Report:

Performance Mock-Up- Additional Impact Testing

Project:
7126 The Stage Far East
For:
Far East Facades

By:
Inhabit Europe Ltd.

Ref:

7126-LO-F-MS-0001

Doc. No: 7126-LO-F-MS-0001

Date: 2018-10-17

Inhabit Group

9th Floor Tower Building, Waterloo, London, SE1 7NX, UK

T. +44 (0) 20 3397 2484 W.www.inhabitgroup.com E.contact@inhabitgroup.com
Australia | China | Hong Kong | Indonesia | Singapore | United Arab Emirates | United Kingdom | Qatar |
Report: Performance Mock-Up- Additional Impact Testing
Project: 7126 The Stage Far East
Date: 2018-10-17
Rev: 00 Page | i

Table of Contents

1.0 Executive Summary ........................................................................................................................... ii

2.0 Introduction ........................................................................................................................................1
3.0 Load Estimation and Assessment ...................................................................................................1
4.0 Specification Requirements ............................................................................................................5
5.0 Method statement ............................................................................................................................6

5.1 Test procedure ...................................................................................................................................6

5.2 Impact locations................................................................................................................................8

5.3 Impact locations- Special cases ................................................................................................. 10

Report: Performance Mock-Up- Additional Impact Testing
Project: 7126 The Stage Far East
Date: 2018-10-17
Rev: 7126 Page | ii

1.0 Executive Summary

The Contractor will demonstrate that the performance requirements of the façade can be met
by carrying out a performance Mock-Up test using Test sequence B clause 8.12.2 in the Centre for
Window and Cladding Technology, Standard for Systemised Building Envelopes, modified as set
out in the project specification “WSP-FE-XX_RP_290617-P12-Facade Performance Specification”.

This report deals with the impact testing requirements and aims to outline a method statement
which will cover the effects on the façade by potential impact loads that may occur during
maintenance and cleaning operations.

Inhabit have been provided with the Mock Up drawings related to the office Building 2 and
represent the Test Specimen B as per project specification.

The tested area as submitted to Inhabit is shown in the following figure and it is a fraction of the
development limited within the office Building B2.

Figure 1: Partial Elevation- PMU- Building 2

Report: Performance Mock-Up- Additional Impact Testing
Project: 7126 The Stage Far East
Date: 2018-10-17
Rev: 7126 Page | 1

2.0 Introduction

During the service life of the building the façade will be susceptible to maintenance loads actions
which may have an impact on the structural performance of the façade systems either as whole or
individually.

The loads are expected to be generated along the BMU suspended platform (i.e. cradle) ascend
and descend routes during the maintenance process.

The mechanism of the load generation depends on the wind action which may result either in static
load by positive wind pressure normal to the suspended platform, or in impact energy transferred by
the suspended platform on the façade in the case it is sucked from the façade by negative wind
pressures (suction) and then released to impact the façade.

3.0 Load Estimation and Assessment

According to the Façade maintenance access Systems Report – Stage4 generated and issued by
Reef Associates, referred as REEF-BMU-RP-R_BMU_001 -T01- the following assumptions have been
considered:

Suspended platform length: 3.0m

Operation conditions: Restrained (20m/s winds)
Impact Energy generated: 760Nm

Inhabit have been requested to carry out an additional impact testing requirement assessment by
investigating the distribution of the energy released on the façade in the event of an impact of the
specified BMU cradle on the façade area.

The Façade under consideration will be subject to energy release generated along the 3.0m of the
cradle contacting simultaneously the façade as the provision of restraint points at relatively small
intervals is aiming to eliminate the risk of the suspended platform being rotated and impact at an
angle or perpendicularly.

The B2 building façade consists of unitised framed facade system incorporating framing in
structurally glazed configuration installed to the concrete structure via purpose designed bracketry.

