Editorial

Citation

Shelbourn, M. (2010), "Editorial", Structural Survey, Vol. 28 No. 5. https://doi.org/10.1108/ss.2010.11028eaa.001

Editorial

Article Type: Editorial From: Structural Survey, Volume 28, Issue 5

In the fifth issue of Volume 28 I am drawn to celebrating our own success of the journal. The Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors (RICS) has been working closely with the publisher Emerald to broker a deal where all members of the RICS will have free access to all the facilities that the journal produces. This is great news for Mike and myself as Editors, as it potentially increases our readership, and hopefully members of the RICS will contribute to the research and issues discussed in the pages of the journal.

In the same vein, on the front of the journal the CIB logo always appears. This means that the journal is a “CIB encouraged journal”, again adding to the impact and credence of the journal. This accolade from the CIB is to continue with a statement now appearing on the inside front cover of the journal. This statement reads: “Structural Survey has been awarded the distinction of CIB Encouraged Journal by the International Council for Research and Innovation in Building and Construction (CIB)”.

In the final issue of Volume 28 we have accepted six papers for your enjoyment. These papers reflect the diversity and internationalism of the journal. Authors from across the world continue to submit papers to the journal, and as Editors Mike and I encourage papers from any authors around the world.

The first paper from Richardson et al. comes from Northumbria University in the UK, and continues on a theme of research that has been well documented in this journal. The paper, entitled “Synthetic and steel fibres in concrete with regard to equal toughness”, reflects on the use of steel fibres in concrete, and the differences in strength when synthetic fibres are used instead. The main findings show that synthetic Type 2 fibres when used as a prescribed additional volume can provide equal toughness to steel fibre concrete. The use of practical testing is described to show contractors and clients how to balance the dose of fibres in concrete so that synthetic fibres could be used as a steel replacement.

The second paper in the issue is from Georgiou from the University of Melbourne in Australia. The paper is entitled “Verification of a building defect classification system for housing”. The key question discussed in this paper is “Does government regulatory control improve the quality of house construction?”. In the paper the author builds upon previous work, and describes a classification system of defects and compares homes that are self-built and those of registered builders. The classification system was further verified through a pilot study on 100 homes, with the results compared between homes built under two different regulatory regimes.

The third paper comes from Forster and Douglas from Heriot-Watt University in the UK. The paper is entitled “Condition survey subjectivity and philosophy driven masonry repair: an increased probability for project divergence?”. The paper describes the differences in human interpretation of an assessment of a deteriorating masonry structure and its effects on the evaluation of condition. This means that the condition of the substrate and the required repairs cannot be guaranteed and may vary from different building inspectors. The paper finds that research shows that a visual survey is subjective and is prone to differences in reporting. Also, the application of any building conservation philosophy is seen through the perspective of the professional specifying the repairs. This means that when the two are added together, there is a potential for significant differences in project outcomes.

The fourth paper in this issue is entitled “Elemental cost format for building conservation works in Malaysia”. The authors Wee Li Woon and Lim Yoke Mui present their paper from research conducted in George Town, Penang, Malaysia. The paper proposes a new format of presenting the cost of building conservation works which better reflects the actual cost components had has a higher relevance to building conservation works. The paper has highlighted that there are a number of work items that are always high on building works. These are partitions, doors and ironmongery, roof finishes and rainwater goods, followed by floor finishes, external walls and windows. A number of new building work items were identified, these were: scientific analysis, archaeology excavation and temporary roof items were deemed to be the most important to recognise in building conservation works. These new – alongside the existing work – items are key in providing the quantity surveyor in preparing a more complete budget/cost estimate by reducing the risk of missing out work items that are pertinent in building conservation works.

The fifth paper in this issue is entitled “Research into practice: Malatya solar housing”, and comes from researchers across universities in Turkey. They report on how research is being implemented in actual building practices in housing in Turkey. The paper describes how research has been sporadic in solar housing in Turkey, and even less of this has been implemented within industry practices. The paper describes case studies of existing solar housing in Turkey, their heat gains and compares these to industry norms. The paper also proposes a residential solar building project based on the knowledge gained from previous solar projects. The design aspects proposed and described in the paper are expected to be beneficial to everyone involved in passive solar house design.

The final paper in this bumper issue of the journal, comes from UK researchers Kangwa from Leeds Metropolitan University, and Olubodun and Nelson from the University of Bolton. The paper entitled “Logistical constraints negating the successful completion of live city-centre building refurbishment projects: a case for management skills probity”, and examines the perceived barriers to effective management of live city-centre building refurbishment projects in the UK. Currently a school of thought posits that refurbishment projects are more unpredictable than new built. The aim of the study described in this paper is to identify how, against the myriad of logistical constraints of city-centre refurbishment projects, managers endeavour to complete their projects on time. The paper has found that using SPSS and non parametric statistical techniques, that the chance of success of planning for Live City-Centre Projects (LCCP) is impacted upon by economics, micro traffic flow, the experience of project managers, the share scale of the building form, the availability of specialist refurbishment trades, and how the project itself is linked to the feeder routes to and from the main active shopping areas (MASA). The main conclusion of the paper concludes that auxiliary skills remain critical to successful project completion; among these is the relationship between local authority agencies and the project team.

Once again the broad aspects of building pathology and refurbishment are witnessed in the variety of papers on show. We have the usual internet review, recent publications and newsbriefs in the issue too.

As this is the last issue of Volume 28, I would like to thank all the researchers and authors who have contributed to the issues of the journal. I would also like to thank the support received from Emerald by myself and Mike throughout this volume.

I hope you enjoy reading this issue.

Mark Shelbourn