULS and with additional community
risk reduction strategies.
− Structural and non-structural robustness are essential to mitigate disasters.
− There are significant technical challenges both for building back better and for retrofitting
to annul the impact of future natural hazards.
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1409.indd 162 20/08/15 12:33 PM

REFERENCES 163
References
[1] United Nations. 1987. Our Common Future: The World Commission on Environment and
Development. G. H. Brundtland, Ed., Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK, p. 374.
[2] Adams, W.M., The Future of Sustainability: Re-thinking Environment and Development
in the Twenty-first Century. Report of the IUCN Renowned Thinkers Meeting, January
29–31, 2006.
[3] Whitman, R.V. 1984. Evaluating calculated risk in geotechnical engineering. J. Geotech.
Eng., ASCE, 110(2): 145–188.
[4] ANCOLD, International Commission on Large Dams, Australian National Committee on
Large Dams Incorporated. 2003. Guidelines on risk assessment, Hobart, TAS, Australia.
[5] Grundy, P. Disaster reduction on coasts. Proc IStructE Centenary Conference, January
24–26, 2008, Hong Kong, 247–263.
[6] Grundy, P. 2010. Disaster Risk Reduction and the Structural Engineer (e-lecture).
Available at: www.iabse.org/e-learning/L07/player.html.
[7] Grundy, P. 2005. Disaster reduction on the coasts of the Indian Ocean. Struct. Eng. Int.,
15(3): 193–196.
[8] Knoll F. Vogel T. 2009. Design for Robustness. Structural Engineering Document 11.
IABSE, Zurich, Switzerland.
[9] Homeland Security News Wire. 2011. Early warning system helped save lives in Japanese
quake. Available at: http://www.homelandsecuritynewswire.com/early-warning-system-
helped-save-lives-japanese-quake [accessed on 20 July 2015].
[10] Dominic M. 2009. Dowling and Bijan Samali low-cost and low-tech reinforcement sys-
tems for improved earthquake resistance of mud brick buildings. Proceedings of the Getty
Seismic Adobe Project 2006 Colloquium, The Getty Conservation Institute, Los Angles,
CA, USA, April 11–13, 2006.
[11] Grundy, P. The Padang earthquake: building back better and retrofitting. Surveys and
activities on post-earthquake disaster. UNESCO-IPRED-RIHS International Workshop,
Padang, Indonesia, July 6–8, 2010, UNESCO, Paris, France, 121–128. Available at: http://
unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0021/002138/213843e.pdf
[12] Grundy, P. Retrofitting for resilience – lessons from the Yogyakarta earthquake 2006.
International Disaster and Risk Congress, Davos, August 25–29, 2008, 3 pp.
[13] Grundy, P. 2009. The structural engineering challenges following the Wenchuan earth-
quake. J. Sichuan University (Engineering Science Edition), 41(3): 1–8.
[14] Chan, C.L.W., Sun, A., Ho, A., Wang, X.L., Wang, X., Zhang, B., Zhang, X. 2009.
IDRC, International Disaster and Risk Conference, Hong Kong University, Chengdu,
July 13–15, 2009.
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1409.indd 163 20/08/15 12:33 PM

BackBack
to table contents
sed_1409.indd 164 20/08/15 12:33 PM

165
Chapter
10
Green Materials for Concrete
Production
Jorge de Brito, Full Prof., CERis-ICIST, DECivil, Instituto Superior Técnico, Lisbon, Portugal.
Rui V. Silva, MSc. Civil Engineering, CERis-ICIST, Instituto Superior Técnico, Lisbon,
Portugal. Contact: jb@civil.ist.utl.pt, rui.v.silva@tecnico.ulisboa.pt
10.1 Introduction
As the world population increases, the use of natural resources and energy grows proportion-
ally, becoming one of the major environmental concerns of our times. Several economic sec-
tors are already pursuing a solution to this problem, by analysing the added-value potential of
reusing their own wastes. The conventional methods of constructing and demolishing buildings
and concrete structures are implemented in such a way that most of the resulting waste is sent
to landfills, instead of being recycled or reused in new constructions. This becomes a serious
concern since construction and demolition wastes (CDW) are among the heaviest and bulkier
wastes generated by all economic sectors.
Numerous studies have shown the feasibility of using recycled aggregates (RAs) in various
construction applications, specifically concrete, mortar, and road construction. However, due to
the deficient or even inexistent waste separation and sorting techniques, during construction or
demolition activities, the RA produced from these CDW often have poor quality and are limited
to low grade applications. Indeed, by applying a selective demolition methodology (also known
as deconstruction), it is possible to highlight specific components that can be reused in new con-
structions, as well as to efficiently separate materials by type. This forward thinking allows the
production of high quality RAs, which can then be used in high-grade construction applications
such as structural concrete.
The possibility of using RA in concrete opens a whole new range of possibilities in terms of
recycling materials in construction. This could be an important breakthrough for society in its
endeavour towards sustainable development, as it is significantly beneficial in terms of environ-
mental protection, as well as preservation of natural resources. There are several studies mainly
engaged in the processing of demolished concrete, mix proportion design, mechanical properties,
durability aspects, and materials improvement. Recently, the structural and environmental
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1410.indd 165 20/08/15 12:32 PM

166 CHAPTER 10. GREEN MATERIALS FOR CONCRETE PRODUCTION
performance and economic aspects of using recycled aggregate concrete (RAC) have also been
analysed.
The current chapter seeks to provide existing knowledge on the effects of using RA on the prop-
erties of concrete, in addition to guidelines as to how to make the best use of these materials
when producing concrete.
10.2 Background
The global construction aggregate market was valued at over €75 billion in 2012 [1]. The larg-
est regional market for aggregates in the world belonged to the Asia-Pacific region, with 42.5%.
Europe and North America were the second (26.9%) and third (20.8%) largest regional markets,
respectively. Growing economies in the Asia-Pacific, specifically China, India, and Indonesia,
are expected to reduce the market shares of Western regions. This is due to the rapid develop-
ment of infrastructures and other construction markets, which increases the demand for aggre-
gates. Although at a somewhat slower pace, Central and South America, Eastern Europe, and
some regions in Africa are also expected to increase consumption of aggregates for construction.
Overall, it can be said that the aggregate market for use in construction applications is enormous
and worldwide. It is expected to increase 5.2% per year up until 2015 to 48.3 billion metric tons
(Fig. 10.1). This represents a slower rate of growth than during the period between 2005 and
2010. Nevertheless, the demand for aggregates still requires a huge amount of natural resources
for construction activities.
At present, almost all economic sectors have a significant environmental impact, the production
of waste. According to Eurostat [2], the total amount of generated waste, in the European Union
alone in 2010, was over 2.5 billion tons (Fig. 10.2), of which almost 35% (860 million tons)
and 27% (672 million tons) of the total, belonged to construction and demolition activities and
mining and quarrying operations, respectively.
Other Western Europe North America Asia/Pacific

50
45
Aggregate demand (billion tons)
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
2005 2010 2015
Fig. 10.1: World consumption of aggregates for construction [3]
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1410.indd 166 20/08/15 12:32 PM

10.2 BACKGROUND 167
Households Other economic activities
Construction and demolition activities Energy and water supply sectors
Manufacturing Mining and quarrying activities
3000
2500
Waste amount (tons)
2000
1500
1000
500
0
2004 2006 2008 2010
Fig. 10.2: Waste generated by all economic sectors in the European Union [4]
The majority of wastes coming from construction and demolition can be considered a mineral
waste. Therefore, with proper care, these materials are capable of being recycled and reused in
construction. However, there are still several obstacles to the use of RA in construction activities:
• Lack of confidence: Clients and contractors still exhibit a great lack of confidence on the
positive effects of using RA in construction. It is possible to overcome this issue, by in-
creasing their knowledge on the positive environmental and economic benefits and commu-
nicating successful cases in which the feasibility of using these materials has been proven.
• Uncertain environmental benefits: Some may think that the ecologic footprint of sourcing
and processing CDW into RA is greater than that of obtaining NA. This is entirely inaccu-
rate, as the whole point of recycling CDW is to reduce environmental impacts and prevent
natural resources’ depletion. In order to eliminate this misconception, seminars and “green”
marketing campaigns, including detailed studies on the environmental benefits, are required.
• Limiting specifications: The lack of standards and specifications, with clauses regarding the
use of RA in concrete, is also an alarming barrier to recycling. Since concrete producers
follow these codes in a strict manner, only by changing them can a path be built for RA to
be used in concrete. Although some standards already contain information on RA use in
concrete, they have highly restricting limitations to their use in concrete, which also proves
to be an obstacle to the best possible use of these materials. By demonstrating the positive
results, obtained by several researchers, that it is possible to use high amounts of some re-
cycled materials, it is possible that specifications will be improved.
• Quality of final product: Several recycling plants are either unaware of the proper procedure
for obtaining RAs with the best possible quality, or simply are not interested in producing
RAs with good enough quality for high-grade applications. In either case, the quality of the
final product may not be good enough for use in structural concrete.
• Location of construction and demolition sites: One of the main barriers for recycling CDW
is their transportation costs. Indeed, great distances from construction and demolition sites
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1410.indd 167 20/08/15 12:32 PM

to the recycling plant may greatly increase the cost of RAs, reducing their attractiveness to
contractors and concrete manufacturers.
• Supply and demand: These are two main barriers for the recycling of CDW, which are also
affected by the aforementioned issues. Considering that most construction and demolition
operations are not consistent, it is difficult for recycling plants to have steady streams of
raw materials. Additionally, since most wastes are not sorted out at their construction or
demolition sites, they come with various types of materials, which may contaminate the
final products. As such, there is a serious concern as to obtain sufficient quantities of raw
materials with good enough quality to produce RAs for concrete.
10.3 How to make concrete more sustainable

According to a conservative estimate, for every kg of cement produced, there is a by-product of
0.9 kg of carbon dioxide (CO2) [4]. This leads to over 3 billion tons of CO2 emissions per year.
The main sources of these emissions can be divided into two parts: from the calcination of lime-
stone and from the fuel combustion used in the production of clinker (sintering temperatures of
1400 to 1600°C). The amount of CO2 emissions also depend on the type of fuel used and the
processing method. During the sintering process, cement kilns can be ignited using coal, fuel
oil, natural gas, petroleum coke, biomass, waste-derived alternative fuels or even mixtures of
these fuels [5].
When producing concrete, there are several methods that can be applied in order to manufacture
a more sustainable material. Over the course of time, the CO2 quantity emitted in the production
of one unit of cement has been decreasing due to simple changes, such as using a dry process,
when mixing all the components of the cement, instead of using a wet paste that took longer to
dry during the sintering stage.
Considering the high temperatures required for its production, cement stores a great amount of
emergy. Emergy is defined as the equivalent quantity of solar energy used, directly or indirectly,
to obtain a final product or service [6,7]. Therefore, in order to reduce the emergy of cement,
apart from some changes in the manufacturing method (such as the use of the dry process), it is
also necessary to reduce as much as possible its sintering temperatures, provided that this does
not affect the quality of the final product. When producing concrete, the factors with the high-
est emergy values are the materials required for its production, specifically cement, sand, and
gravel [8].
The reduction of concrete emergy is possible by reducing the cement emergy, by optimizing
or modifying cement production, by its partial replacement with supplementary cementitious
materials [9] and even by using other alternative cement products [10]. However, consider-
ing the high emergy of conventional natural aggregates (NA), it is also possible to reduce the
emergy of concrete by using RA from CDW. A great number of studies have been performed
worldwide on the production of RAC.
There are other methods, which may increase the emergy and cost of concrete at the initial stage,
but have a higher benefit, in terms of sustainability, over time. When producing concrete, by
using better quality materials, lowering the water/cement (w/c) ratio (cement and water contents
increase and decrease, respectively) with the assistance of admixtures or additions, it is possible
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1410.indd 168 20/08/15 12:32 PM

