Safe Design of Structures

SAFE DESIGN OF STRUCTURES
Code of Practice
JULY 2012
Safe Work Australia is an Australian Government statutory agency established in 2009.
Safe Work Australia consists of representatives of the Commonwealth, state and territory
governments, the Australian Council of Trade Unions, the Australian Chamber of Commerce
and Industry and the Australian Industry Group.
Safe Work Australia works with the Commonwealth, state and territory governments to
improve work health and safety and workers’ compensation arrangements. Safe Work Australia
is a national policy body, not a regulator of work health and safety. The Commonwealth, states
and territories have responsibility for regulating and enforcing work health and safety laws in
their jurisdiction.
ISBN 978-0-642-78546-6 [PDF]

ISBN 978-0-642-78547-3[RTF]
Creative Commons
Except for the logos of Safe Work Australia, SafeWork SA, Workplace Standards Tasmania,
WorkSafe WA, Workplace Health and Safety QLD, NT WorkSafe, WorkCover NSW, Comcare
and WorkSafe ACT, this copyright work is licensed under a Creative Commons
Attribution-Noncommercial 3.0 Australia licence. To view a copy of this licence, visit
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/au/
In essence, you are free to copy, communicate and adapt the work for non commercial
purposes, as long as you attribute the work to Safe Work Australia and abide by the other
licence terms.
Contact information
Safe Work Australia
Phone: +61 2 6121 5317
Email: info@safeworkaustralia.gov.au
Website: www.safeworkaustralia.gov.au
WORKSAFE
Western Australia
TABLE OF CONTENTS
FOREWORD 2
SCOPE AND APPLICATION 2
1. INTRODUCTION 4
1.1 What is safe design? 4
1.2 Who has health and safety duties in

relation to the design of structures? 4
1.3 What is ‘reasonably practicable’ in

relation to the designer’s duty? 6
2. KEY ELEMENTS OF SAFE DESIGN 7
2.1 Use a risk management approach 7
2.2 Consider the lifecycle 7
2.3 Knowledge and capability 7
2.4 Consultation, co-operation and co-ordination 8
2.5 Information transfer 8
3. INTEGRATING DESIGN AND RISK

MANAGEMENT 10
3.1 Pre-design phase 10
3.2 Conceptual and schematic design phase 13
3.3 Design development phase 13
3.4 Reviewing control measures 19
4. DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS 20
4.1 Design for safe construction 20
4.2 Design to facilitate safe use 20
4.3 Design for safe maintenance 21
4.4 Modification 21
4.5 Demolition and dismantling 22
APPENDIX A – ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES 23
APPENDIX B – SAFETY IN DESIGN CHECKLIST 26
APPENDIX C – CASE STUDIES 28
CODE OF PRACTICE | SAFE DESIGN AND STRUCTURES 1

FOREWORD
This Code of Practice on the safe design of structures is an approved code of practice under
section 274 of the Work Health and Safety Act (the WHS Act).
An approved code of practice is a practical guide to achieving the standards of health, safety
and welfare required under the WHS Act and the Work Health and Safety Regulations (the
WHS Regulations).
A code of practice applies to anyone who has a duty of care in the circumstances
described in the code. In most cases, following an approved code of practice would achieve
compliance with the health and safety duties in the WHS Act, in relation to the subject
matter of the code. Like regulations, codes of practice deal with particular issues and do not
cover all hazards or risks which may arise. The health and safety duties require duty holders
to consider all risks associated with work, not only those for which regulations and codes of
practice exist.
Codes of practice are admissible in court proceedings under the WHS Act and Regulations.
Courts may regard a code of practice as evidence of what is known about a hazard, risk
or control and may rely on the code in determining what is reasonably practicable in the
circumstances to which the code relates.
Compliance with the WHS Act and Regulations may be achieved by following another
method, such as a technical or an industry standard, if it provides an equivalent or higher
standard of work health and safety than the code.
An inspector may refer to an approved code of practice when issuing an improvement or

prohibition notice.
This Code of Practice has been developed by Safe Work Australia as a model code of
practice under the Council of Australian Governments’ Inter-Governmental Agreement for
Regulatory and Operational Reform in Occupational Health and Safety for adoption by the
Commonwealth, state and territory governments.
SCOPE AND APPLICATION

