0115 966 7955 Today's Opening Times 10:00 - 20:00 (BST)
Banner ad for Viper plagiarism checker

Building Maintenance Review for University

Published: Last Edited:

Disclaimer: This essay has been submitted by a student. This is not an example of the work written by our professional essay writers. You can view samples of our professional work here.

Any opinions, findings, conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of UK Essays.

Strategy

As Plymouth University strives to distinguish its legacy through excellence in facility offerings, the maintenance of such structures becomes an essential part of the strategy. Refurbishment has already been undertaken across the campus in the past five years, as major additions and facelifts have offered dimension and expanded capabilities for an expanding student and faculty body. Ultimately in the preservation of this legacy, a proactive revision to campus maintenance is needed, one which will ensure that the lifecycle costs of the multiple structures are limited and appropriate. Reactionary maintenance programmes dramatically detract from such principles; therefore, by following the programmed outlined herein, officials will effectively navigate the broad spectrum of repair and maintenance projects which will develop in the coming decades.

Exemplary of campus revisions in the past several years, perhaps the most noticeable addition has been that of the Roland Levinsky building. A remarkable new structure boasting 12,711m2 of spatial area and housing an expanded Faculty of the Arts, this building is representative of all that the university plans for the future of the campus façade and its legacy. These developments include meritorious architecture, active facility management, and long term preservation techniques as structural retention among both new and historic participants becomes an essential part of the long term process.

Supplemental rehabilitations and expansions have included the Rolle Building development and the Nacy Astor building programme. A combined total area of over 11,000 m2, these two structures represent a campus evolution which retains history while at the same time, boasts a progressive vision. Incorporating new student housing and offers substantial revisions to common areas, sports facilities, and office space, the maintenance of such facilities will become a pivotal role in the university reputation for quality and consistency.

To define appropriate and effective maintenance strategies, it become essential to identify the structural frailties which will be encountered over the coming years. A case study conducted of homes in the Midlands area determined that the predominant cause of structural deterioration is underground movement and shifting, while material defects and superstructure decay fill in the remaining sources.[1] Recognising that such variables are essential to maintenance of a building’s lifecycle directs the maintenance programme towards structural components, specifically those of the super and substructures and their material integrity.

In considering that maintaining only such areas would not fully integrate the much broader aesthetic and range of functional components within university buildings, there are other factors which must be considered as well. Similar surveys and studies have identified inadequacy defects within the structure itself which stem from roofing failure (42.9%), walls and column deficiencies (21.2%), lintel failure (18.5), and beam and joist overloading (17.5%).[2] These components broaden the scope of maintenance operations; however, recognition of their frailties and the potential for system-wide failure given component collapse enables maintenance crews to seriously consider structural deviance and proactively reform and refurbish according to the prescribed strategy.

Determining which areas will offer the greatest challenge and thereby warrant the most attention becomes a more difficult task. Material defects are also of considerable concern when designing a maintenance programme, as deterioration stemming from biological, chemical, and physical attack can substantially reduce the longevity of a structure and dramatically increase long term maintenance costs.[3] Understanding that while new structures may incorporate the most advanced materials and construction techniques, recognition of material failure, could highlight additional system deviance such as elemental concerns that undermine functional operation of the building. Similarly, within historic campus structures, the potential for material deterioration is substantially higher, detracting from longevity and reducing functionality without proactive initiatives.

Perhaps the most substantial concern given the prevalence of inclement weather, identifying key seepage points and wet areas will assist maintenance crews in stopping problems before they increase in both cost and severity. The maintenance cost of wet areas within a building’s substructure can extract between 35 and 50% of a building’s annual maintenance cost, in spite of their limited area occupation (10% in most cases).[4] Within the structural elements which are contained in wet areas, studies have demonstrated that there are three main causes of system failure, highlighting water leakages, corrosion of pipes, and the spalling of concrete as substantial modes of foundation decay.[5] From this perspective, regular maintenance and constant evaluation of wet area structures will also be an essential part of the maintenance programme.

