Seismic Design for Architects: The Best Approach

Article by Jordan Kelly Having spent the past 10 years focusing on seismic design in both New Zealand and Australia, we’ve become privy to the repeated discussions amongst industry members surrounding regulation, compliance and where the responsibility for seismic design actually lies. A question we often get asked is why aren’t seismic designs completed in the early stages of a project? Especially when design has been completed by fire, acoustic AND structural engineers. This is a good question and one that is important for industry practitioners to ask, however the answer isn’t always particularly straight forward. Current State There has been limited structural input for non-structural building elements, leaving specifications and contracts ambiguous. This, in turn, leaves specific design requirements on the shoulders of the last player in the project chain, the subcontractor. Late stage design is often accepted as an effective approach to address structural requirements of interiors due to design or product changes throughout a project. In reality the most efficient approach would be far earlier in the project life cycle, due to late design variations posing significant risk to project timings and overall costs. Industry practitioners have long accepted the concept that ‘the cost of change increases exponentially as the project progresses’ but this doesn’t have to be, nor should it be the case.  Best Practice Seismic Design Implementing a resilient and compliant design that reduces the risk of failure or damage, requires a firm understanding by architects and head contractors for what structural design of non-structural building elements actually entails. Architects that have been well informed by their engineer can create more robust specifications or ensure design is finalised before tender. This flows down to an even playing field for tender submissions and results in more accurate prices by subcontractors aware of construction requirements. Additionally throughout a project, if an architect drives compliance by engaging an engineer variations can be captured to ensure final certification.

Bridging the Gap A greater ownership and understanding of the liability is required by both head contractors and architects. If this responsibility is allowed to flow to subcontractors the project risks are greater. The industry is adapting with architects, head contractors and subcontractors who are aware of the risks associated with interior engineering design, and are taking proactive steps towards addressing these. Seeking the correct design advice is essential in progression towards a resilient building.  How Architects Can Implement Seismic Design  An Architect can utilise engineering design around a particular product or system to solidify specification and ensure compliance instead of allowing a sub-contractor to swap and change specification based on cost for potentially an inferior product. In addition to this, knowing the consent requirements are fulfilled, eliminates the risk of compliance and schedule delays at a late stage of the project. This reduces the risk of being one of the many projects halted due to compliance issues when it comes time for certification. This process starts with seeking the right information.  BVT Engineering are proud to be an industry educator, working towards the general uplift of construction standards across interiors, providing CPD presentations and leading discussions, as well as driving engagements that define the best building practices. At BVT, our team of engineering consultants provide guidance across the entire project lifecycle, from specification clarity and preliminary details, all the way through to complete design certification and ‘as built’ documentation for occupancy.  Put simply, we recommend engaging an engineer for structural design of non-structural elements such as ceilings, partitions, facades and services because the building code merely demands it. Without sign off from an engineer, a building can be considered non compliant and unsafe, resulting in significant project delays and unforeseen costs.  It’s important to remember that seismic load requirements will change for every project, and as a result, so too will the design. There are many benefits to architects who own the design engagement and accommodate seismic design requirements from the offset of a project. Not only will seismic design provide more clarity for your architectural specifications, but it will also reduce liability and risk of schedule for your clients and prevent compliance hold ups throughout the project.    As always, we welcome continued conversation on this topic and encourage you to get in touch with engineer, Jordan Kelly , by filling in the form below.

Name

*

First Name

Last Name

Company

*

Email

*

Message

*

Thank you!