The Code provides practical guidance to persons conducting a business or undertaking
who design structures that will be used, or could reasonably be expected to be used, as a
workplace. This includes architects, building designers and engineers.
This Code is also relevant for anyone making decisions that influence the design outcome,
such as clients, developers and builders.
This Code applies to the design of ‘structures’ defined under the WHS Act to mean anything
that is constructed, whether fixed or moveable, temporary or permanent, and includes:
buildings, masts, towers, framework, pipelines, roads, bridges, rail infrastructure and
underground works (shafts or tunnels)
any component of a structure, and
part of a structure.
2 CODE OF PRACTICE | SAFE DESIGN OF STRUCTURES

FOREWORD
HOW TO USE THIS CODE OF PRACTICE

In providing guidance, the word ‘should’ is used in this Code to indicate a
recommended course of action, while ‘may’ is used to indicate an optional course
of action.
This Code also includes various references to provisions of the WHS Act and
Regulations which set out the legal requirements. These references are not exhaustive.
The words ‘must’, ‘requires’ or ‘mandatory’ indicate that a legal requirement exists and
must be complied with.
CODE OF PRACTICE | SAFE DESIGN OF STRUCTURES 3

1. INTRODUCTION
Eliminating hazards at the design or planning stage is often easier and cheaper to achieve
than making changes later when the hazards become real risks in the workplace.
Safe design can result in many benefits, including:
more effective prevention of injury and illness

improved useability of structures
improved productivity and reduced costs
better prediction and management of production and operational costs over the lifecycle
of a structure
innovation, in that safe design can demand new thinking to resolve hazards that occur in
the construction phase and in end use.
Design, in relation to a structure, includes the design of all or part of the structure and the
redesign or modification of a design. Design output includes any hard copy or electronic
drawing, design detail, design instruction, scope of works document or specification relating
to the structure.
1.1 What is safe design?

Safe design means the integration of control measures early in the design process to
eliminate or, if this is not reasonable practicable, minimise risks to health and safety
throughout the life of the structure being designed.
The safe design of a structure will always be part of a wider set of design objectives,
including practicability, aesthetics, cost and functionality. These sometimes competing
objectives need to be balanced in a manner that does not compromise the health and
safety of those who work on or use the structure over its life.
Safe design begins at the concept development phase of a structure when making
decisions about:
the design and its intended purpose

materials to be used
possible methods of construction, maintenance, operation, demolition or dismantling
and disposal
what legislation, codes of practice and standards need to be considered and complied
with.
1.2 Who has health and safety duties in relation to the

design of structures?
A person conducting a business or undertaking has the primary duty under the WHS Act to
ensure, so far as is reasonably practicable, that workers and other persons are not exposed
to health and safety risks arising from the business or undertaking.
A person conducting a business or undertaking that designs a structure that will be used, or
could reasonably be expected to be used, as a workplace must ensure, so far as is reasonably
practicable, that the structure is without risks to health and safety. This duty includes carrying
out testing and analysis and providing specific information about the structure.