10.4 RECYCLED MATERIALS FOR CONCRETE 169
Economies in transition OECD Pacific Other developing Asia
Africa and Middle East India China
Latin America Canada and United States Other OECD Europe
European Union High demand scenario Low demand scenario
5000
4500
Cement production (million tons)
4000
3500
3000
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
2006 2015 2030 2050
Fig. 10.3: Average estimated cement production in 2006, 2015, 2030 and 2050 [11]
to improve the performance of concrete in terms of durability and expand its life span. This will
ultimately lead to reduced maintenance, repair, and replacement costs over time.
Figure 10.3 presents the current and the average estimated cement production from 2015 to
2050. Throughout this period, a high and a low demand scenario were estimated. Regardless of
how low the demand and production of cement can be, it still represents a significant amount
of cement produced. For this reason, it is important to find new ways of making cement and
concrete more sustainable.
10.4 Recycled materials for concrete

There are several types of industries and types of resulting wastes as well. This has led to a ris-
ing interest among various researchers in studying the effects of adding these materials on the
properties of concrete. This section describes the various types of waste materials which were
studied.
10.4.1 Industrial wastes

The generation of industrial by-products has been increasing at an alarming rate. Depending on
the type of industry, there is a wide range of industrial by-products. One such type of material is
ground granulated blast furnace slag (GGBS), which is typically obtained from blast-furnaces of
steel industries. GGBS, which is mostly comprised of silicates and alumina, may have binding
properties and thus can be used as partial cement replacement. There have been many studies
on the use of this material as aggregate and as part of the binder in the production of concrete
[12–15]. It is clear that GGBS is most beneficial if it is used as cement replacement, since
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1410.indd 169 20/08/15 12:32 PM

increasing its incorporation may enhance workability. Thus, a smaller amount of water is
required in order to maintain the same workability as that of a corresponding ordinary Portland
cement concrete mix, leading to mechanical performance improvement. The use of this material
has also led to superior resistance to sulphate attack and to chloride ion penetration, in compari-
son to ordinary Portland cement.
Fly ash (FA) or pulverised fuel ash is a by-product obtained from coal burning industries.
Similarly to GGBS, it is comprised of silicates and alumina, and when used as partial cement
replacement may cause pozzolanic reactions. The effects of using FA in concrete are well-
known [16–21]. A judicious use of this material may lead to improvement of concrete workabil-
ity, pumpability, cohesiveness, finishing, and mechanical and durability performance.
The abundant production and consumption of glass (especially in bottle manufacturing) calls for
the need of additional recycling methods for this product. Besides the typical recycling process
into new bottles, there are several studies that have assessed its application in the production of
concrete [22–30]. Generally, the incorporation of glass waste aggregates causes a decrease in
the mechanical performance of concrete. This decrease is mainly attributed to the fragile behav-
iour of glass waste aggregates and to the difficulty in obtaining proper bond strength between
them and the cement paste. However, the use of very fine glass waste aggregates, up to given
replacement ratios, may lead to a filler effect, improving some mechanical properties and also
durability-related performance (reduced permeability and chloride ion penetration).
The use of plastic waste as a NA substitute in concrete is a relatively recent concept. One of the
first significant reviews on the use of waste plastic in concrete [31] focused on the advantages
and financial benefits of such use, besides their physical and mechanical properties. There have
been many studies on the use of plastic aggregates in the production of concrete [32–40]. There
is a common ground in that the use of plastic waste aggregate in the production of non-structural
concrete is viable, even though the performance of most properties strongly declines.
At the end of its life cycle, the final destination of a tyre may vary greatly: from illegal disposal;
landfill disposal; energy recovery as fuel; and introduction of ground tyre waste aggregate in hot
mix asphalt production. The rising production of rubber-based products has led to a growing inter-
est by several authors [41–46], in alternative recycling methods, specifically in their use as aggre-
gates, fillers, and partial cement replacement, in the production of concrete. The increased use of
these materials causes significant losses in mechanical performance. Rubber waste aggregates,
which have a very low modulus of elasticity, act as voids in concrete when subjected to loading.
There is, however, some improvement in resistance to chloride ion penetration and to abrasion.
The use of other unconventional aggregates from industrial by-products, such as stone slurry [47],
leather [48], ethylene-vinyl acetate (EVA) [49–51], oyster shells [52], palm tree shell [53–56],
and even sewer sludge [57–59], was also considered for the production of concrete. Generally,
the use of these materials as NA replacement causes a decrease in the mechanical and durability-
related performance of concrete, unless when added in small ratios and as ultra-fine material.
10.4.2 Construction and demolition wastes

CDW materials may have different origins and, consequently, different properties. Institutions
from several countries have developed standards and specifications [60–74] for the character-
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1410.indd 170 20/08/15 12:32 PM

ization of RA obtained from CDW. Among the various CDW materials, three main classes
were identified as best suited for structural concrete production. Although this classification is
primarily based on their composition, it is also based on their higher quantity and higher com-
patibility with cementitious binders, when compared to other waste materials (asphalt, wood,
glass, soil, metal, plastic, etc.).
Recycled concrete aggregates (RCA): The most common RA, RCA is produced by crushing
concrete from prestressed, reinforced, or plain concrete structures and from precast concrete
units. This material is made up of a minimum of 90%, by weight of total aggregate, of the sum
of cementitious fragments and NA.
Recycled masonry aggregates (RMA): This class of materials includes aerated and lightweight
concrete blocks, ceramic bricks, blast-furnace slag bricks and blocks, and sand-lime bricks.
Rendering mortar and burnt clay materials, such as roofing tiles and shingles, may also be pres-
ent in RMA [75]. It is composed of a minimum of 90%, by weight, of the sum of any of the
aforementioned materials.
Mixed recycled aggregates (MRA): This material is an aggregate blend which includes the two
previously mentioned RA. It is composed of less than 90%, by weight, of cementitious frag-
ments and masonry-derived debris.
After their collection, these materials are then transported to certified recycling plants, where
they go through beneficiation or purification processes. The layout of these industrial units is
often quite similar to that of conventional NA processing plants. However, there are a few excep-
tions in these units, in which specific devices are used for the separation of unwanted materials.
Before being used as RA, the CDW materials must undergo various processing operations. They
must go through a magnetic separator, which extracts ferromagnetic metals. After that, they
must undergo several screening processes, to be separated into different sizes. Depending on
the size, these may be considered unsuitable for use, or sent to crushers or hand-picking lines.
In the latter, trained workers remove contaminants, such as wood, metal, hazardous waste, plas-
tic, paper, glass, among others. Some of the lightweight contaminants (dirt, clay lumps, wood,
paper, plastics, and textiles) may also be removed by air sifting processes [75,76]. The resulting
materials may again go through some of the previously mentioned recycling processes, in order
to ensure maximum decontamination and, only then, they are considered as RA.
Steel reinforcement rebars or profiles are a crucial component of concrete or concrete-steel
composite structures. When such a structure reaches the end of its service life, all steel elements
can be easily recovered, recycled, and/or used again. Using proper equipment, some of these
elements (e.g. profiles) can be recovered on site, whereas the removal of other steel components
(e.g. reinforcement rebars) is typically done at the recycling plant. This can be done by using
electromagnets along the conveyor belts to collect steel between the concrete crushing pro-
cesses. This is an important step in the recycling process of structural concrete and contributes
to the sustainability of this material. The embodied energy of recycled steel elements results
from the energy input of the melting and remoulding processes. The energy input to obtain a ton
of steel from recycled scrap metal can be less than half of that when producing it from iron ore.
Wooden elements, either structural or non-structural, have been recovered, recycled, and/or
reused for many centuries. The most valued elements are those with architectural value or made
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1410.indd 171 20/08/15 12:32 PM

of exotic or subsequently rarefied species, which have a good market value. Large structural
timber elements also have a big reuse potential and they may also be resized to fit in future appli-
cations. However, most of the other wooden elements are either damaged during demolition,
degraded by rot or xylophagous or too small to be of any practical future use, and therefore are
used for incineration purposes only. Often they act as deleterious elements in mixes of otherwise
useful materials for concrete production (such as the inert materials).
10.4.3 Converting CDW into usable aggregates

During the demolition of a building structure, two diverging methodologies may be exercised:
conventional demolition or selective demolition. In the former, the structure is demolished in
such a way that most types of materials are directed to unspecified containers, whilst the lat-
ter tends to be more selective when removing each part of the building. Selective demolition,
also known as deconstruction, is a relatively new concept in the demolition industry. Processes
related to selective demolition are time consuming and have a higher initial cost. However,
studies [77–80] have shown that this methodology may lead to lower global costs by selling
separated materials to suitable entities and reducing the landfill fees.
Naturally, the use of this approach also leads to evident positive effects on the environment, in
comparison to the alternative [77,78]. Besides reducing the amount of material sent to landfill, it
also reduces the emission of a wide array of substances, which are known to cause nitrification,
summer smog, acidification, and increased concentration of heavy metals.
There are several types of methods and apparatuses which can be used for obtaining good
quality separated materials when demolishing a structure [81,82]. These may vary between
simple hand tools (chisels, sledgehammers, crowbars), hand-operated power tools (electrical,
hydraulic, pneumatic, gasoline), heavy demolition equipment (impact hammers, wrecking ball,
concrete crushers), thermal cutting equipment (cutting torch, thermal lance, powder cutting
torch), hydro-demolition devices, mechanical cutting equipment (diamond saws, core drills,
stitch drilling) and even expansion-based methods (controlled explosive blasting, gas expansion,
solid non-explosive demolition agents). Naturally, the demolition method selection is based on
several factors: size and location of the building; allowable levels of noise, dust, and vibration;
materials used in that construction; environmental, public, and construction workers’ safety; and
time period [83].
CDW recycling plants are not very different from NA production plants. Both are composed of
various types of crushers, screens, and transfer equipment. The main difference between them is
the existence of apparatuses to remove contaminants. After receiving CDW materials, the degree
of processing is determined by a visual examination of the existing level of contamination and
of their future application. For instance, when producing RA for high-grade applications, such
as structural concrete, CDW must be subjected to extensive processing in order to minimize the
existence of contaminants. However, for low-grade applications, such as general bulk fill and sub-
base layers for road construction, less intensive contaminant removal procedures may be applied,
thus reducing their final cost. Figure 10.4 presents a flow chart of a possible recycling procedure
capable of producing good quality RA. Depending on the variety of existing types of materials
and level of contamination, some steps, such as the manual separation or mechanical removal of
contaminants, may be bypassed. This allows energy savings and thus less production costs.
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1410.indd 172 20/08/15 12:32 PM

Reduce size of Separate storage of Manual or mechanical

individual fragments different types of materials pre-crushing separation
Primary Primary Electromagnetic removal Secondary

screening crushing of ferrous materials screening
Bypass of material with size Bypass of material with size

10 mm < d < 40 mm d < 40 mm
Manual or mechanical Secondary Washing or Final screening and storage

removal of contaminants crushing air sifting of various size fractions
Fig. 10.4: Recycling procedure of CDW (adapted from [75])
It must be understood that recycling plants may produce different batches of RA exhibiting
very diverse quality and composition. This is due to variations in the quality, type, and level of
contamination of the original materials coming from construction and demolition activities. For
this reason, it is important to apply a comprehensive selective demolition, with proper separa-
tion and storage of all types of materials. Furthermore, recycling plants have evolved to a point
where strict recycling procedures can minimize the contaminant content by using various con-
tamination removal apparatuses.
There are two types of CDW recycling plants: stationary and mobile. A stationary recycling
plant frequently consists of a large primary crusher, working in combination with a secondary
crusher, as well as various contamination removal devices. Some stationary recycling plants
operate with a tertiary crushing stage. This extra step, which would certainly produce better
quality materials, was found to produce RAs with only slightly better performance than that of
the output of a secondary crushing stage [84,85]. Therefore, tertiary or further crushing stages
must be considered only in situations in which the RAs are going to be used for structural con-
crete production. Otherwise, the extra processing stages would render the final product with an
unnecessarily high quality and cost.
Compared to stationary plants, a mobile recycling plant normally is comprised of fewer process-
ing devices. Tables 10.1 and 10.2 present the main advantages and limitations of using these
recycling plants.
In order to produce RAs with the best possible quality and free of contamination, in each of the
following conditions they must be stored separately whenever possible [83]:
• RAs resulting from CDW debris with different qualities,