The team involved in such initiatives must be one of substantial talent, including abilities directly related to those concerns which will most occupy their time, including routine building maintenance, minor construction, repair, and general upkeep. An in-house team whose number is dictated by the scope of the short term maintenance programme should be able to assume the role of daily operator in terms of duties such as light bulb replacement, leak management in pipe couplings, plumbing blockage, door hinge failure, minor boiler issues, tap washer changes, sign erection, and a host of other duties. Along these lines, internal team members must be coached in awareness faculties, ensuring that they can recognise and act when presented with system frailties or structural deviance. Such identification should include slipped tiling, dampness and wet areas, unnatural ageing, rot or mould, cracking, discolouration, and many other signs that the integrity of each building is being negatively affected by some element. These in house participants should also be versed in decoration and design principles, enabling their participation in an ongoing aesthetic awareness programme where they adjust and alter the decorum to suit university objectives.

In spite of the high costs associated with emergency repairs, the best maintenance programme cannot prevent their incidence; therefore maintenance contracts must be designed to ensure cost effectiveness while at the same time encourage a rapid response time. Such partnerships should entail a specific cost basis dependent on the required task, and revolve around a long term relationship in which the maintenance contractors become familiar with the university. A twenty-four hour guideline should be in place for response rates; however, given a major system failure such as a boiler break or plumbing backup, emergency teams must be immediately available.

The maintenance programme will entail a rotation of short, medium, and long term tasks, each assigned to either an in-house participant or contracted to an external maintenance team. As these responsibilities happen at regular intervals, long term contracts can remain in place on a specific rotation to ensure that participants are acting proactively and in accordance with the programme needs, not reaction based hiring. Teams should be qualified according to skill set and appropriateness for the stage of the maintenance programme, ensuring that contractor responsibilities do not exceed their scope of normal operation. As structural and systematic problems are identified during the regular review periods and daily operations, maintenance teams must recognise the severity of the damage or wear on the structure and inform a supervisory team of their findings. From this control position, the team will either instruct on internal repair or will hire out the duty to an outside firm. Managing costs through the maintenance chain will ensure that the university meets their long term cost objectives and yet remains active in the scope of their building maintenance.

Maintenance Policy Review

To develop an effective maintenance programme, the university must adopt a perspective of preventative maintenance, one which while often perceived as costly in the short term, will dramatically reduce the systematic failure in the long term. Holmes and Droop (1982) recognised that periodic maintenance is most often directed according to budget instead of aligning with the needs of the building in question.[6] As university expenditure expectations are oftentimes maligned with real working scenarios, the determination of a predictive budget and maintenance policy will enable referral and discussion to be directed towards a proactive scenario. The reality is that instead of developing a systematic maintenance framework, decision makers will often choose to weigh budgeting concerns against the severity of the needed service prior to attempting any form of work.[7] Maintenance of a university campus is not about severity or reactionist tendencies. Instead, the maintenance of school facilities must be directed towards a long term focus of preservation and conservation, ensuring that sustainability is an ultimate objective. The following charts detail the short, medium, and long term focus through which maintenance projects will directly reduce the overall cost basis for renovation and repair over the life of school structures. The representative building is the Reynolds Building, although this plan could be repositioned for any of the many structures on campus with minimal adjustment. In spite of the fact that the costing data is only a general estimate, it places into perspective just how overwhelming major projects can be. Therefore, following a set maintenance plan and integrating professional labour to ensure its validity will enable the university to reduce costs and adequately maintain their diverse structural offering.

It should be noted that all three sections contain a complete interior and exterior survey during which any potential problems are identified long before they become emergency repairs. Such analyses should be performed by a licensed surveyor and entail differing levels of comprehensiveness according to the length of time in between reviews. This process is essential to the preventative maintenance scheme of the university, as in spite of other review, the educated perspective of the surveyor could catch concerns before they escalate into much larger challenges. The relatively low cost of this process would be escalated if problems were found; however, the overall long term savings due to a proactive methodology is substantial

Short Term Costs

The following chart details the short term maintenance costs which will enhance the overall operations of university buildings while at the same time ensure that major systems are checked and repaired prior to major collapse. For the purpose of this plan, short term can be considered a one to two year variable in which the repetition of action is essential to preventative techniques. Each of these segments will not individually contribute to costly renovations; however, when considered as a unit, the cost basis for rehabilitating a distressed structure would be substantial and should be avoided at all costs.