1. INTRODUCTION
A designer is a person conducting a business or undertaking whose profession, trade or

business involves them in:
preparing sketches, plans or drawings for a structure, including variations to a plan or

changes to a structure
making decisions for incorporation into a design that may affect the health or safety of
persons who construct, use or carry out other activities in relation to the structure.
They include:
architects, building designers, engineers, building surveyors, interior designers, landscape

architects, town planners and all other design practitioners contributing to, or having
overall responsibility for, any part of the design (for example, drainage engineers
designing the drain for a new development)
building service designers, engineering firms or others designing services that are part
of the structure such as ventilation, electrical systems and permanent fire extinguisher
installations
contractors carrying out design work as part of their contribution to a project (for
example, an engineering contractor providing design, procurement and construction
management services)
temporary works engineers, including those designing formwork, falsework, scaffolding
and sheet piling
persons who specify how structural alteration, demolition or dismantling work is to be
carried out.
A person conducting a business or undertaking who alters or modifies a design without
consulting the original or subsequent designer will assume the duties of a designer. Any
changes to the design of a structure may affect the health and safety of those who work on
or use the structure and must be considered by the person altering or modifying a design.
The duties also apply to designers of domestic residences, only to the extent that at some
stages in the lifecycle the residence may become a workplace and the design could
affect the health and safety of workers who will carry out work on the building, such as
construction, maintenance and demolition.
A person conducting a business or undertaking that commissions construction work (the

client) has specific duties under the WHS Regulations to:
consult with the designer, so far as is reasonably practicable, about how to ensure that
health and safety risks arising from the design during construction are eliminated or
minimised, and
provide the designer with any information that the client has in relation to the hazards
and risks at the site where the construction work is to be carried out.
A principal contractor is required for a construction project where the value of the
construction work is $250,000 or more. The principal contractor is a person conducting a
business or undertaking that:
commissions the construction project (the client), or

is engaged by the client to be the principal contractor and is authorised to have
management or control of the workplace.
The principal contractor has duties to ensure the construction work is planned and
managed in a way that eliminates or minimises health and safety risks so far as is reasonably

1. INTRODUCTION
practicable. Further guidance on managing risks for construction projects and principal
contractor duties is available in the Code of Practice: Construction Work.
A person conducting a business or undertaking who commissions a design or construction

work or a construction project is referred to in this Code as the ‘client’.
1.3 What is ‘reasonably practicable’ in relation to the

designer’s duty?
The duty of a person conducting a business or undertaking to ensure health and safety is
qualified by what is reasonably practicable. Deciding what is ‘reasonably practicable’ requires
taking into account and weighing up all relevant matters including:
the likelihood of the hazard or the risk occurring

the degree of harm that might result from the hazard or the risk
knowledge about the hazard or risk, and ways of eliminating or minimising the risk
the availability and suitability of ways to eliminate or minimise the risk, and
after assessing the extent of the risk and the available ways of eliminating or minimising
the risk, the cost associated with eliminating or minimising the risk, including whether
the cost is grossly disproportionate to the risk.
For example, in deciding what is reasonably practicable, consideration will be given to the
prevailing standards of design and the hazards and risks known at the time the designer
designed the structure.
In the process of designing structures it will not always be possible to clearly delineate who
has responsibility, and in which circumstances, for the elimination or minimisation of hazards
associated with the structure. The duties may be concurrent and overlapping.
Where more than one person has a duty for the same matter, each person retains
Section 16
responsibility for their duty and must discharge it to the extent to which the person has
the capacity to influence or control the matter or would have had that capacity but for
an agreement or arrangement claiming to limit or remove that capacity.
While designers may not have management and control over the actual construction work
they can discharge their duty by consulting, co-operating and co-ordinating activities, where
reasonably practicable, with those who do have management or control of the construction
work, for example by:
applying risk management processes to more traditional designs and considering

whether new or innovative approaches to design will eliminate or minimise risk and result
in an intrinsically safer building or structure
providing information of any identified hazards arising from an unconventional design
to those who will construct or use the building
providing guidance on how a structure might be constructed safely
carrying out the above in collaboration with those who have expertise in construction safety.
A designer may be asked to provide health and safety information about a building they
designed many years ago. The designer may not be aware of changes made to the building
since it was constructed. In this situation, the extent of a designer’s duty is limited to the
elements of the design detailed or specified by the designer and not by others.