• RAs manufactured from different recycling procedures,
• RAs of different types,
• RA with different grading sizes.
Furthermore, it is also necessary that the RAs are kept dry, as much as possible, until they are
used, due to self-cementing properties of un-hydrated cement particles.
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1410.indd 173 20/08/15 12:32 PM

Stationary recycling plants

Advantages • Due to the greater size of the plant (economy of scale), it is capable of
producing RAs of various grading sizes with improved efficiency and
lower cost.
• The greater amount of processing stages allows the production of RAs
with enhanced quality.
Limitations • The rate of production and economic viability of this plant depend on the
constant supply of CDW from nearby construction and demolition sites,
which may be somewhat erratic.
• The greater distance between the recycling plant and the construction or
demolition sites increases transportation costs.
• Due to the greater amount of devices involved in this particular type of
recycling plant, a higher initial investment is required.
Table 10.1: Stationary recycling plants: advantages and limitations [86]
Mobile recycling plants

Advantages • As the name suggests, this recycling plant can be easily relocated to new
construction or demolition sites, capable of sustaining them.
• Due to the very close distance between construction or demolition sites
and the recycling plant, transportation costs are minimal, especially if the
CDW are produced, recycled, and reused on the same site.
• The production of RA increases the local supply of aggregates and thus
reduces demand and need of NA to be imported to the area.
Limitations • Due to the typically lower number of contamination removal devices in
this type of recycling plant, the final RAs are of lower quality.
• This type of recycling plant may only be used in non-urban areas due to
its unacceptable high levels of dust and noise.
• The economic viability of this recycling plant depends on the amounts of
CDW in construction or demolitions sites, which must compensate for the
expense of setting up the facility.
Table 10.2: Mobile recycling plants: advantages and limitations [86]
10.5 Early age behaviour of structural RAC

The most relevant fresh concrete properties in study are workability, bleeding, and fresh density.
In order to encourage the extensive use of RA, it is necessary to know exactly how these materi-
als affect these properties, in comparison to those of the natural aggregate concrete (NAC).
Workability, or consistency, being one of the essential properties of fresh concrete, is signifi-
cantly influenced by various mixing design parameters. When replacing NA with RA, the fol-
lowing main parameters need to be accounted for: replacement ratio, type, size, and moisture
content.
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1410.indd 174 20/08/15 12:32 PM

10.5 EARLY AGE BEHAVIOUR OF STRUCTURAL CONCRETE WITH RAs 175
Most studies have shown that increasing RA content leads to decreased workability levels
[87–91]. Naturally, this decrease depends on the nature of the RA used. Among the three most
suitable RA for concrete production, RCA were found to have lesser impact on the consistency of
concrete. This is mainly due to their lower water absorption, in comparison to MRA and RMA,
which include materials with greater porosity. All other criteria being equal, as the RA water
absorption increases, the consistency levels decrease, due to the absorption of the mixing water.
Within each RA type, it is possible for the quality of materials to vary significantly. For example,
high strength concrete materials, due to their higher capacity, tend to produce less porous RCA
and thus with less water absorption, in comparison to RCA from low strength concrete. How-
ever, it was also found that, for the same crushing age, RCA from concrete materials with differ-
ent compressive strength will not have an influence on the consistency levels of RAC [91–93].
Regarding RA size, the finer fraction generally shows higher water absorption values than that of
the coarser fraction. This is mainly due to the recycling process of these materials in which after
being subjected to various crushing stages, the finer fraction RA accumulates, increasing crushed
fragments of adhered cement paste, which has a relatively high water absorption. Due to this,
fine RA usually cause lower consistency levels, when compared to RAC made with coarse RA.
There are three methods that allow recovering of the consistency loss, due to RA water
absorption:
• Use of water reducing admixture (WRA),

• RA pre-saturation,
• Water compensation using additional mixing water.
For the same consistency, WRA, or (super) plasticizers, allow reducing the quantity of water.
In cases where the amount of water is maintained, these admixtures allow greater consistency
levels. The reduction of water may vary between 5 and 30%, depending on the plasticizer’s
effectiveness. WRA act as dispersants when introduced in concrete mixes. These prevent the
flocculation of fine particles of cement by electrostatic repulsion. In other words, instead of
grouping in large clusters, cement particles disperse, allowing a more fluid mix.
The second method consists of saturating RA by using a sprinkler system or introducing them
in water tanks, for a 24 hour period prior to mixing. One hour before using these aggregates in
the production of concrete, they must be dried in air, in order to achieve a saturated and surface
dried condition. This allows the production of a concrete mix with the desired slump values and
minimal consistency loss over time.
The water compensation method is a simple process, which consists of introducing additional
water during the mixing stage, corresponding to the extra amount absorbed by RA. In this
method, the mixing process requires an extra amount of time for the RA to absorb most of its
water capacity. Several researchers [94–98] have used this technique and obtained stable results.
Furthermore, one study [98] showed that the use of water-compensated RCA leads to more
stable slump values than when using pre-saturated aggregates.
In one particular research [99], the authors found that the moisture conditions of the aggregates
incorporated had a profound effect on the workability of concrete mixes over time. Figure 10.5
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1410.indd 175 20/08/15 12:32 PM

Air-dried NA Air-dried RCA Oven-dried NA Oven-dried RCA

(a) 160 (b) 160
140 140
120 120
100 100
Slump (mm)
Slump (mm)
80 80
60 60
40 40
20 20
0 0
0 30 60 90 120 150 180 0 30 60 90 120 150 180
Time (mins) Time (mins)
Saturated and surface-dried NA

Saturated and surface-dried RCA
(c) 160
140
120
100
Slump (mm)
80
60
40
20
0
0 30 60 90 120 150 180
Time (mins)
Fig. 10.5: Slump over time of concrete mixes with NA and RCA at different moisture conditions:
(a) air-dried; (b) oven-dried; (c) saturated and surface dried [99]
presents the slump of concrete mixes over time made with NA and RCA at different moisture
conditions and with similar total w/c ratio. As the RCA were introduced at a progressively
drier state (oven-dried condition), the initial slump increased, due to a higher amount of mixing
water. Concrete mixes made with RCA, in a saturated and surface-dried condition, exhibited
initial slump equal to that of control mixes. Over time, concrete mixes made with oven-dried
RCA showed the greatest slump loss, while mixes made with saturated and surface-dried RCA
presented fairly similar slump levels over time. It was also observed that all RAC mixes, made
with non-saturated RCA, exhibited similar slump levels to those of control mixes 15 to 30 min-
utes after mixing. This period corresponds to the amount of time that RCA take to absorb the
additional mixing water, reaching a saturated state.
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1410.indd 176 20/08/15 12:32 PM

10.6 MECHANICAL BEHAVIOUR OF STRUCTURAL CONCRETE WITH RAs 177
Bleeding, referred to the movement of water to the surface of fresh concrete as a result of the
settlement of solid particles, is known to have negative effects on the properties of concrete. A
high degree of bleeding can significantly increase the near-surface w/c ratio, leading to lower
concrete strength of the reinforcement cover.
By replacing NA with RA, both positive and negative outcomes were obtained by several
researchers [91,100–107]. Some researchers suggested that RA should be pre-wetted or satu-
rated in order to prevent a rapid decrease in consistency of concrete [75,107,108], but others
[99] suggested that, when using RAs in saturated and surface dried state, the water within them
may cause bleeding during casting.
Owing to the lower density of RAs, their increasing use in the production of concrete will lead to
progressive density loss. Naturally, this varies according to the RA type. Since RMA normally
present lower density values than RCA, for the same replacement ratio, RAC mixes made with
RMA will exhibit lower density values than those made with RCA. Full NA replacement with
coarse RCA may result in 5 to 10% density loss [109].
10.6 Mechanical behaviour of structural RAC

There have been numerous studies on the effect of RA use on the mechanical properties of
concrete. In most of these researches, coarse RCA were used in the production of concrete.
Although it has been considered as the most compatible RA to be introduced into concrete, with
some precautions other RA types and sizes can also be incorporated in relatively high amounts,
as will be subsequently explained.
As was demonstrated in the fresh concrete section, there are several inherent properties of RA,
which differ from those of NA, that need to be accounted for when producing RAC. Since
RAs exhibit lower quality, when compared to NA, their increasing use in RAC generally leads
to decreased mechanical performance (lower compressive, flexural and tensile strengths and
modulus of elasticity, and increased creep and shrinkage). Still, for the same replacement ratio,
this decrease may be either minimal or noteworthy, depending on the RA type, size, original
material quality, and moisture content.
RCA exhibit the closest basic properties (water absorption, density, resistance to fragmenta-
tion) to those of NA. Therefore, this aggregate type is more likely to produce RAC with similar
or slightly lower strength, in comparison to NAC, than when using the same amount of MRA
or RMA. As the RMA content in an aggregate blend increases, the mechanical performance is
expected to decline at an even greater rate than for mixes made with RCA alone. This shows that
there must be a very strict quality control during the aggregates’ recycling process, in order to
separate as much as possible the materials by type.
Although the use of coarse RCA may produce RAC with compressive strength losses up to 40%
[110], in comparison with corresponding NAC mixes, they may also result in 40% strength
gains [111]. Thus far, the existing literature showed that the use of fine RCA resulted in similar
[97,112,113] or lower [114–116] compressive strength values, when compared to corresponding
control mixes. Therefore, it can be said that coarse RCA are more likely to produce RAC mixes
with superior mechanical performance than mixes made with fine RCA. However, this may not
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1410.indd 177 20/08/15 12:32 PM

be the case when producing concrete with RMA. Fine RMA often exhibit similar, or slightly
less, density and water absorption to those belonging to the coarser fraction. Moreover, due to
their greater surface area, as well as silica and alumina contents, fine RMA are more likely to
create pozzolanic reactions with the surrounding cement paste. Consequently, this phenomenon
may lead to RAC mixes with increased mechanical performance than when using coarse RMA.
The quality of the original material has a vital role on the strength development of RAC mixes.
Several studies [85,91,99,117–120] have shown that the use of RCA, from high strength con-
crete, may produce RAC mixes with marginal strength loss and, in some cases, strength gain.
This effect is not exclusive for RCA, as studies [121,122] have shown that the use of RMA, from
high strength brick units, resulted in RAC with compressive strength values equivalent to those
of corresponding NAC mixes.
It is well known that the mechanical strength of concrete mixes improves over time, due to the
continuous hydration of cement particles. Researchers [123] have assessed the effects of incor-
porating coarse RCA contents in the mechanical properties of concrete, over a 10-year period.
As expected, the compressive strength decreased as the RCA content increased (Fig. 10.6).
However, the relative 28-day compressive strength loss of mixes with 100% RCA was 22%, in
comparison to the control NAC, whereas, after 10 years, the relative difference was 7% only.
While the relative 28-day splitting tensile strength loss was 8%, after 10 years, mixes with 100%
coarse RCA showed a 5% strength gain in comparison to NAC. This phenomenon suggests
that the continuous hydration of cement particles allowed a progressive improvement in bond
strength between the new cement paste and RCA.
An intense study was performed on the effect of exposing RAC, with various replacement ratios, to
different environmental conditions [96]. As expected, the mechanical performance of concrete mixes
(compressive and splitting tensile strength and modulus of elasticity) declined with increasing coarse
NA 50% RCA 100% RCA

