Chris

Like most things exactly what is required is not set in stone (or in the case of your external fire escape, probably another material).

Some of the principles that you might consider are set out in CS 450 Inspection of highway structures (formerly BD 63/17) which is a free download from the internet.

So, amongst other things you need to consider whether it is safe from a structural surveyor/engineer to do the job. Depending on what they see whether from a safe place such as the ground or close to elements of the fire escape they might want to do some testing, including hammering component and possibly non-destructive testing.

P

Thanks Peter and Paul

I’m not sure you can realistically compare a fire escape going up one level to a bridge carrying HGV’s and buses etc with constant vibration from traffic. I note the referenced document actually lists 72 months (6 years) between inspections for bridges.

Oddly in a previous life I was the Quality Manager for a company that made bespoke steel girders for bridges (and put them up). There are 3 types on NDT (non-destructive Testing) MPI where a white background is sprayed on a welded joint and a water Iron filing solution sprayed on and a magnet across the two pieces to highlight cracks, but you end up with white paint everywhere. The other method is UT and you need close contact with the metal to look for cracks or voids (so would be best to remove the Galv or paint, it can be done through, but is not so good to do, unless just thickness checks).

I really do not think that a structural engineer would do this on an inspection of a stair way. That only leaves the 3rd method of Visual, and my eyes work as well as theirs. Even for bridges you would not carry out NDT unless a visual noted something out of place. You would check bolts (are still there and possibly that they had not come loose).

Fair Point Paul about things like box section, however in this instance there are no hidden sides, it is I section with plate steps.

However, we digress, so back to the question I do not see the point of getting a structural survey after 5 years (and then what wait another 5 years or like a car MOT every year after that). So, is it absolutely necessary or is it so standard practice everyone is doing it regardless or is it just gold plating the need to ensure it is in an efficient state?

I guess a second question to those that have had this done at their places of work, what did they do was it just visual?

Chris

The skill lies in the qualified eyes (underwritten by Professional Indemnity).

What could appear to be a minor crack in surface concrete you would filler over at home could be a major rupture arising from reinforcing bar / plate rust bloom requiring further investigation.

Well not hundreds, it is a secondary means of escape and not likely to be the first choice as there is a protected internal escape outside their office and straight outside at the bottom. They could use it, all 3 of them (well actually 2 but there could be a visitor like me). Worst thing is we are moving in 9 months, and it is anticipated the landlord will flatten the current structure and develop the site.

However, ok then people seem to be saying yes required (even though the BS states recommended).

Interesting thought. If you did not do it and the fire brigade made a visit or HSE, and the stair was actually structurally sound, would they have to prove it wasn’t or would lack of survey to prove it is, be sufficient for some sort of enforcement action.

I have tried to google someone who can do it and they all seem (only 2) offer a repair or replacement service after survey. mmm I would prefer someone to just provide the report so no vested interest one way or another.

Thanks all, makes a change from Covid

Chris

Thanks Peter

I think it is the same question, is the requirement in BS 8210 a legal requirement in effect, to every 5 years get a structural engineer to survey. Ie the same as an ACOP is considered to represent the legal requirement of legislation in simpler terms and where you would need to do as it states or prove you have done better.

Or is the BS considered to be that of guidance which you can decide to do or not. I my view with our structure, I’m not convinced it is necessary, but you all have made some valid points.

Unfortunately, recently and I don’t just mean covid, the lines of what is or is not a legal requirement seem to be getting ever more blurred.

Chris

OK, with my professional hat on (as a chartered civil engineer who works on structures, so I'm CEng MICE and specialise in structures, but I'm not a chartered member of the IStructE), I observe:

Engineering is a profession in the technical sense, so is self-regulating as to who 'makes the grade'...

but, Structural Engineer (or indeed Engineer) is not a protected title, so anyone can call themselves a structural engineer, they don't need to have any particular qualification.  As such a requirement that it be inspected by a structural engineer is a rather toothless requirement.

The relevant qualification is the 'CEng' postnomials, but that's just chartered engineer (registered with the Engineering Council), so could be a different sort of engineer entirely (Chemical, Aeronautical, etc).

If you're going to appoint an engineer you probably should appoint a qualified one.

Yes, pretty much anyone being careful shoudl be capable of spotting the defects that an expert engineer would spot.  The difference would relate to the interpretation of the significance of a defect.  For example - a ripple in a flange tip.  An expert should be able to decide if a rippled flange is a big deal or not.  That would depend on quite a lot of things more than just how big the member is and how big the ripple is.

I wouldn't use NDT on a fire escape as described.  The only time I've used NDT on anything similar was where it had circular members and we didn't know how thick the walls of the tubes were, so used ultrasound to measure.  (Answer: they weren't tubes, they were solid round!). Otherwise when inspecting you use NDT when there's a known problem and you're trying to quantify it (e.g. you know you've got a fatigue problem, now you're hunting for actual fatigue cracks). (For this sort of structure - bit different if you're inspecting e.g. the cables on the Severn Bridge, then you'd do a bit more than give it a quick shufty).

For a structure as described, I would expect an engineer will just do a visual and hand-tools measurement inspection.  An inspection is not an assessment.  If you have inspection records and an assessment on record and the new inspection does not identify any new defects, I would not expect to re-calculate anything every five years.

I wouldn't use any BD or their successors.  This whole suite of docs is by the Highways Agency for use on highway and related structures.  There are similar highway structures (metallic footbridge, for example), but you just wouldn't use these docs for that. (Unless you were desperate and a HA doc addressed some situation that no other guide addresses - this is true with respect to some structural forms, notably jack arches on metallic beams).

5 years is a good general rule-of-thumb for building inspections.  It comes up a lot (lots of church  denominations mandate a quinquennial inspection of premises, for example).

I wouldn't do this job - my firm generally only works on larger projects or more specialist things. 

I don't believe it's a legal requirement.  I think it is clearly just a 'recommendation', but I happen to think it's a reasonable one, and something that will bite you if it's not done and 'something' happens. If you got a local Structural Engineer to do it, it shouldn't be too expensive.  It's not much more than 'giving it the once over' with an expert eye and writing a report saying so, if the condition is as described and the design is either reasonably new and OK pretty much by inspection, or you have an assessment of adequacy on record.

Originally Posted by: chris42

Interestingly I did a google search for someone to carry out such an assessment and found only two company’s that advertised as doing this (looked in the Bristol to Swindon area) but I think the results were wider than that. However, both companies offered to fix whatever they found wrong, almost predetermining they were going to. You would have thought that with so many fire escapes around there would be lots of companies offering such a service.

https://www.istructe.org/find-an-engineer/structural-engineers-near-me/

Although somewhat targeted at domestic clients, this may find you some more local smaller firms.  IStructE members will be very unlikely to do repair work, so it elminates that potential conflict.

(As noted, you won't find me in that list, so I'm hoping no-one interprets thsi as advertising).