2. KEY ELEMENTS OF SAFE DESIGN
2.1 Use a risk management approach

A risk management process is a systematic way of making a workplace as safe as possible
and it should also be used as part of the design process. It involves the following steps
outlined in Chapter 3 of this Code:
identify reasonably foreseeable hazards associated with the design of the structure
if necessary, assess the risks arising from the hazards
eliminate or minimise the risk by designing control measures, and
review the control measures.
General guidance on the risk management process is available in the Code of Practice:
How to Manage Work Health and Safety Risks.
2.2 Consider the lifecycle

In the same way that designers consider the future impact of a building on environmental
sustainability, designers should consider how their design will affect the health and safety
of those who will interact with the structure throughout its life.
The WHS Act requires the designer to ensure, so far as is reasonably practicable, that a
Section 22 structure is designed to be without risks to the health and safety of persons who:
at a workplace, use the structure for a purpose for which it was designed
construct the structure at a workplace
carry out any reasonably foreseeable activity at a workplace in relation the
manufacture, assembly, use, proper demolition or disposal of the structure, or
are at or in the vicinity of a workplace and are exposed to the structure or whose
health and safety may be affected by an activity related to the structure.
This means thinking about design solutions for reasonably foreseeable hazards that may
occur as the structure is built, commissioned, used, maintained, repaired, refurbished
or modified, decommissioned, demolished or dismantled and disposed or recycled. For
example, when designing a building with a lift for occupants, the design should also include
sufficient space and safe access to the lift-well or machine room for maintenance work.
2.3 Knowledge and capability

In addition to core design capabilities relevant to the designer’s role, a designer should
also have:
knowledge of work health and safety legislation, codes of practice and other regulatory
requirements
an understanding of the intended purpose of the structure
knowledge of risk management processes
knowledge of technical design standards

an appreciation of construction methods and their impact on the design

the ability to source and apply relevant data on human dimensions, capacities
and behaviours.
Many design projects are too large and complex to be fully understood by one person.
Various persons with specific skills and expertise may need to be included in the design team
or consulted during the design process to fill any knowledge gaps, for example ergonomists,
engineers and occupational hygienists.
2.4 Consultation, co-operation and co-ordination

Consultation is a legal requirement and an essential part of managing work health and safety
risks. A safe workplace is more easily achieved when people involved at the design stage
communicate with each other about potential risks and work together to find solutions.
By drawing on the knowledge and experience of other people, including workers, more
informed decisions can be made about how the building or structure can be designed to
eliminate or minimise risks.
CONSULTING YOUR WORKERS

A person conducting a business or undertaking must consult, so far as is reasonably
Section 47 practicable, with workers who carry out work for the business or undertaking who are
(or are likely to be) directly affected by a work health and safety matter.
If the workers are represented by a health and safety representative, the consultation
Section 48 must involve that representative.
If you are commissioning a new workplace or refurbishing your existing workplace, you must
consult your workers who will be using the workplace, because their health and safety may
be affected by the new design.
CONSULTING, CO-OPERATING AND CO-ORDINATING ACTIVITIES WITH OTHER DUTY

HOLDERS
A person conducting a business or undertaking must consult, cooperate and coordinate
Section 46 activities with all other persons who have a work health or safety duty in relation to the
same matter, so far as is reasonably practicable.
Often, the design process will occur over various stages and involve different people who
make financial, commercial, specialist or technical decisions over a design, for example,
clients, architects, project managers and interior designers.
Such decisions may positively or negatively affect the safety of a building. In these
circumstances, each party will have responsibility for health and safety in the design stage.
So far as is reasonably practicable, the duty holders involved must consult each other on
the hazards and risks associated with the building and work together on appropriate design
solutions. This would include a client co-operating with a designer in changing a design to
address a health and safety risk identified in the design process.
A person who commissions construction work must consult with the designer to ensure
Regulation 294 that risks arising from the design during construction are eliminated or minimised as far as
reasonably practicable.