Primary Systems Maintenance

To begin to exploit the systems which most influence the structural security and stability of a building, a composite of form and function must be evaluated and long term costs prohibited. The key systems within the university building structures include heating and cooling systems, gutters and down pipes and fire protection tools. Aligning these systems around a schedule of regular repair will elongate the life of these instrumental participants and ensure that building stability is upheld.

The consideration within this model for gutters and down pipes as essential modes of preservation is directly due to the nature of groundwater seepage and runoff. In order to ensure a long lifecycle for each structure, the water diversion systems must be intimately linked to a maintenance schedule. By cleaning on a 6 month frequency, maintenance technicians are ensuring that any foreign debris that might have filled those units, particularly during the Autumn season, is removed prior to more wet and rain-filled weather.

Secondly, ensuring that heating and cooling systems operate at maximum efficiency over their lifecycle assists the university budget on many levels. First and foremost, efficiency measures reduce the overall energy costs associated with maintaining an appropriate temperature within the structure. As global concern regarding energy usage continues to overwhelm headlines and Parliamentary initiatives, complying with social and political expectations places the university at the forefront of ‘green’ supporters. Alternately, when considering the costs of unit replacement in comparison with the minor costs of unit overhaul and monitoring, the potential for unforeseen budgeting problems is very prevalent. Through preventative maintenance on these units which includes a cleaning of the ducts and system components in addition to oiling the motor and replacing belts, the university will ensure that systems operate at extreme efficiency. This maintenance should be done in accordance with season frequencies, including the Winter and Summer seasons during which units will be taxed to their maximum capacity.

Secondary Systems Maintenance

Within the scope of this maintenance schedule, there are other systems which are essential for appropriate functioning of building operations as well as those, that if not well maintained, can cause higher long term costs for the university. Lighting, weather proofing, and drainage are all within this category, and although their functions can easily be considered a primary concern to daily campus life, their long term impact on the university budget is limited in the scope of material costs and lifecycle.

Lighting replacement and repair is an essential step to ensuring that daily operations are performed in an attractive and well supplied environment, encouraging patrons to continue their use of university facilities. When replacing bulbs within a regular cycle, maintenance crews are identifying any faults within the lighting system which could turn into critical electrical failure at a later date. Similarly, the replacement of bulbs enables the most efficient and environmentally friendly units to be placed into rotation at regular intervals. This expected maintenance will need to be altered according to technological advances and lifecycle.

Within the whole life cost cycle of a structure, the potential for inclement weather and more importantly, the failure of structural systems to prevent penetration by this weather, can dramatically reduce the longevity and efficiency of a building. Therefore, checking the weather stripping and ensuring that all door and window seals function appropriately ensures that time sensitive erosion and wear on the structure does not occur. This maintenance also ensures that the crew evaluates a variety of key entry and exit points for rodent or insect incursions and eliminates the potential for such future problems.

Finally, within the secondary modes of short term maintenance, drainage systems are an oft ignored reactive form of maintenance which, when properly maintained, can substantially contribute to structure longevity and limit the propensity for future problems. Ensuring that the proper flow of waste waters away from the building is regular and consistent eliminates the costly reactive calls to plumbing contractors after emergency situations have dictated refurbishment. Similarly, proactive evaluation of this system offers plumbers the opportunity to note any potential cracks, fissures, or weak points within the piping system and ensure that all drive mechanisms are appropriately synced for efficient operation.

