Structural Survey

ISSN: 0263-080X

Article publication date: 30 August 2011


Shelbourn, D.M. (2011), "Editorial", Structural Survey, Vol. 29 No. 4. https://doi.org/10.1108/ss.2011.11029daa.001



Emerald Group Publishing Limited

Copyright © 2011, Emerald Group Publishing Limited



Article Type: Editorial From: Structural Survey, Volume 29, Issue 4.

In this issue of volume 29 we are publishing five papers. 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 many other authors from across the globe.

It is the subject of internationalization that I wish to discuss with you in this Editorial. First, I would like to take this opportunity to say that I have changed roles as of July 2011; I accepted a role at the University of South Australia in Adelaide, Australia. The journal will continue as normal. However the submission of papers is now electronic using the ScholarOne system, rather than sending them to the editors directly. Submissions to the journal are now made using ScholarOne Manuscripts, the online submission and peer review system. Registration and access is available at http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/ss. Full information and guidance on using ScholarOne Manuscripts is available at the Emerald ScholarOne Manuscripts Support Centre: http://msc.emeraldinsight.com. We continue to thank you for your continued support and interest in submitting your work to the journal.

The other issue linked to internationalization is the increasing role it is playing in undergraduate teaching at universities. Our construction management suite of courses at Nottingham Trent University has recently been redesigned and reaccredited with both the Chartered Institute of Building (CIOB) and the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors (RICS) to reflect the growing demand and recognition of the importance of the global construction industry to the world economy.

With this in mind, myself and a group of colleagues decided to introduce modules of learning at undergraduate degree level where students carry out projects in groups reflecting different stakeholders in a project. This has proved somewhat difficult. Not only do you need to talk with colleagues to design a suitable brief across different subject groups and areas, you need to seek appropriate sites around the world that they could possibly visit.

From personal experience, once the learning outcomes and suitable brief are set the next stage is to find a suitable site. We all have access to Google "earth" and "maps but is this any substitute for visiting the real thing?? My experiences are mixed on this front. I believe if you have small numbers then an actual site visit is feasible but as soon as you get anywhere near 40 or 50 students a virtual site using modern technologies has to take over - but is this a suitable option for the student experience??

Only time will tell whether or not the success of such ideals for undergraduate teaching are a success or not. With students requiring more and more diversity on their CVs the importance of internationalization is becoming a top priority. Innovative ideas as to how this can be achieved are most welcome!!

Now to the papers being published in this issue. The first paper from Joseph, Proverbs, Lamond and Wassell is a collaboration between the University of West of England, University of Wolverhampton and Cunningham Lindsey UK (Chartered Quantity Surveyors and Chartered Loss Adjusters) in a paper entitled "An analysis of the costs of resilient reinstatement of flood affected properties: a case study of the 2009 flood event in Cockermouth". The paper discusses the lessons that can be learnt from the flooding in Cockermouth from heavy rains in 2009. The uptake of property level flood adaption measures remains very low despite the damage floods can cause. This could be due to the costs for resilient reinstatement over traditional repair range from 23 to 58 per cent depending on the house type, however resilient repairs were found to significantly reduce the repair costs where a subsequent flood were to take place. However, the financial benefit of adopting resilient reinstatement will often be reaped by insurance companies as they in most cases bear the cost of reinstatement. Once again this would surely only lead to higher insurance premiums for all of us-food for thought from this interesting paper.

Paper 2 in this issue comes from three authors from Glasgow Caledonian University in the UK. The authors, Sommerville, Craig and Charles have written a paper entitled: "No-fines concrete in the UK social housing stock: 50 years on". Some explanation first. No-fines concrete is an open textured cellular concrete obtained by eliminating either fines or sand from the normal concrete mix. The paper discusses the performance characteristics of no-fines concrete in social housing by identifying the nature of the material and the influence of pore structure on heat loss through the fabric of a building. The paper uses detailed analysis and the results of core sampling of types of concrete and the effects these results have on concrete used in building structures are all discussed.

Paper 3 comes from authors Inan and Korkmaz from the Izmir Institute of Technology in Turkey. Their paper entitled "Evaluation of structural irregularities based on architectural design considerations in Turkey" sets out to describe the points which can be used in the architectural design process from investigating the basic principles of earthquake resistant design (ERD) in a deductive format and relate these findings so a significant contribution to the architectural perception of ERD. The paper has concluded that the problems causing structural irregularities affecting the earthquake performance of structures are: architectural form, structural configuration, slenderness ratio, the location and rate of floor openings, projection rates and symmetry, rigidity and strength differences between floors, short columns, and pounding effect. The suggested solutions from the paper could be adopted and applied to future projects for designing earthquake resistant buildings.

Paper 4 in this issue comes from the King Fahd University of Petroleum and Minerals in Saudi Arabia. The authors, Juaim and Hassanain have written a paper entitled "Assessment of factors influencing the development and implementation of the architectural program". The paper aims to present an assessment of the factors that influence the process of developing and implementing the architectural program (design brief) for buildings projects. Through a literature review and questionnaire data the research has confirmed the importance of all the identified factors, and identified the most influential factors in each of the factor groups. The survey findings indicate that the respondents recognize the significance of these factors when undertaking the development and implementation of the architectural program for building projects.

The final paper entitled "Building cracks: evidence on the impact of new construction works on existing buildings" comes from a number of authors from the Universiti Kebangsaan and the National University of Singapore. The authors Che-Ani, Noor, Pheng, Tawil and Tahir aimed to highlight several recent cases reported in Malaysian newspapers of complaints about the impact of construction works on the physical conditions of surrounding buildings. Using a sample study of 28 units of two-storey terrace houses, a building survey was carried out on all 28. The case study of these 28 buildings showed that the adjacent new construction works did impact on existing buildings nearby. Significant cracks of varying magnitude were identified, with no significant relationship between the cracks on the interior and exterior parts of the buildings.

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.

I would like to take this opportunity in welcoming Nicola Codner to the Structural Survey team. She replaces Aimee Nixon (was Wood) who has moved onto pastures new. I would like to thank Aimee for her support to Mike and myself during the period she worked on the journal.

I hope you enjoy reading this issue.

Dr Mark Shelbourn