Appendix A provides examples of consultation, co-operation and co-ordination between

duty holders in various contractual relationships.
Further guidance on consultation is available in the Code of Practice: Work Health and Safety
Consultation, Cooperation and Coordination.
2.5 Information transfer

Key information about identified hazards and action taken or required to control risks should
be recorded and transferred from the design phase to those involved in later stages of the
lifecycle. Communicating this information to other duty holders will make them aware of
any residual risks and minimise the likelihood of safety features incorporated into the design
being altered or removed by those engaged in subsequent work on or around the building
or structure.
Designers must give adequate information to each person who is provided with the
Section 22
design in order to give effect to it concerning:
the purpose for which the structure was designed

the results of any calculations, testing, analysis or examination
any conditions necessary to ensure that the structure is without risks when used for
a purpose for which it was designed or when carrying out any activity related to the
structure such as construction, maintenance and demolition.
The designer must also, so far as is reasonably practicable, provide this information to any
person who carries out activities in relation to the structure if requested.
Points for designers to consider when providing information include:
making notes on drawings, as these will be immediately available to construction workers

providing information on significant hazards, as well as:
hazardous substances or flammable materials included in the design
heavy or awkward prefabricated elements likely to create handling risks
features that create access problems
temporary work required to construct or renovate the building as designed, for
example bracing of steel or concrete frame buildings
features of the design essential to safe operation
methods of access where normal methods of securing scaffold are not available
any parts of the design where risks have been minimised but not eliminated
noise and vibration hazards from plant.

METHODS OF TRANSFERRING INFORMATION

Safety report
A designer must provide a written report to the person conducting a business or

Regulation 295
undertaking who commissioned the design that specifies
the hazards relating to the design of the structure that, so far as the designer is
reasonably aware:
create a risk to persons who are to carry out the construction work, and
are associated only with the particular design and not with other designs of the
same type of structure.
The safety report applies to designs of structures that have unusual or atypical features
which present hazards and risks during the construction phase that are unique to the
particular design.
The safety report should include information about:
any hazardous materials or structural features and the designer’s assessment of the risk
of injury or illness to construction workers arising from those hazards
the action the designer has taken to control those risks, for example changes to
the design.
The information requirements under the WHS Act may be incorporated into the safety report
prepared under the WHS Regulations.
The client must provide a copy of the safety report to the principal contractor.
Work health and safety file
The development of a work health and safety (WHS) file for a structure could assist the
designer meet the duty to provide information to others. It could include copies of all
relevant health and safety information the designer prepared and used in the design process,
such as the safety report, risk register, safety data sheets, manuals and procedures for safe
maintenance, dismantling or eventual demolition.

3. INTEGRATING DESIGN AND RISK
MANAGEMENT
A systems approach that integrates the risk management process in the design phases and
encourages collaboration between a client, designer and constructor is recommended
(see Figure 1).
3.1 Pre-design phase

This stage of the process involves:
Establishing the design context in terms of the purpose of the structure, as well as the
scope and complexity of the project.
Establishing the risk management context by identifying the breadth of workplace
hazards and relevant legislation, codes of practice and standards that need to be
considered.
Identifying the required design disciplines, skills and competencies.
Identifying the roles and responsibilities of various parties in relation to the project, and
establishing collaborative relationships with clients and others who influence the design
outcome.
Conducting consultation and research to assist in identifying hazards, assessing and
controlling risks.
CONSULTATION
The client should prepare a project brief that includes the safety requirements and objectives
for the project. This will enable a shared understanding of safety expectations between the
client and designer.
The client must give the designer all available information relating to the site that may affect
health and safety.
Designers should ask their clients about the types of activities and tasks likely or intended to
be carried out in the structure, including the tasks of those who maintain, repair, service or
clean the structure as an integral part of its use.
RESEARCH
Information can be found from various sources to assist in identifying hazards, assessing and
controlling risks, including:
WHS and building laws, technical standards and codes of practice
industry statistics regarding injuries and incidents

hazard alerts or other reports from relevant statutory authorities, unions and employer
associations, specialists, professional bodies representing designers and engineers
research and testing done on similar designs.
Table 1 provides suggestions on using consultation and research to obtain information in the
pre-design phase.