NA 50% RCA 100% RCA
80 5
70 4.5
4
Splitting tensile strength (MPa)
Compressive strength (MPa)
60
3.5
50 3
40 2.5
30 2
1.5
20
1
10 0.5
0 0
28-day 1-year 3-year 5-year 10-year
Time after demoulding
Fig. 10.6: Compressive (columns) and splitting tensile (lines) strength development of RAC with
increasing RCA content [124]
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1410.indd 178 20/08/15 12:32 PM

10.6 MECHANICAL BEHAVIOUR OF STRUCTURAL CONCRETE WITH RAs 179
RCA content. However, in contradiction to a common assumption that RAC is more susceptible to
different curing conditions, this research has proven otherwise. Indeed, by comparing the relative
loss in performance of concrete specimens exposed to progressively drier environments, the authors
found negligible differences between the mechanical performance of RAC and the control NAC.
As previously stated, WRA have varying compositions, leading to various levels of effective-
ness. Research [97] has set out to determine the effects of adding different kinds of WRA on
the mechanical performance of concrete containing fine RCA. In this research, regular and
high-range WRA were used in the production of concrete. The results presented in Fig. 10.7
enabled several conclusions. Although increasing the fine RCA content led to a decline of the
mechanical performance of concrete, this variation was slight and the specimens presented qual-
ity good enough for structural use. Indeed, when producing concrete specimens with fine RCA,
the effectiveness of high-range WRA proved to be quite similar to that when used in control
NAC mixes. However, the results also indicated that regular WRA had slightly higher sensitivity
with increasing fine RCA content. This resulted in concrete mixes with higher relative compres-
sive strength loss, in comparison to mixes made with high-range WRA. The authors argue that
the regular WRA act mainly by electrostatic repulsion and partially by steric hindrance, adsorb-
ing onto the surface of the cement particles. Thus, their reduced effectiveness was likely due to
their interaction with a greater number of cement particles, as the fine RCA content increased.
There have been many studies in which mineral additions were used in the production of RAC.
Most have focused on the use of FA [124–128], but there were also studies that used silica
fume (SF) [128], GGBS [128,129], and metakaolin (MK) [128]. The results of these studies
have shown that, as the RA content increased and regardless of the type of mineral addition, the
strength loss of mixes with and without additions was quite similar. In other words, the increas-
ing incorporation of RAs did not influence the expected outcome of adding mineral additions.
Without WRA Regular WRA High range WRA

70
60
Compressive strength (MPa)
50
40
30
20
10
0
0 10 30 50 100
Fine RCA replacement ratio (%)
Fig. 10.7: 28-day compressive strength of concrete mixes made with increasing fine RCA con-
tent and WRA with different levels of effectiveness [97]
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1410.indd 179 20/08/15 12:32 PM

10% SF 15% MK Control 55% GGBS 35% FA

70
Compressive strength (MPa) 65
60
55
50
45
40
35
30
0 50 100
Coarse RCA replacement ratio (%)
Fig. 10.8: 28-day compressive strength of concrete mixes with increasing coarse RCA content
and different kinds of mineral additions [128]
Figure 10.8 illustrates a good example of this phenomenon, in which the slope, corresponding
to the compressive strength loss, is almost similar in all concrete mixes.
As previously stated, there are three methods that allow compensation of the consistency loss
caused by RA absorption. Various researchers [94–98] using the water compensation method,
besides obtaining stable products in terms of workability, have also achieved consistent results
in terms of mechanical performance. In one of these studies, the authors [98] compared the
effects of using previously saturated coarse RCA, against the water compensation method, on
the mechanical performance of RAC. The results were very clear, in that the water compensa-
tion method allowed slightly improved performance in the compressive strength and modulus of
elasticity. This improvement was even more noticeable in terms of shrinkage. RAC mixes with
100% water-compensated coarse RCA, exhibited close to 25% less shrinkage than correspond-
ing mixes with pre-saturated coarse RCA.
Another topic of great interest, which strangely has not been the subject of many investigations,
is multiple recycling. In other words, how many times can RCA be used in the production of
new concrete before it starts to exhibit a noticeable loss in performance? Researchers [130,131],
who studied this theme, performed at least three recycling cycles. In both studies, the result-
ing RAC mixes exhibited similar or slightly lower compressive strength values to those of the
control concrete. This indicates that concrete may endure endless cycles of recycling, without
showing a significant loss in mechanical performance. However, this must be verified through
further research, in which the durability aspects are also evaluated.
10.7 Durability behaviour of structural RAC

Nowadays, engineers look for materials with enhanced durability, which besides improving
resistance to external agents also reduce the life-cycle costs of concrete structures. Although less
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1410.indd 180 20/08/15 12:32 PM

10.7 DURABILITY BEHAVIOUR OF STRUCTURAL CONCRETE WITH RAs 181
Debieb and Kenai (2008) Sadek (2011)
160
Water absorption increase in relation to

140
120
corresponding NAC (%)
100
80
60
40
20
0
100% fine RMA 100% coarse RMA 100% coarse and fine
RMA
Fig. 10.9: Water absorption of RAC mixes with RMA of varying sizes [140,141]
frequent in the mechanical performance section, there have been numerous researches that have
assessed the effects of adding RAs on the durability-related performance of RAC.
Generally, as the replacement ratio increases the performance of concrete declines. The extent
of this effect may vary depending on the RA type, size, and quality of the original materials.
As stated, RCA’s inherent properties are the most similar to those of NA. Therefore, they are
capable of producing RAC mixes with much closer durability-related performance to that of
NAC, than RAC mixes made with other RA types [132–136]. This is only natural, considering
that the alternative RA (RMA and MRA) may exhibit much greater water absorption than RCA.
Regarding the influence of RA size, it was found [137–139] that, for the same replacement ratio,
coarse RCA may produce RAC mixes with much less porosity than when using fine RCA. This
trend was reversed in the case of RMA (Fig. 10.9) [140,141]. Owing to the greater amount of
pozzolanic reactions between the fine RMA and cement paste, these mixes may exhibit less
permeability than when using coarse RMA.
A significant study [118] assessed the effects of introducing coarse RCA, with varying quality,
on the durability performance of concrete. The materials used in this study came from concrete
materials with different strength levels and were exposed to a varying number of processing
stages. The authors found that the durability factor increased as the strength of the original
materials increased. Furthermore, they learned that, as the RCA was subjected to an increasing
number of processing stages, the durability-related performance improved. This trend, which is
attributed to the use of RCA with progressively lower water absorption, is mainly due to two
factors: as the strength of the original material increased, the porosity of the adhered mortar
decreased; and as the number of processing stages increased, the amount of adhered mortar
decreased, thus exhibiting lower water absorption values. However, this may not be the case in
the process of carbonation of concrete. Studies [142–144] reveal that, provided that the incorpo-
rated RCA, coming from concrete materials with varying strength levels, exhibit similar water
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1410.indd 181 20/08/15 12:32 PM

absorption values, the strength of the original material and quantity of adhered mortar have little
influence on the process of concrete carbonation.
In most studies, authors use simple test methods, in a relatively short period of time after cast-
ing, to assess the durability of concrete. However, [145] went a step further and determined the
performance of RAC mixes over a 10-year period. Figure 10.10 presents the total charge passed
and carbonation depth of these RAC mixes, exposed to an outdoor environment, with increas-
ing coarse RCA and FA content. After 10 years, RAC mixes, with no additions and with 100%
coarse RCA, showed only 10% higher total charge passed and carbonation depths, in compari-
son to corresponding NAC mixes. This shows that it is possible to produce RAC, using 100%
coarse RCA, with negligible performance loss.
Using additions to lower the penetrability of concrete is an effective method to achieve a more
durable material. Figure 10.10 shows that incorporating increasing FA content increases the
resistance to chloride ion penetration. This, however, does not take happen with carbonation,
that is, as the FA content increased, carbonation depths also increased. Apart from the lower
calcium hydroxide content in FA, in comparison to cement, high amounts of FA may lead to
increased porosity levels [146,147]. Figure 10.11 demonstrates that mineral additions, other
than FA, are also able to greatly reduce the chloride ion penetrability of RAC.
Although some properties of RAC, when exposed to progressively drier environments, may
be more sensitive than those of corresponding NAC [148], the differences are minimal [149].
In other words, the increasing incorporation of coarse RCA has minimal effect on the relative
effect caused by exposing concrete to different environmental conditions.
Several researches [150–153] have revealed that the increasing use of RAs in RAC mixes
may cause a somewhat lower resistance to freezing and thawing cycles. However, this may
28-day 1-year 10-year 28-day 1-year 10-year

8000 30
7000
25
Total charge passed (coulombs)
6000
Carbonation depth (mm)
20
5000
4000 15
3000
10
2000
5
1000
0 0
R0
00
25
35
55
5
R5
F2
F2
F3
F3
F5
F5
Rl
0F
0F
0F
R0
00
R0
00
R0
00
R5
R5
R5
R1
R1
R1
Fig. 10.10: Total charge passed (columns) and carbonation depth (lines) of RAC mixes with
increasing coarse RCA and fly ash content [145]
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1410.indd 182 20/08/15 12:32 PM

10.8 SUCCESSFUL CASE STUDIES USING STRUCTURAL RAC 183
Control 10% SF 15% MK 35% FA 55% GGBS
6000
5000
Total charge passed (coulombs)
4000
3000
2000
1000
0
0 50 100
Coarse RCA content (%)
Fig. 10.11: Total charge passed of RAC mixes with increasing coarse RCA content and different
mineral additions [128]
be overcome by introducing air-entraining admixtures. Studies [151,154,155] have shown that

after using air-entraining admixtures, very little difference was found between RAC and NAC
mixes and that they had the same air content, irrespectively of the RA content.
10.8 Successful case studies using structural RAC

As previously mentioned, one of the main barriers to recycling and reuse of CDW materials is
the lack of confidence by clients and contractors. It is expected that by presenting various suc-
cessful case studies, in which structural RAC was used, these players increase their confidence
on the use of this sustainable construction material. Table 10.3 presents some of these case
studies.
10.9 Concluding remarks

This chapter has described several ways of making concrete more sustainable, of which recy-
cling CDW is one of the most important and feasible with the existing technology. For this
reason, at the present date, there are no arguments against CDW materials being used for the
production of new concrete. The literature, besides providing sufficient evidence of the feasibil-
ity of using RA in concrete, it also already covered most aspects in regard to the effects of their
incorporation.
Many types of wastes were studied as a constituent in concrete production. Although some
industrial waste materials (i.e. GGBS and FA) have shown significant improvements in some
concrete properties, most were incompatible with concrete. Concerning RA from CDW materi-
als, of the three types identified, RCA are considered the most compatible with concrete. The
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1410.indd 183 20/08/15 12:32 PM