Short Term

Maintenance Item

Description

Frequency

Additional Equipment

Anticip. Cost

Notes

Gutters

Cleaning and debris removal

6 Months (After Autumn/Spring)

Scaffolding

£270.00

Price Includes Scaffolding

Down Pipes

Cleaning and debris removal

6 Months (After Autumn/Spring)

Scaffolding

Included in Gutter Cost

Price Includes Scaffolding

Fire Equipment

System evaluation, recharge, and certification

3 Months (Seasonal)

Replacement Extingusihers

£180.00

Price includes system certification

Heating System

System evaluation, vent cleaning and tubing refurbish (As Needed)

6 Months (Prior to Winter and After Summer)

Ladder, Replacement Parts

£240.00

Price includes cleaning

Fire/Smoke Alarms

Check batteries, test function, and replace if needed

3 Months (Seasonal)

Replacement alarm

£115.00

Indicates replacement

Cooling System

System Evaluation, recharge, system cleaning

(6 Months Prior to Summer and After Winter)

Ladder, Replacement Parts

£310.00

Includes Recharge

Lighting

Light bulb replacement, system overhaul as needed

Monthly as Needed, 6 months for major systems

Ladder, Replacement Bulbs, Replacement Housing

£85.00

Includes Replacement of bulbs at 6 month interval

Weather proofing

Reapply stripping to interior and exterior door and window seals

Anuual (Prior to Winter)

Weather Stripping, Sealant

£110.00

Includes replacement throughout building

Windows

Cleaned, debris removed, function certified

3 Months (Seasonal)

Ladder, Scaffolding

£270.00

Includes Cleaning and scaffolding rental

Drainage Analysis

All drains inspected for free flow action and plumbing repaired as needed

Annual (Prior to Summer)

Snaking system, chemical unblock system

£320.00

Includes Cleaning of problem areas

Interior Eval

Full analysis of problem areas and survey of interior

Annual (Prior to Spring)

Ladder

£180.00

Full inspection

Exterior Eval

Full analysis of problem areas and survey of exterior (Includes ground variance and nearby incidences)

Annual (After Autum)

Ladder

£180.00

Full inspection

 

TOTAL ANNUAL COST

£2,260.00

 

Medium Term

The medium term responsibilities offer an ideal time frame for replacement and refurbishment that includes more substantial, and generally, more costly repairs than those attempted in the short term. The expectation remains that any problem which arises during routine inspections must be dealt with according to the needs of the university, not the maintenance schedule or proposed budget. Through adherence to this strategy throughout the whole life costing of the structure, quality will be maintained and the overall lifecycle costs will be reduced.

Primary Systems Maintenance

The primary systems evaluated during the medium term are directly related to the essential operations of the structure, including those systems which can debilitate and detract from the consistent workings of the building, including the boiler, the electrical system, and the gutter system. Recognising that the replacement of these systems at the medium term interval will substantially improve cost savings over emergency repair and expensive maintenance projects is a priority for committee members.

The boiler replacement is most likely one of the most expensive, but most rewarding measures to be taken at the medium term interval. Given that the average life-span of a boiler could potentially last longer than the ten year period listed here, the maintenance team must be able to recognise the characteristics of a well-functioning or suffering unit and offer advice regarding its condition during standard evaluations before and after this period. Replacement is highly recommended at the ten year mark because this essential systems component could substantially increase costs of a disaster repair in the event of its failure.

Analysis of the electrical system will be included within the survey report conducted at the short-term intervals and expanded into the full spectrum 10 year evaluation in the medium term. Those systems which are deemed faulty during this period should be replaced immediately, as malfunctioning electrical systems can become an unanticipated fire hazard. Replacing the electrical system at ten year intervals ensures that the insulation efficacy is maintained and that updated wiring is installed for new technology to function properly.

Finally, within the primary systems, the gutter and down pipe components become an essential mode of structural preservation, as the water transport away from the building limits the amount of erosion and decay over a lengthy period of time. At the ten year period, however, the prediction is that most of the system will have begun to demonstrate signs of wear, specifically around the hardware and jointing sections of the unit. Repair teams should undergo substantial overhaul to replace mounting brackets and pipe couplings as well as replacing any sections of the system which are cracking or developing holes due to exposure to the elements.

Secondary Systems Maintenance

The medium term secondary systems are represented by those that both enhance the standard operations of the structure and offer the most cost versus value refurbishment within the maintenance system. Although primary systems are deemed essential components, the high visibility of the secondary systems ensures that they are of an essential nature to the continued functioning of the structure.