In particular the Mock Up Specimen B combines the cladding types EWS 2B and 2C which
correspondingly incorporate:

EWS 2B:

Curtain wall system incorporating framing in structurally glazed configuration

Fixed vision full height double glazed units

Shadow box panels that incorporates a double glazed unit with aluminium panel and Glass

Glass-fibre Reinforced Concrete (GRC) rain-screen panel fixed to the spandrel panels. The GRC
panels are fixed with undercut anchors and interlocking channel to the face of the aluminium
spandrel panel (ALU-201).

Double storey heights terracotta brise soleil panels fixed to the curtain wall panels with purpose
designed bracketry.

EWS 2C:
Report: Performance Mock-Up- Additional Impact Testing
Project: 7126 The Stage Far East
Date: 2018-10-17
Rev: 7126 Page | 2

Curtain wall system incorporating framing in structurally glazed configuration

Fixed vision full height double glazed units

Frameless IGU glass door with offset pivot, concealed closure and key locking. (This is not included in
the Mock Up)

Shadow box panels that incorporates a double glazed unit with aluminium panel and Glass

Please note that the description of the system components is limited to the ones included in the
available Mock Up drawings and in particular the elements that may be structurally affected by a
BMU impact.

The structural systems supporting the façade types to be tested consist mainly of mullions, transoms
and variable bracketry which are intended to bear and distribute the façade loads to the primary
structure.

This in conjunction with the expected uniform impact of the cradle on the facade as
aforementioned allow us to conclude that the energy released during an impact will be distributed
as opposed to being concentrated and thus the peak energy will be a fraction/proportion of the
total energy depending on the spacing between the main structural elements.

In order to quantify the amount of energy expected to be developed on the Mock Up we have
created the following impact scenarios on characteristic façade areas.

Figure 2 Impact scenarios A, B, C, D, E

Report: Performance Mock-Up- Additional Impact Testing
Project: 7126 The Stage Far East
Date: 2018-10-17
Rev: 7126 Page | 3

Figure 3 Impact scenarios A1, B1, C1

The cradle will release 760Nm or J energy along the length of the buffer. Each scenario corresponds
to a certain amount of energy distributed across the affected elements as follows:

Scenario A: 760Nm/2=380Nm will be shared between the spandrel glass. 760Nm/2=380Nm will affect
the mid mullion while the end ones will share 380Nm, i.e. 190Nm.

Scenario A1: 760Nm/2=380Nm will be applied on the middle spandrel glass unit.

Conservatively we may assume that only the two mullions within the impact zone will be affected
sharing 760Nm, i.e. 760Nm/2=380Nm each. The adjacent glass will be sharing the rest of the released
energy i.e. 190Nm each. No significant load will be applied on the rest of the mullion for the purposes
of this report.

Scenario B: As Scenario A where instead of the spandrel glass it is the vision glass to absorb the
impact.

Scenario B1: As Scenario A1 where instead of the spandrel glass it is the vision glass to absorb the
impact.
Report: Performance Mock-Up- Additional Impact Testing
Project: 7126 The Stage Far East
Date: 2018-10-17
Rev: 7126 Page | 4

Scenario C: 760Nm will be uniformly distributed on the continuous GRC panel, however the support
system that consists of 3No mullions and 2No horizontal transoms spanning from mullion to mullion
allow us to assume that either halfs of the panel will be subject to 760Nm/2=380Nm of energy which
subsequently will be shared between the transoms and the mullions. Given that the precise vertical
impact location might coincide with only one of the transoms we may conservatively assume that
the impact energy will affect only one transom which will have to absorb the whole amount of
energy affecting the half GRC panel and equals to 380Nm. The mid mullion will be subject to the
energy transferred by the transoms either side which will equal to the energy corresponding to the
half length of each transom and therefore 380Nm. The end mullions will share 380Nm, i.e. 190Nm.

Scenario C1: The load path philosophy complies with the one presented in scenario A1 which leads
us to the following energy distribution:
GRC Panel: 380Nm
GRC support transoms: 380Nm on one transom only (worst case assuming that the impact will
coincide with one of the two transoms)
Mullions: 380Nm each (mullions within the impact zone)

Scenarios D and E: These scenarios assume that the impact will be taking place mainly within the
terracotta brise soleil zone or areas.