Case Study Description

Hong Kong Hong Kong Wetland Park is located at the north western part of Hong
Wetland Park Kong and is close to the border between Hong Kong and Shenzhen, China.
(Hong Kong) Hong Kong Wetland Park comprises a 10 000 m2 visitor centre with
exhibition galleries, theatres, souvenir shops, cafes, children play areas,
classrooms and a resources centre.
In the construction of the Hong Kong Wetland Park, RA was used to
replace part of the NA used in structural concrete. A total volume of
around 13 000 m3, and of RAC was used in its construction. The applica-
tions of the RAC include pile caps, ground slabs, external works, mass
concrete, minor concrete works, and concrete blinding, depending on the
strength class of concrete. The replacement levels of coarse RA were of
20 and 100%, for strength classes equal to or above C25 and below C20,
respectively. The highest strength class of RAC was C35.
The “Delftse The Dutch Concrete Association took the initiative in setting up a dem-
Zoom” Hous- onstration project, called “Delftse Zoom”, to stimulate the use of CDW
ing Project materials in the production of structural concrete. The purpose was to work
(The Nether- with RAC, in which the coarse NA was entirely replaced by RCA and
lands) RMA.
This project involved the construction of 272 low-rise dwellings and family
houses, in which the partitioning walls were made of load-bearing prefab-
ricated concrete elements. Although building specifications limited the use
of coarse MRA to a maximum replacement level of 20%, in this project,
replacement levels up to 100% were used with caution. In the demonstration
project, the partitioning walls were built with C25 RAC. In the first phase of
the project, the RAC was only used in relatively simple constructive ele-
ments such as unreinforced load-bearing walls. At a later stage, attention was
directed towards more high-grade uses, such as pre-stressed facade elements
and floors.
The Envi- The Environmental Building is an office and seminar facility at the heart of
ronmental the main Building Research Establishment (BRE) site in Watford, UK. It
Building at was designed to act as a model for low energy and environmentally aware
BRE (United office building of the 21st century.
Kingdom) This building incorporates the first-ever use of RA in ready-mixed concrete in
the UK. RAs were used under the supervision of structural engineers. RCA
was used as coarse aggregate in over 1500 m3 of concrete supplied for founda-
tions, floor slabs, structural columns, and waffle floors. For the foundations, a
C25 mix was specified. For floor slabs, structural columns, and waffle floors, a
C35 mix was specified.
Singapore In support of the Singapore government’s goal to achieve sustainable
Changi Airport development in the construction industry, the Changi Airport Group has
(Singapore) initiated a project using RCA. This material was obtained from the demoli-
tion of existing aircraft stand rigid pavement, to reconstruct a new aircraft
stand rigid pavement at Singapore Changi Airport.
(Continued)
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1410.indd 184 20/08/15 12:32 PM

10.9 CONCLUDING REMARKS 185
Case Study Description

Singapore The RCA was obtained from the demolition of the aircraft stand rigid
Changi Airport pavement, which was processed in a recycling plant. Laboratory tests were
(Singapore) carried out on the RCA to ensure that these complied with the require-
ments before its use in RAC production. A maximum replacement level
of 20% RCA was employed. The application of RAC was made similar
to NAC, except that special measures were undertaken to ensure that it
was properly cured to minimize shrinkage cracking. The first phase of this
project involved the construction of an aircraft stand rigid pavement area
of about 35 750 m2. The remaining areas, of about 190 000 m2, will be
completed by 2019.
Recycled The German Federal Foundation for the Environment (Deutsche Bundess-
building ma- tiftung Umwelt) erected its new office building in Osnabrück to accom-
terials for the modate its headquarters. With this new structure, the Foundation set an
Head Office example for the use of environmentally friendly construction materials.
in Osnabrück When this project started, the existing German standards, for the produc-
(Germany) tion of structural concrete, did not yet provide the framework for the use
of RA in concrete production. In laboratory investigations, concrete mixes
were developed to meet the technical requirements, such as strength and
workability. C25 and C35 strength class RAC mixes were used for struc-
tural elements.
Table 10.3: Successful case studies using structural RAC [156–158]
use of these materials in the production of new concrete has shown considerably less loss in per-
formance, than when using the other two types of RA (MRA and RMA). Of course, due to the
varying quality and strength of the original materials, extra precautions must be taken to ensure
the use of the best possible materials when producing structural concrete.
To ensure that good quality RAs are manufactured, the quality control process must start during
construction or demolition activities. By applying a selective demolition methodology, waste
materials will then be separated and stored properly, which, besides facilitating the task of recy-
cling plant operatives, will also minimize contamination levels of future RAs.
Owing to the similarity between CDW recycling plants and NA manufacturing facilities, it is
relatively easy to set up the first one by purchasing currently used technologies or even by con-
verting an existing NA production factory. In either case, the literature review has shown that
there is enough information for recycling plants to produce RA with good quality enough to be
used in structural concrete production.
The recycling procedure and type of recycling plant must adapt to the desired application of
the end product. This is important as some processing stages may be bypassed, transportation
distances reduced and less energy consumed. This translates into reduced costs and lessens the
ecological footprint.
Some studies have shown that it is possible to produce RAC mixes, using unsaturated RA,
with similar or even improved mechanical performance, when compared to conventional mixes.
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1410.indd 185 20/08/15 12:32 PM

However, in situations in which the consistency of concrete is important, it is recommended that

some sort of water compensation method is used.
Regardless of the type of RA, the coarser fraction has proved to produce RAC mixes with
closer performance to that of a corresponding control mix, than when using the finer frac-
tion. However, it is possible to use fine RA in the production of concrete under special
precautions.
Since the strength of the original material has a noticeable effect on the properties of RAC, the
use of some sort of quality control of materials prior to demolition would increase the potential
value of the resulting aggregates. Furthermore, the extra information would also allow a better
understanding of the potential effects on the mechanical and durability-related properties of
concrete.
Although very little information was obtained on the multiple recycling potential of concrete,
existing studies have shown that this material is able to endure a significant number of recycling
cycles. This aspect is rather significant as it suggests that it is possible to continually produce
new concrete from RCA, without significant loss in performance and using minimum amounts
of natural resources. However, further research is required on this subject in order to ascertain
the effects on the various properties of concrete.
Furthermore, as various studies have demonstrated while using a selective demolition approach,
significant economic and environmental benefits may be guaranteed. The use of materials from
processed CDW results in a dramatic reduction of the use of natural resources as well as the
amount of waste sent to landfills.
Finally, one of the most important conclusions drawn during this study is that, considering that
a proper recycling methodology is used, CDW derived materials should be considered as just
another possible aggregate for the production of concrete (i.e. sandstone, granite, limestone,
RCA, RMA, and MRA). This forward thinking, in which RA are regarded as an added-value
material instead of a poor-quality and unusable material, is a step further into making structural
concrete production more sustainable.
References
Introduction
[1] Timetric. 2013. Global Construction Aggregates Market – Key Trends and Opportunities
to 2017, Timetric, 225 p.
[2] European Commission. Eurostat. http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/statistics_explained/
-index.php/Waste_statistics, [accessed on 17 July 2013].
[3] Freedonia. 2012. World construction aggregates. Available at: http://www.freedoniagroup.
com/brochure/25xx/2564smwe.pdf [accessed on 13 August 2013].
[4] Hendriks, C.A., Worrell, E., de Jager, D., Blok, K., Riemer, P. 1998. Emission reduction of green-
house gases from the cement industry. Fourth International Conference on Greenhouse Gas
Control Technologies, Interlaken, Switzerland, August 1998, Elsevier Science Ltd., 939–944.
[5] Imbabi, M.S., Carrigan, C., McKenna, S. 2012. Trends and developments in green cement
and concrete technology. Int. J. Sustain. Built Environ., 1(2): 194–216.
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1410.indd 186 20/08/15 12:32 PM

REFERENCES 187
[6] Odum, H.T. 1996. Environmental Accounting: Emergy and Environmental Decision Mak-
ing, Wiley, New York, NJ, USA, 370.
[7] Brown, M.T., Buranakarn, V. 2003. Emergy indices and ratios of sustainable material cycles
and recycle options. Resour. Conserv. Recycl., 38(1): 1–22.
[8] Pulselli, R.M., Simoncini, E., Ridolfi, R., Bastianoni, S. 2008. Specific emergy of cement
and concrete: an energy-based appraisal of building materials and their transport. Ecolog.
Indicat., 8(5): 647–656.
[9] Flatt, R.J., Roussel, N., Cheeseman, C.R. 2012. Concrete: an eco material that needs to be
improved. J. Euro. Ceramic Soc., 32(11): 2787–2798.
[10] Hasanbeigi, A., Price, L., Lin, E. 2012. Emerging energy-efficiency and CO2 emission-
reduction technologies for cement and concrete production: a technical review. Renew.
Sustaina. Energ. Rev., 16(8): 6220–6238.
[11] International Energy Agency. 2009. Technology Roadmap: Cement - Foldout. Available at:
http://www.iea.org/publications/freepublications-/publication/Cement_Roadmap_Foldout_
WEB.pdf [accessed on 21 June 2013].
Industrial wastes
Ground granulated blast furnace slag
[12] Al-Jabri, K., Hisada, M., Al-Saidy, A., Al-Oraimi, S. 2009. Copper slag as sand replace-
ment of high performance concrete. Cement Concr. Compo., 31(7): 483–488.
[13] Dhir, R.K., El-Mohr, M.A.K., Dyer, T.D. 1996. Chloride binding in GGBS concrete.
Cement Concr. Res., 26(12): 1767–1773.
[14] Oner, A., Akyuz, S. 2007. An experimental study on optimum usage of GGBS for the
compressive strength of concrete. Cement Concr. Compo., 29(6): 505–514.
[15] Tasong, W.A., Wild, S., Tilley, R.J.D. 1999. Mechanism by which ground granulated blast
furnace slag prevents sulfate attack of lime stabilized kaolinite. Cement Concr. Res.,
29(7): 975–982.
Fly ash
[16] Oluokun, F.A. 1994. Fly ash concrete mix design and the water cement ratio law. ACI
Mater. J., 91(4): 362–371.
[17] Bilodeau, A., Sivasundaram, V., Painter, K.E., Malhotra, V.M. 1994. Durability of concrete
incorporating high volumes of fly ash from sources in the USA. ACI Mater. J., 91(1):
3–12.
[18] Langley, W.S., Carette, G.G., Malhotra, V.M. 1992. Strength development and temperature
rise in large concrete blocks containing high volumes of low-calcium (ASTM class F) fly
ash. ACI Mater. J., 89(2): 362–368.
[19] Langan, B.W., Weng, K., Ward, M.A. 2002. Effect of silica fume and fly ash on heat of
hydration of portland cement. Cement Concr. Res., 32(7): 1045–1051.
[20] Siddique, R. 2004. Performance characteristics of high-volume class F fly ash concrete.
Cement Concr. Res., 34(3): 487–493.
[21] Huang, C.H., Lin, S.K., Chang, C.S., Chen, H.J. 2013. Mix proportions and mechanical
properties of concrete containing very high-volume of class F fly ash. Construct. Build.
Mater., 46: 71–78.
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1410.indd 187 20/08/15 12:32 PM