The building decoration, and in essence, the prescribed character of the interior structure is a maintenance project that requires substantial investment and vision. External contractors participating in the decoration revision every six years should replace drapes and visible accessories, alter furniture to match the expected period representation, and dramatically alter any additional components which add to the building aesthetics. The cost in this plan is a best case scenario cost and will have to be updated according to the broad range of needs.

Aligned with redecoration, the repair and replacement of both internal and external finishes dramatically improves the user perception of the building, supporting operations and ensuring that during this activity that walls and beams are in good repair. While the costs in these sections are an estimate, paint quality must be chosen of a high enough grade to endure elements and use over the coming decade, and of a colouring that matches the prescribed decoration aesthetics of the contractors’ vision.

Finally, within the medium term, updating carpet and repairing the flooring become enhancement variables which ensure both function and aesthetics are aligned throughout the building. Although the wear lifecycle of both of these systems may offer a longer term operation, by replacing these components within the medium interval sustains the overall appearance of the building as well as identifies any underfoot rot or decay which could cause substantial problems later in the building lifecycle. These costs are only estimates, and depending on the quality or installation costs, the replacement of these elements could be substantially higher.

Medium Term

Maintenance Item

Description

Frequency

Additional Equipment

Anticip. Cost

Notes

Decoration

All interior and exterior decorative features cleaned or retouched as needed, application of desired new features

6 Years

Added moulding and New decoration features

£1,400.00

Includes interior design revision

Interior Wall Finish

Paint or stain alteration throughout interior of structure

8 Years

New Paint colours

£2,800.00

Includes new paint for all surfaces

Exterior Wall Finish

Paint or stain alteration throughout exterior of structure

8 Years

New Paint colours

£3,200.00

Includes new paint for all surfaces

Gutters

Gutters repaired or replaced as needed

10 Years

Remove and Replace hardware

£1,100.00

Includes hardware replacement and repair to system

Boiler

Boiler system cleaned, repaired, or replaced

10 Years

New Boiler System

£2,200.00

Replacement of Boiler System

Heating System

System Features and couplings replaced, vent system replaced

10 Years

New vent system

£2,700.00

Includes labour and cost of new venting system

Flooring

All Flooring examined for structural soundness and replaced as needed

7 Years

New Flooring

£1,700.00

Includes New Flooring

Carpeting

All carpeting examined for fraying and stains and replaced as needed

7 Years

Replacement Carpet

£1,400.00

Includes New Carpeting

Interior Eval

Full analysis of problem areas and survey of interior

10 Years

Structural Modifications

£240.00

Includes in-depth survey only

Exterior Eval

Full analysis of problem areas and survey of exterior (Includes ground variance and nearby incidences)

10 Years

Structural Modifications

£240.00

Includes in-depth survey only

Electrical Eval

Explore electrical system and replace any frayed wiring or non-working areas

8 Years

New Wiring system

£1,700.00

Includes cost of new wiring system

Roofing Repatch

Patch and fill areas demonstrating extensive wear or lack of structural stability

5 years

Roofing shingles or covering

£400.00

Includes labour and new shingles

Damp proofing

Analyse all areas for wet seepage, fill and fix problem areas

7 Years

Mastic replacement and filling

£700.00

Includes replacement of all mastic and fillings

Drainage Clear

Drains cleaned and pumped through ensuring proper rate of flow

4 years

Pressurised Cleaning

£350.00

Complete system cleaning and pumping

 

TOTAL MEDIUM TERM COSTS

£20,130.00

 

Long Term

As the building lifecycle reaches the long term variables of the maintenance plan, substantial wear and repair throughout the passage of time will have altered many of the structural variables within the system. From this perspective, an according chart of timelines must be maintained to identify when particular items have been replaced prior to the lifecycle prediction. Overall, the long term costs will be substantially higher than either the short or medium term; however, the replacement of major systems offers an improved structural integrity and preserves the structure for many more decades of use.

