and Falling Elements Healthy Home Rating System (HHRS) 2015 1 - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

and falling elements
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

and Falling Elements Healthy Home Rating System (HHRS) 2015 1 - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Hazard 29: Structural Collapse and Falling Elements Healthy Home Rating System (HHRS) 2015 1 Description of the Hazard The structural collapse category covers the threat of whole dwelling collapse, or a part of the dwelling being


slide-1
SLIDE 1

2015 1

Healthy Home Rating System (HHRS)

Hazard 29: Structural Collapse and Falling Elements

slide-2
SLIDE 2

Description of the Hazard

  • The structural collapse category covers the

threat of whole dwelling collapse, or a part of the dwelling being displacing or falling because of inadequate fixing, disrepair, or as a result of adverse weather conditions.

  • Structural failure may occur internally or

externally, threatening the occupants or members of the public.

2015 2

slide-3
SLIDE 3

Potential for Harm

  • There is no particular age group more

vulnerable than others.

2015 3

slide-4
SLIDE 4

Health Effects and Causes

  • Objects falling from the fabric of a building and as a result

causing injury are extremely rare. Potential injuries range from minor bruising to death.

  • External hazards include falling slates, eaves gutters, bricks,

windows, and the collapse of walls.

  • Internal hazards include floor, ceiling, and staircase

collapse.

  • The most common incident is for a fixture, such as a light

fitting or kitchen cabinet, to fall from the ceiling or wall because of a combination of poor fixings and vibration.

  • The most common part of the fabric of buildings to fall and

injure someone is ceiling plaster.

2015 4

slide-5
SLIDE 5

Relevant Matters Affecting Likelihood

1. Structural movement – evidence of continuing movement 2. Structural cracks, etc. – cracks and/or bulges to external walls 3. Open joints – to brick, stone or block work to external walls or chimney stacks 4. Cladding defects – loose render or other insecure external finish to external walls 5. Loose coping(s) – to parapet or balcony walls or to chimney stacks 6. Loose guarding – to balconies, roof terraces, etc. 7. Structural damage – to balconies, etc. 8. Disrepair to lintels/sills – cracks or other disrepair around openings to external and internal walls 9. Insecure frames or hinges – to either windows or doors 10. Roof movement – sagging, distorted or spreading to the roof structure 11. Loose roof covering – loose or slipped roof slates, tiles etc. 12. Loose pots – to chimney stacks 13. Insecure rainwater goods – including eaves gutters and/or external pipework 14. Staircase failure – springy, distorted or other indications of failure of staircase structure 15. Insecure guarding – to staircases and/or landings 16. Defective ceilings – cracked, damp and/or bulging ceilings 17. Defective internal walls – cracked and/or bulging internal walls 18. Insecure internal frames – loose door frames or hinges 19. Loose fittings or fixtures – loose cupboards, shelves or handrails

2015 5

slide-6
SLIDE 6

Relevant Matters Affecting Severity of Outcomes

  • 1. Height above ground

– The height of the building or of the element above the ground or floor

  • 2. Size/weight of element

– The size, weight and nature of the object or element likely to fall

2015 6

slide-7
SLIDE 7

Hazard Prevalence: National

  • In a national sample of 130,112 housing units

from the 2009 American Housing Survey:

– 2,765 (2.13%) had a sagging roof – 5,805 (4.46%) had missing roof material – 2,020 (1.55%) had a hole in the roof – 3,175 (2.44%) had missing bricks, siding, or outside wall material – 1,687 (1.30%) had sloping outside walls – 2,822 (2.17%) had foundation crumbling or an open crack or hole

2015 7

slide-8
SLIDE 8

Hazard Prevalence: Metro Detroit (MI)

  • In metro Detroit (1,900,600 housing units in

Wayne, Macomb, Oakland, Monroe, Livingston,

  • St. Clair, & Lapeer counties):

– 54,500 (2.87%) had a sagging roof – 73,500 (3.87%) had missing roof material – 40,000 (2.10%) had a hole in roof – 72,300 (3.80%) had missing bricks, siding, or other

  • utside wall material

– 31,800 (1.67%) had sloping outside walls – 52,000 (2.74%) had foundation crumbling or an open crack or hole

2015 8

slide-9
SLIDE 9

Hazard Prevalence: Oakland (CA)

  • In the Oakland metropolitan area (895,000

housing units in Alameda & Contra Costa counties):

– 35,000 (3.91%) had a sagging roof – 51,400 (5.74%) had missing roof material – 35,500 (3.97%) had a hole in roof – 35,700 (3.99%) had missing bricks, siding, or other

  • utside wall material

– 27,500 (3.07%) had sloping outside walls – 33,100 (3.70%) had foundation crumbling or an open crack or hole

2012 9

slide-10
SLIDE 10

10

Healthy Home Rating System Project Leadership

2015

Lyke Thompson Director CUS/WSU (313) 577-5209 ad5122@wayne.edu Carrie Beth Lasley Research Associate CUS/WSU (313) 577-9280 cblasley@wayne.edu Angie Sarb Research Assistant CUS/WSU (313) 577-8911 msorbo@med.wayne.edu David Ormandy Professorial Fellow University of Warwick +44 (0) 76524 936 david.ormandy@warwick.ac.uk