Glass
[22] Chen, C.H., Wu, J.K., Yang, C.C. 2006. Waste E-glass particles used in cementitious mix-
tures. Cement Concr. Res., 36(3): 449–456.
[23] Ismail, Z.Z., Al-Hasmi, E.A. 2009. Recycling of waste glass as a partial replacement for
fine aggregate in concrete. Waste Manag., 29(2): 655–659.
[24] Kou, S.C., Poon, C.S. 2009. Properties of self-compacting concrete prepared with recy-
cled glass aggregate. Cement Concr. Compo., 31(2): 107–113.
[25] Metwally, I.M. 2007. Investigations on the performance of concrete made with blended
finely milled waste glass. Adv. Struct. Eng., 10(1): 47–53.
[26] Park, S.B., Lee, B.C., Kim, J.H. 2004. Studies on mechanical properties of concrete con-
taining waste glass aggregate. Cement Concr. Res., 34(12): 2181–2189.
[27] Shao, Y., Lefort, T., Moras, S., Rodriguez, D. 2000. Studies on concrete containing ground
waste glass. Cement Concr. Res., 30(1): 91–100.
[28] Topçu, I.B., Canbaz, M. 2004. Properties of concrete containing waste glass. Cement
Concr. Res., 34(2): 267–274.
[29] Castro, S., de Brito, J. 2013. Evaluation of the durability of concrete made with crushed
glass aggregates. J. Clean. Prod., 41: 7–14.
[30] Serpa, D., Santos Silva, A., de Brito, J., Pontes, J., Soares D. 2013.ASR of mortars contain-
ing glass. Construct. Build. Mater., 47: 489–495.
Plastic
[31] Siddique, R., Khatib, J., Kaur, I. 2007. Use of recycled plastic in concrete: a review. Waste
Manage., 28(10): 1835–1852.
[32] Akçaözoglu, S., Atis, C.D., Akcaözoglu, K. 2010. An investigation on the use of shred-
ded waste PET bottles as aggregate in lightweight concrete. Waste Manag., 32(2):
285–290.
[33] Albano, C., Camacho, N., Hernandez, M., Matheus, A., Gutierrez, A. 2009. Influence of
content and particle size of waste PET bottles on concrete behaviour at different W/C
ratios. Waste Manag., 29(10): 2707–2716.
[34] Choi, Y.W., Moon, D.J., Chung, J.S., Cho, S.K. 2005. Effects of waste PET bottles aggre-
gate on the properties of concrete. Cement Concr. Res., 35(4): 776–781.
[35] Saikia, N., de Brito, J. 2012. Use of plastic waste as aggregate in cement mortar and con-
crete preparation: a review. Construct. Build. Mater., 34: 385–401.
[36] Frigione, M. 2010. Recycling of PET bottles as fine aggregate in concrete. Waste Manag.,
30(6): 1101–1106.
[37] Kou, S.C., Lee, G., Poon, C.S., Lai, W.L. 2009. Properties of lightweight aggregate concrete
prepared with PVC granules derived from scraped PVC pipes. Waste Manag., 29(2): 621–628.
[38] Soroushian, C. 1999. Experimental investigation of the optimized use of plastic flakes in
normal-weight concrete. Magaz. Concr. Res., 51(1): 27–33.
[39] Ferreira, L., de Brito, J., Saikia, N. 2012. Influence of curing conditions on the mechani-
cal performance of concrete containing recycled plastic aggregate. Construct. Build.
Mater., 36: 196–204.
[40] Silva, R.V., de Brito, J., Saikia, N. 2013. Influence of curing conditions on the durability-
related performance of concrete made with selected plastic waste aggregates. Cement
Concr. Compos., 35(1): 23–31.
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1410.indd 188 20/08/15 12:32 PM

REFERENCES 189
Rubber
[41] Valadares, F., Bravo, M., de Brito, J. 2012. Concrete with used tire rubber aggregates:
mechanical performance. ACI Mater. J., 109(3): 283–292.
[42] Marques, A.M., Correia, J.R., de Brito, J. 2013. Post-fire residual mechanical properties of
concrete made with recycled rubber aggregate. Fire Saf. J., 58: 49–57.
[43] Khatib, Z., Bayomy, F. 1999. Rubberized portland cement concrete. J. Mater. Civil Eng.,
11(3): 206–213.
[44] Segre, N., Joekes, I. 2000. Use for tire rubber particles as addition to cement paste. Cement
Concr. Res., 30(9): 1421–1425.
[45] Topçu, I. 1995. The properties of rubberized concretes. Cement Concr. Res., 25(2): 304–310.
[46] Pedro, D., de Brito, J., Veiga, R. 2012. Mortars made with fine granulate from shredded
tyres, J. Mater. Civil Eng., 25(4): 519–529.
Other wastes
[47] Almeida, N., Branco, F., Brito, J., Santos, J. 2007. High-performance concrete with recy-
cled stone slurry. Cement Concr. Res., 37(2): 210–220.
[48] Baffa, I., Akasaki, J. 2005. Light-concrete with leather: durability aspects. International
Conference on Concrete for Structures, Coimbra, Portugal, July 2005, University of
Coimbra, Coimbra, 69–77.
[49] Lima, P., Leite, M., Santiago, E. 2010. Recycled lightweight concrete made from footwear
industry waste and CDW. Waste Manag., 30(6): 1107–1113.
[50] Martins, M., Santos, J., Azevedo, A. 2004. Production of lightweight concrete with E.V.A.
residues as recycled aggregate. International RILEM Conference on the Use of Recycled
Materials in Buildings and Structures, Barcelona, Spain, November 2004, RILEM, 973–981.
[51] Santiago, E., Lima, P., Leite, M., Filho, R. 2009. Mechanical behaviour of recycled light-
weight concrete using EVA waste and CDW under moderate temperature. IBRACON
Struct. Mater. J., 2(3): 211–221.
[52] Yang, E., Yi, S., Leem, Y. 2005. Effect of oyster shell substituted for fine aggregate on con-
crete characteristics. Part I: fundamental properties. Cement Concr. Res., 35(11): 2175–2182.
[53] Chandra, S. 1997. Palm Oil Shell Aggregate for Lightweight Concrete, Waste Materials
Used in Concrete Manufacturing. Division of Concrete Structures, Chalmers University
of Technology, Sweden, 624–636.
[54] Mannan, M., Ganapathy, C. 2004. Concrete from an agriculture waste-oil palm shell
(OPS). Build. Environ., 39(4): 441–448.
[55] Mannan, M., Ganapathy, C. 2001. Long-term strengths of concrete with oil palm shell as
coarse aggregate. Cement Concr. Res., 31(9): 1319–1321.
[56] Teo, D., Mannan, M., Kurian, V., Ganapathy, C. 2007. Lightweight concrete made from
oil palm shell (OPS): structural bond and durability properties. Build. Environ., 42(7):
2614–2621.
[57] Sales, A., Souza F. 2009. Concretes and mortars recycled with water treatment sludge and
construction and demolition rubble. Construct. Build. Mater., 23(6): 2362–2370.
[58] Tay, J., Hong, S., Show, K. 2000. Reuse of industrial sludge as pelletized aggregate for
concrete. J. Environ. Eng., 126(3): 279–287.
[59] Mun, K. 2007. Development and tests of lightweight aggregate using sewage sludge for
non-structural concrete. Construct. Build. Mater., 21(7): 1583–1588.
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1410.indd 189 20/08/15 12:32 PM

Construction and demolition wastes

Specifications
[60] Building Contractors Society of Japan (BCSJ). 1997. Proposed Standard for the Use of
Recycled Aggregate and Recycled Aggregate Concrete. Committee on Disposal and
Reuse of Construction Waste, Japan.
[61] Building Research Establishment (BRE). 1998. Recycled aggregates, BRE Digest 433, CI/
SfB p(T6), 6 p.
[62] Cement and Concrete Association of New Zealand (CCANZ). 2011. Best Practice Guide
for the Use of Recycled Aggregates in New Concrete. Cement and Concrete Association
of New Zealand, 49 p.
[63] CEN/TC 154/SC2. 2005. Proposed Amendments to EN 12620 to Incorporate Clauses for
Recycled Aggregates. CEN/TC 154/SC2, Brussels, Belgium, 16.
[64] DIN 4226-100. 2002. Aggregates for Mortar and Concrete – Part 100 Recycled Aggre-
gates, DIN 4226-100, Germany.
[65] Japan Standards Association (JIS A 5021). 2005. Recycled Aggregate for Concrete-Class
H. Japan Standards Association, Japan.
[66] Japan Standards Association (JIS A 5022). 2005. Recycled Aggregate for Concrete-Class
M. Japan Standards Association, Japan.
[67] Japan Standards Association (JIS A 5023). 2007. Recycled Aggregate for Concrete-Class L.
Japan Standards Association, Japan.
[68] LNEC E 471. 2006. Guideline for the Use of Recycled Coarse Aggregates in Hydraulic Binders’
Concrete (in Portuguese). LNEC E 471, National Laboratory in Civil Engineering, Portugal.
[69] NBR 15.116. 2005. Recycled Aggregates from Construction and Demolition Waste: Non-
Structural Concrete-Requirements (in Portuguese). NBR 15.116, Brazil.
[70] DDPS - Département fédéral de la défense, de la protection de la population et des
sports (Federal Department of Defence, Civil Protection and Sports). 2006. Ot (Objectif
technique) 70085 Instruction technique: Utilisation de Matériaux de Construction
Minéraux Secondaires dans la Construction d’abris, Switzerland.
[71] Prescriptions Techniques PTV 406 Édition 1.1. 2003. Granulats de Débris de Démolition
et de Construction Recycles. PTV 406 Édition 1.1, Brussels, Belgium.
[72] RILEM TC 121-DRG. 1994. Specifications for concrete with recycled aggregates, Materials
and Structures. Mater. Struct., 27(173): 557–559.
[73] Task Force of the Standing Committee of Concrete of Spain. 2004. Draft of Spanish regula-
tions for the use of recycled aggregate in the production of structural concrete. Interna-
tional RILEM Conference on the Use of Recycled Materials in Buildings and Structures,
Barcelona, Spain, November 2004, RILEM, 511–525.
[74] WBTC No. 12. 2002. Specifications Facilitating the Use of Recycled Aggregates. Works
Bureau Technical Circular, Hong Kong.
Converting CDW into RA
[75] Hansen, T.C. 1992. Recycling of Demolished Concrete and Masonry, RILEM Report 6,
Report of Technical Committee 37-DRC, Demolition and Reuse of Concrete, E&FN
Spoon, London, 319 p.
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1410.indd 190 20/08/15 12:32 PM

REFERENCES 191
[76] Mas, B., Cladera, A., del Olmo, T., Pitarch, F. 2012. Influence of the amount of mixed
recycled aggregates on the properties of concrete for non-structural use. Construct. Build.
Mater., 27(1): 612–622.
[77] Coelho, A., de Brito, J. 2011. Economic analysis of conventional versus selective demoli-
tion – a Case Study. Resour. Conserv. Recycl., 55(3): 382–392.
[78] Coelho, A., de Brito, J. 2012. Influence of construction and demolition waste management
on the environmental impact of buildings. Waste Manag., 32(3): 532–541.
[79] Coelho, A., de Brito, J. 2013. Economic viability analysis of a construction and demolition
waste recycling plant in Portugal E. Part I: location, materials, technology and economic
analysis. J. Clean. Prod., 39: 338–352.
[80] Coelho, A., de Brito, J. 2013. Economic viability analysis of a construction and demolition
waste recycling plant in Portugal E. Part II: economic sensitivity analysis. J. Clean. Prod.,
39: 329–337.
[81] ACI Committee 555. 2001. Removal and Reuse of Hardened Concrete. American Con-
crete Institute, Farmington Hills, MI, USA, Special Publication, 26.
[82] Hendriks, C.F., Pietersen, H.S., Fraay, A.F.A. 1998. Recycling of building and demolition
waste – an integrated approach. Proceedings of the International Conference on the Use of
Recycled Concrete Aggregates, London, UK, November 1998, Thomas Telford, UK, 419–432.
[83] Kasai, Y. 1998. Barriers to the reuse of construction by-products and the use of recycled aggre-
gate concrete in Japan. Proceedings of the International Conference on the Use of Recycled
Concrete Aggregates, London, UK, November 1998, Thomas Telford, UK, 433–444.
[84] Gokce, A., Nagataki, S., Saekic, T., Hisada, M. 2011. Identification of frost-susceptible
recycled concrete aggregates for durability of concrete. Construct. Build. Mater., 25(5):
2426–2431.
[85] Nagataki, S., Gokce, A., Saeki, T., Hisada, M. 2004. Assessment of recycling process induced
damage sensitivity of recycled concrete aggregates. Cement Concr. Res., 34(6): 965–971.
[86] O’Mahony, M. 1990. Recycling of Materials in Civil Engineering, PhD. Thesis, Univer-
sity of Oxford, 233.
Fresh behaviour of RAC