Primary Systems Maintenance

As with the other timeline components, the primary systems identified in this maintenance schedule are represented by essential structural variables, specifically those which if unchecked and un-replaced could dramatically reduce the building longevity. In the long term, however, this list expands due to the nature of the overhaul and the replacement of more essential components. Replacing the foundation, the roofing, and the fire system as well as the gutters and down pipes will generate a substantial cost for the university; however, as lifecycle costs have already ensured that these systems were functioning efficiently, their replacement will be an expected and appropriately budgeted endeavour.

The roofing and gutter replacement should be pursued at the same time, as scaffolding and contracting crews should be able to work more efficiently completing these tasks in a singular incidence of rehabilitation. Ultimately, the newest technology should be incorporated into both systems, including more lightweight and long-life materials. Upon completion, the maintenance schedule must be updated according to the system expectations and the preventative repair cycle should begin.

The fire system, including the wiring, alerts, sensors, and central housing unit must be replaced at this interval. Given the nature of systems developments along the long term cycle of a building, replacing the system will enable the integration of more modern technology and advanced warning and extinguishing mechanisms to ensure that the building operates according to national code. This system must be certified upon completion by the appropriate fire marshal or certified inspector.

Finally, perhaps the most overlooked long term repair on a building is that of its foundation. Ensuring that the building footing is structurally sound and retaining its level over the course of so many years will extend its overall longevity and ensure that costly structural failures do not occur. The costs for this repair could include patchwork, elevation tools, or replacement of certain foundation elements, and therefore, could not be accurately predicted.

Secondary Systems Maintenance

Within the scope of long term secondary systems, the aesthetics which were addressed in the medium term are realigned with more function and form in this system to ensure that building retains its weather-proof qualities as well as operational stability. Replacing the windows, sashes, and both interior and exterior doors will ensure that all materials are up to date and meet the prescribed energy objectives.

Window and sash removal and repair is potentially a very costly process, one which although predicted below could increase in cost over the long term scope and will most likely improve in technology. Obviously, the ideal refurbishment involves utilising the best materials and technology available; therefore, maintenance crews should consider their options at this juncture.

Replacing the interior and exterior doors of the structure not only improves the aesthetic qualities, it enhances the functionality and ensures that outdoor elements are not permeating the structure. These doors should be of the highest quality so as to ensure the expectation of longevity and all hardware and hinges should be replaced at the same time as well.

Long Term

Maintenance Item

Description

Frequency

Additional Equipment

Anticip. Cost

 

Windows

Remove and replace all windows, noting original quality and enhancing according to modern design: i.e. replace steel walled single pane with double glazed, wood frame windows

25 Years (Or as condition or new models demand)

Double-glazed windows and sustainable wood framing system

£387.00

Cost per Window based on an 8 window minimum

Window Sash and Frame Replace

Remove all frames and replace with upgraded double glazed windows

25 Years (Or as condition or new models demand)

Sustainable Wood Frame System

£350.00

Cost to upgrade to the double glazed system per window

Gutters

Remove entire gutter system and replace with new material and brackets

30 Years (Or as condition demands)

Updated lightweight system

£3,400.00

New system Cost and Installation

Downpipes

Remove all downpipes and replace with new material and brackets

30 Years (Or as condition demands)

Updated lightweight system

£3,400.00

New system Cost and Installation

Interior Doors

Remove all interior doors and frames and replace with enhanced models and hardware

20 years (Or as condition demands)

New system with hardware

£120.00

Cost per door with new framing

Exterior Doors

Remove all exterior doors and frames, resquare and replace with enhanced models and hardware

20 years (Or as condition demands)

New updated fireproof door

£440.00

Cost per exterior Fireproofed door with installation

Foundation Repair

Repair according to appropriate building codes, ensuring that visible cracks and settling are fixed prior to completion

30 Years since original Installed

Replace worn concrete and brick

£27,000.00

Includes cost of replacing foundation supports

Brick Re-Mortar

Re mortar between bricks or remove and replace bricks showing excessive wear

20 years (Or as condition demands)