From the design intent we may also see that façade elements within the brise soleil area are unlikely
to be hit by the cradle being inset to façade line i.e. GRC panels, or covered by the brise soleil (i.e.
glass).

We have not included the terracotta brise soleil system in this assessment as it is expected to have
been type tested with higher loads and therefore we would not recommend to undergo further
testing off-site. It is critical that this is confirmed by the manufacturer and supplier of the product.

The aluminium decorative fins are treated separately/individually. Please refer to the Method
Statement Section.

Transoms in general are participating in the impact load distribution as per scenarios C, C1 and
therefore will be considered to be able to absorb the maximum amount of energy (i.e. 380Nm)
which will be reached in the case that the impact coincides with the transom.

Summarizing from the above we may conclude that the impact energy released on the facade is
not anticipated to exceed 380Nm.
Report: Performance Mock-Up- Additional Impact Testing
Project: 7126 The Stage Far East
Date: 2018-10-17
Rev: 7126 Page | 5

4.0 Specification Requirements

The impact testing is to take place according to the façade performance specification compiled
and issued by WSP titled “THE STAGE SHOREDITCH-BUILDING 1, 2 AND 3 FACADE PERFORMANCE
SPECIFICATION” with reference code name WSP-FE-XX_RP_290617-P12-Facade Performance
Specification.
The following table inserted from the Facade Performance Specification specifies the amounts of
energy to be applied on the Mock Up as per the CWCT Technical Note 75.

Exposure Soft body impact test Hard body impact

Category energy- test
Performance Safety Serviceability Safety Serviceability Safety enServiceabili
ergty
y
500J 120J 10J 10J
Category
B for areas
Class 2
up to 1.5m
of ground
External
Curtain Wall Category 350J 120J 10J 6J
Panels E for areas
Negligible
(Framing Class 2 1.5 to 6m
Risk
members & from
glazing ground
panels) Category 350J 120J 3J 3J
F for areas
Class 2
above 6m
of ground
Low Risk Category E 350J 120J 10J 6J
(Moderate for areas
risk is 1.5 to 6m
acceptabl from
Terracotta e if any ground
Class 4
Louvers falling Category F 350J 120J 3J 3J
debris is for areas
unlikely to
above 6m
hit people
below) of ground.

Category B 500J 120J 10J 10J

for areas
up
to 1.5m of
ground
Category E 350J 120J 10J 6J
GRC Negligible for areas
Class 3
Cladding Risk 1.5 to 6m
from
ground
350J 120J 3J 3J
Category F
for areas
above 6m
Report: Performance Mock-Up- Additional Impact Testing
Project: 7126 The Stage Far East
Date: 2018-10-17
Rev: 7126 Page | 6

5.0 Method statement

Comparing the testing energy requirements as specified in accordance with the guidance provided
by CWCT Technical Note 75 by with the energy release anticipated to affect the façade elements
as per the analysis in section 3.0, we may conclude that testing in compliance with the CWCT
energy levels will cover the possibility of a BMU impact.

5.1 Test procedure

5.1.1 Standards

 CWCT TN 75: “Impact performance of building envelopes: guidance on specification”.

 CWCT TN 76: “Impact performance of building envelopes: method for impact testing of
cladding panels”.
 BS 8200: 1985 – Appendix G: “Methods of test for impact resistance of opaque wall
components”.
 BS EN 14019: “Curtain walling – Impact resistance – Performance requirements”.
 BS EN 13049:2003 Windows. Soft and heavy body impact. Test method, safety requirements
and classification
 Centre for Window & Cladding Technology: " Standard for systemised building envelopes ",
Part 8 Testing, 3rd edition, December 2005, Clause 8.13.1.
 Centre for Window & Cladding Technology: “Standard test methods for building envelopes”,
3rd edition, December 2005, Clause 15.
Report: Performance Mock-Up- Additional Impact Testing
Project: 7126 The Stage Far East
Date: 2018-10-17
Rev: 7126 Page | 7

The test consists on hanging different types of bodies positioned at the required drop height and
releasing them against the sample.