Consistency
[87] Etxeberria, M., Vázquez, E., Marí, A., Barra, M. 2007. Influence of amount of recycled
coarse aggregates and production process on properties of recycled aggregate concrete.
Cement Concr. Res., 37(5): 735–742.
[88] Barra, M., Vazquez, E. 1998. Properties of concretes with recycled aggregates: influence
of properties of the aggregates and their interpretation. Proceedings of the International
Conference on the Use of Recycled Concrete Aggregates, London, UK, November 1998,
Thomas Telford, UK, 19–30.
[89] Khatib, J.M. 2005. Properties of concrete incorporating fine recycled aggregate. Cement
Concr. Res., 35(4): 763–769.
[90] Buyle-Bodin, F., Zaharieva, R. 2002. Influence of industrially produced recycled aggregates
on flow properties of concrete. Mater. Struct., 35(8): 504–509.
[91] Yang, K.H., Chung, H.S., Ashour, A.F. 2008. Influence of type and replacement level of
recycled aggregates on concrete properties. ACI Mater. J., 105(3): 289–296.
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1410.indd 191 20/08/15 12:32 PM

[92] Padmini, A.K., Ramamurthy, K., Mathews, M.S. 2009. Influence of parent concrete on the
properties of recycled aggregate concrete. Constr. Build. Mater., 23(2): 829–836.
[93] Otsuki, N., Miyazato, S., Yodsudjai, W. 2003. Influence of recycled aggregate on interfacial
transition zone, strength, chloride penetration and carbonation of concrete. J. Mater. Civil
Eng., 15(5): 443–451.
[94] Leite, M. 2001. Evaluation of the Mechanical Properties of Concrete Made With Aggre-
gates From Construction and Demolition Waste, PhD Thesis (In Portuguese), Porto
Alegre, Brazil.
[95] Evangelista, L., de Brito, J. 2010. Durability performance of concrete made with fine recy-
cled concrete aggregates. Cement Concr. Compos., 32(1): 9–14.
[96] Fonseca, N., de Brito, J., Evangelista, L. 2011. The influence of curing conditions on the
mechanical performance of concrete made with recycled concrete waste. Cement Concr.
Compos., 33(6): 637–643.
[97] Pereira, P., Evangelista, L., de Brito, J. 2012. The effect of superplasticizers on the mechan-
ical performance of concrete made with fine recycled concrete aggregates. Cement Concr.
Compos., 34(9):1044–1052.
[98] Ferreira, L., de Brito, J., Barra, M. 2011. Influence of pre-saturation of recycled coarse
concrete aggregates on structural concrete’s mechanical and durability properties. Magaz.
Concr. Res., 63(8): 617–627.
[99] Poon, C.S., Shui, Z.H., Lam, L., Fok, H., Kou, S.C. 2004. Influence of moisture states of
natural and recycled aggregates on the slump and compressive strength of concrete. Cement
Concr. Res., 34(1): 31–36.
Bleeding
[100] Limbachiya, M.C., Leelawat, T., Dhir, R.K. 1998. RCA concrete: a study of properties
in the fresh state, strength development and durability. Proceedings of the International
Conference On The Use Of Recycled Concrete Aggregates, London, UK, November
1998, Thomas Telford, UK, 227–237.
[101] Dhir, R.K., Paine, K.A. 2004. Suitability and practicality of using coarse RCA in normal and
high- strength concrete. 1st International Conference on Sustainable Construction: Waste
Management, Singapore, June 2004, CPG Laboratories Pte Ltd., Singapore, 15.
[102] Kou, S.C., Poon, C.S. 2009. Properties of self-compacting concrete prepared with coarse
and fine recycled concrete aggregates. Cement Concr. Compos., 31(9): 622–627.
[103] Poon, C.S., Kou, S.C., Lam, L. 2007. Influence of recycled aggregate on slump and bleeding
of fresh concrete. Mater. Struct., 40(9): 981–988.
[104] Corinaldesi, V., Moriconi, G. 2011. The role of industrial by-products in self-compacting
concrete. Construct. Build. Mater., 25(8): 3181–3186.
[105] Van Der Wegen, G., Haverkort, R. 1998. Recycled construction and demolition waste as
a fine aggregate for concrete. Proceedings of the International Conference on the Use
of Recycled Concrete Aggregates, London, UK, November 1998, Thomas Telford, UK,
333–346.
[106] Koulouris, A., Limbachiya, M.C., Fried, A.N., Roberts, J.J. 2004. Use of recycled aggre-
gate in concrete application: Case studies. Proceedings of the International Conference
on Sustainable Waste Management and Recycling: Construction Demolition Waste,
London, UK, September 2004, Thomas Telford, UK, 245–258.
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1410.indd 192 20/08/15 12:32 PM

REFERENCES 193
[107] Kutegeza, B., Alexander, M.G. 2004. The performance of concrete made with com-
mercially produced recycled coarse and fine aggregates in the Western Cape. Proceed-
ings of the International Conference on Sustainable Waste Management and Recycling:
Construction Demolition Waste, London, UK, September 2004, Thomas Telford, UK,
235–244.
[108] Sagoe-Crentsil, K.K., Brown, T., Taylor, A.H. 2001. Performance of concrete made with
commercially produced coarse recycled concrete aggregate. Cement Concr. Res., 31(5):
707–712.
Density
[109] CCANZ. 2011. Best Practice Guide for the Use of Recycled Aggregates in New Concrete.
Cement and Concrete Association of New Zealand, 49.
Mechanical behaviour of RAC

[110] Kou, S.C., Poon, C.S., Chan, D. 2007. Influence of fly ash as cement replacement on the
properties of recycled aggregate concrete. J. Mater. Civil Eng., 19(9): 709–717.
[111] Ridzuan, A.R., Ibrahim, A., Ismail, A.M.M., Diah, A.B.M. 2005. Durability performance
of recycled aggregate concrete. Proceedings of the International Conference on Achiev-
ing Sustainability in Construction, Dundee, Scotland, UK, July 2005, Thomas Telford,
UK, 193–202.
[112] Evangelista, L., de Brito, J. 2010. Durability performance of concrete made with fine
recycled concrete aggregates. Cement Concr. Compos., 32(1): 9–14.
[113] Sarhat, S.R. 2007. An experimental investigation on the viability of using fine concrete
recycled aggregate in concrete production. International Conference on Sustainable
Construction Materials and Technologies, Coventry, UK, June 2007, Taylor & Francis,
UK, 53–57.
[114] Tang, K., Soutsos, M.N., Millard, S.G. 2007. Concrete paving products made with recycled
demolition aggregates. International Conference on Sustainable Construction Materials
and Technologies, Coventry, UK, June 2007, Taylor & Francis, UK, 77–84.
[115] Khatib, J.M. 2005. Properties of concrete incorporating fine recycled aggregate. Cement
Concr. Res., 35(4): 763–769.
[116] Kenai, S., Debieb, F., Azzouz, L. 2002. Mechanical properties and durability of concrete
made with coarse and fine recycled concrete aggregates. Proceedings of the International
Conference on Sustainable Concrete Construction, Dundee, Scotland, UK, September
2002, Thomas Telford, UK, 383–392.
[117] Kikuchi, M., Dosho, Y., Narikawa, M., Miura, T. Application of recycled aggregate con-
crete for structural concrete: part 1 experimental study on the quality of recycled aggregate
and recycled aggregate concrete. Proceedings of the International Conference on the Use of
Recycled Concrete Aggregates, London, UK, November 1998, Thomas Telford, UK, 55–68.
[118] Nagataki, S., Iida, K. 2001. Recycling of Demolished Concrete, Recent Advances in Con-
crete Technology, SP 200, CANMET/ACI, Ottawa, 1–20.
[119] Otsuki, N., Miyazato, S., Yodsudjai, W. 2003. Influence of recycled aggregate on interfacial
transition zone, strength, chloride penetration and carbonation of concrete. J. Mater. Civil
Eng., 15(5): 443–451.
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1410.indd 193 20/08/15 12:32 PM

[120] Wang, Z., Wang, L., Cui, Z., Zhou, M. 2011. Effect of recycled coarse aggregate on con-
crete compressive strength. Trans. Tianjin Univer., 17(3): 229–234.
[121] Khalaf, F.M., Devenny, A.S. 2004. Performance of brick aggregate concrete at high tempera-
tures. J. Mater. Civil Eng., 16(6): 556–565.
[122] Khalaf, F.M., Devenny, A.S. 2005. Properties of new and recycled clay brick aggregates
for use in concrete. J. Mater. Civil Eng., 17(4): 456–464.
[123] Poon, C.S., Kou, S.C. 2010. Effects of fly ash on mechanical properties of 10-year-old
concrete prepared with recycled concrete aggregates. 2nd International Conference on
Waste Engineering and Management – ICWEM 2010, Shanghai, China, October 2010,
RILEM, 46–59.
[124] Ravindrarajah, R.S., Tam, C.T. 1987. Recycled concrete as fine aggregate in concrete. Int. J.
Cement Compos. Lightw. Concr., 9(4): 235–241.
[125] Kou, S.C., Poon, C.S. 2009. Properties of concrete prepared with crushed fine stone, fur-
nace bottom ash and fine recycled aggregate as fine aggregates. Construct. Build. Mater.,
23(8): 2877–2886.
[126] Kou, S.C., Poon, C.S. 2009. Properties of self-compacting concrete prepared with coarse
and fine recycled concrete aggregates. Cement Concrete Compos., 31(9): 622–627.
[127] Kou, S.C., Poon, C.S., Chan, D. 2007. Influence of fly ash as cement replacement on the
properties of recycled aggregate concrete. J. Mater. Civil Eng., 19(9): 709–717.
[128] Kou, S.C., Poon, C.S., Agrela, F. 2011. Comparisons of natural and recycled aggregate
concretes prepared with the addition of different mineral admixtures. Cement Concr.
Compos., 33(8): 788–795.
[129] Berndt, M.L. 2009. Properties of sustainable concrete containing fly ash, slag and recycled
concrete aggregate. Construct. Build. Mater., 23(7): 2606–2613.
[130] Wang, Z., Huang, X. 2003. Repeated reuse of demolished concrete wastes as aggregates.
Proceedings of the International Symposium on the Role of Concrete in Sustainable
Development, Thomas Telford, UK, 589–594.
[131] de Brito, J.M.C.L., Gonçalves, A.P., dos Santos, J.R. 2006. Recycled aggregates in concrete
production. Multiple recycling of concrete coarse aggregates. Rev. Ing. Constr.,21(1) 33–40.
Durability behaviour of RAC

[132] Gomes, M., de Brito, J. 2009. Structural concrete with incorporation of coarse recy-
cled concrete and ceramic aggregates: durability performance. Mater. Struct., 42(5):
673–675.
[133] Levy, S., Helene, P. 2007. Durability of concrete mixed with fine recycled aggregates.
International Conference on Sustainable Construction Materials and Technologies,
Coventry, UK, June 2007, Taylor & Francis, UK, 45–51.
[134] Levy, S., Helene, P. 2004. Durability of recycled aggregates concrete – a safe way to sustain-
able development. Cement Concr. Res., 34(11): 1975–1980.
[135] Dhir, R.K., McCarthy, M.J., Halliday, J.E., Tang, M.C. 2005. ASR Testing on Recycled
Aggregates Guidance on Alkali Limits and Reactivity, DTI/WRAP Aggregates Research
Programme STBF 13/14C, WRAP - Waste & Resources Action Programme, Oxon, UK,
ISBN: 1-84405-185-4, 31 p.
[136] Poon, C.S., Chan, D.X. 2006. Paving blocks made with recycled concrete aggregate and
crushed clay brick. Construct. Build. Mater., 20(8): 569–577.
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1410.indd 194 20/08/15 12:32 PM