Replacement bricks and mortar

£18,000.00

Includes cost of brick replacement and mortar

Interior Eval

Full analysis of problem areas and survey of interior

25 years

Structural evaluation

£440.00

Evaluates strength of building for coming years

Exterior Eval

Full analysis of problem areas and survey of exterior (Includes ground variance and nearby incidences)

25 years

Structural evaluation

£440.00

Evaluates strength of building for coming years

Roofing Replace

Replace entire roofing system with new and updated shingling

30 Years since original Installed

New shingles and hardware

£21,000.00

Replacement of entire roof system

Fire system Replace

Remove and replace fire system and have fully recertifed according to modern code

25 Years Since Original Model Installation

New wiring and hardware

£18,000.00

Entire system removed and replaced

 

TOTAL LONG TERM COSTS VARY ACCORDING TO NEED

Maintenance Programme

Exemplary of maintenance programme implementation, this section identifies the steps and procedures which should be followed for a specific system failures or necessary repair that were witnessed during visual campus inspection. Each repair process should be conducted according to specific steps, including area management techniques which protect students and faculty from any harm or danger arising from the construction task. Accordingly, the work should be undertaken according to the British Standards Institution, all of which are available online at minimal cost and set forth the expectations for the majority of all construction projects and general guidelines for both in-house and contracted maintenance teams.

Condition 1: Dampness witnessed in subterranean wall in Chaplaincy.

Prescription: Remove afflicted area, clean cement or brick surface until dirt and debris free, apply tanking compound, re-plaster segment with appropriate filler and mastic, resurface section, repaint according to colour scheme of surrounding walls.

Procedure: The following steps will represent the appropriate response after recognising the problem and undertaking the construction.

  1. Seal off the area—this step is essential to ensuring that students and faculty are not affected by the construction
  2. Place dust sheets or drop cloths to protect surrounding flooring and carpeting from debris
  3. Using appropriate tools, remove plaster from the damp area and ensure that the brick or concrete area behind is cleaned and free of debris
  4. Evaluate surrounding areas for mould or additional wet-rot and remove or treat accordingly.
  5. Determine the appropriate tanking compound, Liquid bitumen coating for small areas or a cement based slurry for larger spaces.
  6. Apply tanking and allow to breathe for the prescribed time prior to plaster reapplication
  7. Apply plaster/mortar over the taking, ensuring that texture and level match the adjacent components.
  8. Repaint surface appropriate colour, ensuring that paint type matches the longevity principles of the surrounding walls.
  9. Clean around area, removing all tools and materials and ensuring that debris from project is removed prior to completion

The above job could be considered a form of routine maintenance, given that wet spots in subterranean areas are more likely to occur as structures continue to age. Should the project fall outside of the skill set of the in-house maintenance crew, however, an outside contractor should be hired out in order to complete the project. Appropriate time predictions should be made prior to construction start in order to ensure that traffic is minimal and that the scope of the project is realistically quoted by the contractor. This task from removal to completion would take approximately ½ day, given the curing time for all substances incorporated.

Costs: This job, is size dependent, however could range from £50 to £150 for supplies, labour, and finishing on a medium sized project. (Note: contracted labour may cost more however estimate includes £15 per hour)

Building Codes:

  1. BS 8102:1990 Code of practice for protection of structures against water from the ground
  2. CP 102: 1973 Code of practice for protection of buildings against water from the ground
  3. BS 8215:1991 Code of practice for design and installation of damp-proof courses in masonry construction
  4. BS 743:1970 Specification for materials for damp-proof courses

Note: The above building codes are used as reference material for appropriate procedures and standards related to the underlay of tanking in wet mortar applications and although systemically relevant, may not pertain in full to the completion techniques for the task. University officials can leverage such standards for evaluation of in-house or contractor fulfilment of expected duties.

Condition 2: Window treatments in same structure witnessed with single paned, steel border, requiring update and sash replacement

Prescription: Remove window and sash, clear window frame and old application of hardware and materials, ensure structural stability for reinstallation, square window frame and reinstall new wooden sash and framing, install double-glazed window, reapply flashing and exterior moulding

Procedure: The following steps will represent the appropriate response after recognising the problem and undertaking the construction.