The tests will be carried out with the followings impactors:

 S1 spheroconical bag filled with glass spheres and weighing 50kg (BS 8200), or
 S2 double-tyre, Type 3,50-R8 4PR, 50 kg mass (BS EN 12600)

5.1.2 Impact test with double-tyre

Category
Safety
according to Body Drop height [mm]
Body Impact energy [J]
EN 14019

E5 S2 466 950

Required performance:

 The sample is required to remain safe and in place. Dislodgement of components is not permitted.

5.1.3 Impact test with spheroconical bag

Exposure
category
Serviceability Safety
according to
TN 75
Impact Drop Impact Drop
Body
energy height Body energy height
[J] [mm] [J] [mm]

B S1 120 245 S1 500 1019

Required performance for serviceability test:

 For brittle materials: Spalling of edges of panels of brittle materials, or damage to finishes that may
lead to deterioration of the substrate are allowed according to Class 3 of the CWCT Table 2 TN75

 For other material: damage or denting of the surfaces is allowed, where the damage is a dent, the
depth of the dent should be quantified.

 Please note that after the soft body impact tests some scratches on the surface finish can occur
that are not considered as damage.

Required performance for safety test:

 The sample, when subjected to safety impact test, should not put at risk the structural safety of the
building or make parts of the building liable to fall or to cause serious injury to people inside or
outside the building. In addition, the soft body S1 should not pass through the test wall. Damage to
the finish and permanent deformation on the far side of the wall may occur.
Report: Performance Mock-Up- Additional Impact Testing
Project: 7126 The Stage Far East
Date: 2018-10-17
Rev: 7126 Page | 8

In the following section we present the suggested impact locations

5.2 Impact locations

Figure 4

Legend

Location A: Mid Spandrel Glass

Location B: Mid Vision Glass

Location C: Typical mullion- Mid height

Location D: GRC Panel- Mid span between mullions

Location E: GRC support transom- Mid length

Location F: GRC Panel connection to transom. The triangle shows the impact direction
recommended. Please refer to the following figure:
Report: Performance Mock-Up- Additional Impact Testing
Project: 7126 The Stage Far East
Date: 2018-10-17
Rev: 7126 Page | 9

Figure 5

Location G: Typical transom- Mid length

As aforementioned we recommend that the Aluminium fin is tested individually. The testing
philosophy is to cover both the fin as well as the connection of the fin to the substructure.
Therefore we have suggested that the fin is tested in 3 areas which take into consideration the
support brackets centres and the types of the bracketry which vary.

Location H,H1: Aluminium Fin- Supports at 500cc. Impact at mid span and support please see figure
below. The triangle shows the impact direction recommended.

Figure 6

Location I,I1: Aluminium Fin- Supports at 850cc. Impact at mid span and support please see figure
below. The triangle shows the impact direction recommended.

Figure 7
Report: Performance Mock-Up- Additional Impact Testing
Project: 7126 The Stage Far East
Date: 2018-10-17
Rev: 7126 Page | 10

Location J,J1: Aluminium Fin- Supports at 500cc. Impact at mid span and support please see figure
below. The triangle shows the impact direction recommended.

Figure 8

5.3 Impact locations- Special cases

Further to the above it is critical to ensure that no damage should result to broken pieces are
dislodged and fall off the building. This risk is inherent in brittle materials and especially in the cases
that parts of the façade are cantilevering and as such we identified a few locations within the GRC
range of panels that should be tested. Those locations may be found in the following figure:

Figure 9
Report: Performance Mock-Up- Additional Impact Testing
Project: 7126 The Stage Far East
Date: 2018-10-17
Rev: 7126 Page | 11

The following figures are indicative and are excerpts from the mock up drawings:

FEF-FC-B2-PMU-DT03
FEF-FC-B2-PMU-DT04
FEF-FC-B2-PMU-DT05
FEF-FC-B2-PMU-DT04
FEF-FC-B2-PMU-DT53
FEF-FC-B2-PMU-DT57
FEF-FC-B2-PMU-DT58

Figure 10 Figure 12
Figure 11

Figure 13 Figure 14 Figure 15

Figure 16