REFERENCES 195
[137] Padmini, A.K., Ramamurthy, K., Mathews, M.S. 2002. Relative moisture movement
through recycled aggregate concrete. Magaz. Concr. Res., 54(5): 377–384.
[138] Dhir, R.K., Limbachiya, M.C., Leelawat, T. 1999. Suitability of recycled concrete aggre-
gate for use in BS 5328 designated mixes. Proc. Institut. Civil Eng. Struct. Build., 134(3):
257–274.
[139] Soutsos, M., Tang, K., Millard, S. 2011. Concrete building blocks made with recycled
demolition aggregate. Construct. Build. Mater., 25(2): 726–735.
[140] Debieb, F., Kenai, S. 2008. The use of coarse and fine crushed bricks as aggregate in
concrete. Construct. Build. Mater., 22(5): 886–893.
[141] Sadek, D.M. 2012. Physico-mechanical properties of solid cement bricks containing recy-
cled aggregates. J. Adv. Res., 3(3): 253–260.
[142] Ryu, J.S. 2002. An experimental study on the effect of recycled aggregate on concrete
properties. Magaz. Concr. Res., 54(1): 7–12.
[143] Eguchi, K., Teranishi, K., Nakagome, A., Kishimoto, H., Shinozaki, A., Narikawa, M. 2007.
Application of recycled coarse aggregate by mixture to concrete construction. Construct.
Build. Mater., 21(7): 1542–1551.
[144] Dosho, Y. 2007. Development of a sustainable concrete waste recycling system – applica-
tion of recycled aggregate concrete by aggregate replacing method. J. Adv. Concr. Tech.,
5(1): 27–42.
[145] Kou, S.C., Poon, C.S. 2013. Long-term mechanical and durability properties of recycled aggre-
gate concrete prepared with the incorporation of fly ash. Cement Concr. Compos., 37: 12–19.
[146] Kou, S.C., Poon, C.S. 2006. Compressive strength, pore size distribution and chloride-ion
penetration of recycled aggregate concrete incorporating class-F fly ash. J. Wuhan Univ.
Tech. Mater. Sci. Ed., 21(4): 130–136.
[147] Sim, J., Park, C. 2011. Compressive strength and resistance to chloride ion penetration
and carbonation of recycled aggregate concrete with varying amount of fly ash and fine
recycled aggregate. Waste Manag., 31(11): 2352–2360.
[148] Amorim, P., de Brito, J., Evangelista, L. 2012. Concrete made with coarse concrete aggre-
gate: influence of curing on durability. ACI Mater. J., 109(2): 195–204.
[149] Buyle-Bodin, F., Zaharieva, R. 2002. Concr. Sci. Eng. Mater. Struct., 435(158): 504–509.
[150] Moon, D.J., Moon, H.Y., Nagataki, S., Hisada, M., Saeki, T. 2002. Improvement on the
qualities of recycled aggregate concrete containing super fine mineral admixtures. Pro-
ceedings of the 1st fib Congress, 113–118.
[151] Salem, R.M., Burdette, E.G., Jackson, N.M. 2003. Resistance to freezing and thawing of
recycled aggregate concrete. ACI Mater. J., 100(3): 216–221.
[152] Kimura, Y. 2004. High quality recycled aggregate concrete (hirac) processed by decompres-
sion and rapid release. RILEM International Symposium on Environment – Conscious
Materials and Systems for Sustainable Development, Koriyama, Japan, September 2004,
RILEM, 163–170.
[153] Jankovic, K., Nikolic, D., Bojovic, D. 2012. Concrete paving blocks and flags made with
crushed brick as aggregate. Construct. Build. Mater., 28(1): 659–663.
[154] Teranishi, K., Dosho, Y., Narikawa, M., Kikuchi, M. 1998. Application of recycled aggregate
concrete for structural concrete. Part 3: production of recycled aggregate by real scale plant
and quality of recycled concrete aggregate. Proceedings of the International Conference
on the Use of Recycled Concrete Aggregates, London, UK, November 1998, Thomas
Telford, UK, 143–156.
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1410.indd 195 20/08/15 12:32 PM

[155] Li, X.P. 2008. Recycling and reuse of waste concrete in China. Part I: material behaviour
of recycled aggregate concrete, Resour. Conserv. Recycl., 53(1–2): 36–44.
[156] ETN Recycling. 2000. Use of recycled materials as aggregates in the construction indus-
try, ECOserve network. European Thematic Network on Recycling in Construction,
2(3–4), 14.
[157] Ho, N.Y., Lee, K.Y., Fwa, T.F., Tan, J.Y., Hon, L.Y., Lim, W.F., How, C.O., Koh, S.Y. 2011.
Use of recycled concrete aggregate for the construction of aircraft stand rigid pavement at
Singapore Changi Airport. 7th International Conference on Road and Airfield Pavement
Technology, Bangkok, Thailand, August 2011, 8.
[158] Poon, C.S., Chan, D. 2007. The use of recycled aggregate in concrete in Hong Kong. Resour.
Conserv. Recycl., 50(3): 293–305.
BackBack
to table contents
sed_1410.indd 196 20/08/15 12:32 PM

Author Index
Ana Coelho 53
Andrew J. Martin 111
Bruno Gonçalves 93
Christian Bucher 141
Ekasit Limsuwan 9
Frances Yang 69
John E. Anderson 69
Jorge De Brito 165
Jorge M. Branco 53
José C. Matos 93
Jun Kanda 1
Luís Neves 93
Maik Brehm 141
Martin J.D. Kirk 111
Paul Grundy 153
Paulo B. Lourenço 53
Rui V. Silva 165
Tobia Zordan 25
BackBack
to table contents
sed_author_index.indd 1 20/08/15 2:03 PM

Dedication
Paul Grundy (1935–2013)
This book is dedicated to the memory of Professor Paul Grundy –

A devoted IABSE member, colleague, and friend.
BackBack
to table contents
sed_Dedication.indd 1 12/08/15 5:55 PM

BackBack
to table contents
sed_Dedication.indd 2 12/08/15 5:55 PM

Objective:
To provide in-depth information to practicing stuctural engineers in reports of high scientific
and technical standards on a wide range of structural engineering topics.
SED Editorial Board:

J. Sobrino, Spain (Chair); H. Subbarao, India (Vice Chair); M. Bakhoum, Egypt; C. Bob,
Romania; M. Braestrup, Denmark; M.G. Bruschi, USA; R. Geier, Austria; N.P. Hoej,
Switzerland; S. Kite, Hong Kong; D. Laefer, Ireland; R. Mor, Israel; H.H. (Bert) Snijder,
The Netherlands; R. von Woelfel, Germany.
Topics:
The International Association for Bridge and Structural Engineering (IABSE) operates on a
worldwide basis, with interests of all type of structures, in all materials. Its members represent
structural engineers, employed in design, academe, construction, regulation and renewal. IABSE
organises conferences and publishes the quarterly journal Structural Engineering International
(SEI), as well as reports and monographs, including the SED series, and presents annual awards
for achievements in structural engineering. With a membership of some 4,000 individuals in
more than 100 countries, IABSE is the international organisation for structural engineering.
Readership:
Practicing structural engineers, teachers, researchers and students at a university level, as well
as representatives of owners, operators and builders.
Publisher:
The International Association for Bridge and Structural Engineering (IABSE) was founded
as a non-profit scientific association in 1929. Today it has more than 3900 members in over
90 countries. IABSE’s mission is to promote the exchange of knowledge and to advance the
practice of structural engineering worldwide. IABSE organizes conferences and publishes the
quarterly journal Structural Engineering International, as well as conference reports and other
monographs, including the SED series. IABSE also presents annual awards for achievements in
structural engineering.
For further Information:

IABSE
c/o ETH Zürich
CH-8093 Zürich, Switzerland
Phone: Int. + 41-44-633 2647
Fax: Int. + 41-44-633 1241
E-mail: secretariat@iabse.org
Web: www.iabse.org
Back to table of contents
Sustainable Structural Engineering
Sustainable Structural Engineering Structural Engineering Documents
Sustainability is the defining challenge for engineers in the

twenty-first century. In addition to safe, economic, and effi-
14
cient structures, a new criterion, sustainable, must be met.
Furthermore, this new design paradigm–addressing social,
economic, and environmental aspects–requires prompt action.
In particular, mitigation of climate change requires sustainable
solutions for new as well as existing structures. Taking from
both practice and research, this book provides engineers with
applicable, timely, and innovative information on the state-of-
the-art in sustainable structural design.
Sustainable Structural
This Structural Engineering Document addresses safety and
regulations, integration concepts, and a sustainable approach
to structural design. Life-cycle assessment is presented as a
Engineering
critical tool to quantify design options, and the importance of
existing structures–in particular cultural heritage structures–is
critically reviewed. Consideration is also given to bridge design
14
and maintenance, structural reassessment, and disaster risk
reduction. Finally, the importance of environmentally friendly
concrete is examined. Consequently, structural engineers are John E. Anderson
shown to have the technical proficiency, as well as ethical
imperative, to lead in designing a sustainable future. Christian Bucher
Bruno Briseghella
Xin Ruan

Tobia Zordan
International Association for Bridge and Structural Engineering (IABSE)
SED14_Cover.indd 1 20/08/15 12:51 PM

Sustainable Structural Engineering

Enviado por

Dados do documento

Direitos autorais

Formatos disponíveis

Compartilhar este documento

Compartilhar ou incorporar documento

Opções de compartilhamento

Você considera este documento útil?

Este conteúdo é inapropriado?

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Sustainable Structural Engineering

Enviado por

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Sustainable Structural Engineering

Sustainable Structural Engineering Structural Engineering Documents

Sustainability is the defining challenge for engineers in the

Structural Engineering Documents

International Association for Bridge and Structural Engineering (IABSE)

SED14_Cover.indd 1 20/08/15 12:51 PM

Phone: Int. + 41-44-633 2647

sed_title-page.indd 2 20/08/15 4:58 PM

sed_Preface.indd 1 11/08/15 8:48 PM

1 Safety and Sustainability—the Structural Engineer’s Role

2 Integration Concept of Sustainable Engineering

sed_toc.indd 1 20/08/15 12:24 PM

4 Sustainability and Cultural Heritage Buildings

5 Measuring Sustainability and Life-Cycle Assessment

sed_toc.indd 2 20/08/15 12:24 PM

7 Sustainability and Bridges

8 Structural Reassessment for Lifetime Extension

sed_toc.indd 3 20/08/15 12:24 PM

9 Sustainability through Disaster Risk Reduction

10 Green Materials for Concrete Production

sed_toc.indd 4 20/08/15 12:24 PM

Back to table of contents

sed_1401.indd 1 20/08/15 4:55 PM

1.2 Major elements for architecture

Economy is an important element of architec-

sed_1401.indd 2 20/08/15 4:55 PM

1.3 Environmental impacts

sed_1401.indd 3 20/08/15 4:55 PM

1.4 Role of regulations

sed_1401.indd 4 20/08/15 4:55 PM

1.5 Transparency and accountability

sed_1401.indd 5 20/08/15 4:55 PM

Yes No Not sure

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Yes No Either is good

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Fig. 1.3:Answers to question, “Do you want to receive explanations on safety?”

sed_1401.indd 6 20/08/15 4:55 PM

1.6 Further considerations

sed_1401.indd 7 20/08/15 4:55 PM

sed_1401.indd 8 20/08/15 4:55 PM

Ekasit Limsuwan, Prof., Dr.; Department of Civil Engineering, Chulalongkorn University,

2.1.1 Sustainable development

sed_1402.indd 9 12/08/15 5:45 PM

2.1.2 Sustainable engineering

2.1.3 Integration concept on sustainability engineering

sed_1402.indd 10 12/08/15 5:45 PM

2.2 Integration concept in the building process

2.2.1 Emerging strategy

sed_1402.indd 11 12/08/15 5:45 PM

2.2.2 Planning and development

sed_1402.indd 12 12/08/15 5:45 PM

sed_1402.indd 13 12/08/15 5:45 PM

2.2.5 Operation and maintenance

2.3 Implementation solution

2.3.1 Public consciousness

sed_1402.indd 14 12/08/15 5:45 PM

Corporate social responsibility (CSR)

2.3.2 Laws and regulations

sed_1402.indd 15 12/08/15 5:45 PM

The environmental impact assessment (EIA)

The city planning act

The building control act

2.3.3 Professional practices