  1. Seal off the area—this step is essential to ensuring that students and faculty are not affected by the construction
  2. Place dust sheets or drop cloths to protect surrounding flooring and carpeting from debris
  3. Using appropriate tools, remove exterior moulding and framing from around the window area.
  4. Remove original window, being careful to ensure its wholeness so as not to scatter glass and debris. Set aside for appropriate recycling practices
  5. Remove entirety of steel window frame and all of the protruding harware
  6. Prepare surface for reinstallation of new window by sanding and grinding the four walls until the square of the window frame is established
  7. Install sustainable wood framing, ensuring level and square of the frame
  8. Coat frame with waterproof epoxy and stain for aesthetic and functionality
  9. Place new window into position and ensure appropriate gap on all four sides, allowing for building shift and adjustment.
  10. Attach window at appropriate positions and install exterior moulding and flashing.
  11. Clean around area, removing all tools and materials and ensuring that debris from project is removed prior to completion

The above instructions would be considered routine for a standard window removal and installation and would not be accurate should and structural deviance be determined.

Costs: As prescribed above, the standard cost for a double-glazed, high efficiency window is £387 with an additional cost of £350 for the sustainable wood framing and sash. Removal and installation would be predicted at three hours per window barring any major system failures at £15 per hour.

Building Codes:

  1. 08/30143158 DC BS 644: Timber windows. Fully finished factory assembled windows of various types
  2. 08/30143167 DC BS 6375-3: Performance of windows and doors. Part 3. Classification for additional performance characteristics and guidance on selection and specification.
  3. 08/30143165 DC BS 6375-2: Performance of windows and doors. Part 2. Classification for additional performance characteristics and guidance on selection and specification.
  4. 08/30143162 DC BS 6375-1: Performance of windows and doors. Part 1. Classification for additional performance characteristics and guidance on selection and specification.
  5. BS 644-1:1989 Wood Windows. Specification for factory assembled windows of various types.

Note: The above building codes are considered reference material and should not be taken as a limitation of available additional code requirements. When installing windows, the building codes are expansive and relevance of task should be taken into consideration.

Chew, M.Y.L. (2005) “Defect Analysis in Wet Areas of Buildings.” Construction and Building Materials, Vol. 19, pp. 165-173.

Chew, M.Y.L; Nayanthara, D.S. (2002) “Factors Affecting Water-Tightness in Wet Area of High-Rise Residential Buildings.” Architectural Science Review, Vol. 45, No. 4, pp. 375-383.

Holmes, R; Droop, C. (1982) “Factors Affecting Maintenance Costs in LA Housing.” In: Brandon, P.S. (Ed.). Building Cost Techniques: New Directions. London: E & F.N. Spon.

Olubodun, F; Mole, T. (1999) “Evaluation of Defect Influencing Factors in Public Housing in the UK.” Structural Survey, Vol. 17, No. 3, pp. 170-178.

Page, C; Murray, P. (1996) “An Analysis of Structural Defects Occurring in Residential Buildings in the East Midlands Region.” Structural Survey, Vol. 14, No. 2, pp. 35-40.


Footnotes

[1] C. Page and P. Murray, “An Analysis of Structural Defects Occurring in Residential Buildings in the East Midlands Region,” (1996)

[2] Page and Murray, (1996)

[3] Page and Murray, (1996)

[4] M.Y.L. Chew and D.S. Nayanthara, “Factors Affecting Water-Tightness in Wet Area of High-Rise Residential Buildings,” (2002)

[5] M.Y.L. Chew, “Defect Analysis in Wet Areas of Buildings,” (2005)

[6] R. Holmes and C. Droop, “Factors Affecting the Maintenance Costs in LA Housing,” (1982)

[7] F. Olubodun and T.Mole, “Evaluating of Defect Influencing Factors in Public Housing in the UK,” (1999)


To export a reference to this article please select a referencing stye below:

Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.

Request Removal

If you are the original writer of this essay and no longer wish to have the essay published on the UK Essays website then please click on the link below to request removal:


More from UK Essays

We can help with your essay
Find out more