3. INTEGRATING DESIGN AND RISK MANAGEMENT
FIGURE 1: A systematic approach to integrating design and risk management
PRE-DESIGN PHASE
Obtain information including:
Establish the design Establish consultation
context methods with client Intended use of structure;
Industry injury/illness profile

and statistics;
Guidance on structure hazards

and possible solutions.
CONCEPTUAL AND SCHEMATIC

DESIGN PHASE
Conduct preliminary hazard analysis Framework for the preliminary
and consultation hazard analysis (see Table 2):
Siting;
High consequence hazards;

Identify hazards that are
affected by the design of the Systems of work;
structure, and are within the
control of the designer. Environment;
Incident mitigation.
DESIGN DEVELOPMENT PHASE

Determine how risks will be eliminated or minimised
through either:
a. implementing solutions from recognised
Standards; or
b. conducting a risk assessment process.
a. Implement solutions from b. Conduct a risk assessment process

recognised Standards.
for hazards which have no suitable solutions
Identify hazards that can be adequately in recognised Standards or there is poor
addressed by applying risk controls from safety experience with this type of hazard.
existing standards if appropriate
Design risk controls
Ensure health and safety is Redesign to reduce

included with other structure risks within the
requirements in the design designers control.
Review designs to establish

whether risk elimination or
Final design Yes minimisation has been achieved,
NO
including that control measures
have not introduced new risks

TABLE 1: INFORMATION SOURCES FOR IDENTIFYING HAZARDS

Step Possible techniques
Initial discussions Obtain information on the:
Purpose of the structure, including plant, ancillary

equipment and tasks.
Industry injury profile and statistics and common hazards
and safety issues.
Guidance from health and safety authorities and relevant
associations, and standards.
Establish the breadth of hazards and the consultation
arrangements between the client and designer.
Pre-design Useful techniques may include a combination of the following

preliminary actions by the client:
hazard analysis
Conduct workshops and discussions with personnel using
or working on similar structures within the client company,
including health and safety representatives.
Conduct onsite assessment of an existing similar structure
with feedback from the users of the existing structure.
Research information or reports from similar structures on
hazards and relevant sources and stakeholder groups and
then complete analysis for own design needs.
Conduct workshops with experienced personnel who will
construct, use and maintain the new structure.
Conduct workshops with specialist consultants and experts
in the hazards.
Determine what Workshops/discussions to determine which hazards are

hazards are affected, introduced or increased by the design of the structure.
‘in-scope’
3.2 Conceptual and schematic design phase

HAZARD IDENTIFICATION
Hazard identification should take place as early as possible in the concept development and
design stages. It is important that the hazard identification is systematic and not limited to
one or two people’s experiences of situations.
Broad groupings of hazards should be identified before design scoping begins. Appendix B
provides a checklist of issues that should be considered. A designer and others involved in
the preliminary hazard analysis should then decide which hazards are ‘in scope’ of the steps
of the risk management process, and should be considered in the design process. A hazard
is ‘in scope’ if it can be affected, introduced or increased by the design of the structure.
At this early stage, consideration should be given to possible ways that hazards could be
eliminated or minimised.

Where there are systems of work which are foreseeable as part of the construction method
and the intended use of a structure as a workplace, they should be identified in the
preliminary hazard analysis. Information in the form of likely or intended workflows, if known,
will be useful as part of the project brief prepared by the client, including details at the
task level.
The brief may also include any activities and systems with hazards specific to the nature of
the structure (for example, manual tasks in a health facility, acoustic environment in a call
centre, occupational violence in a bank, the storage of dangerous goods in a warehouse)
where the safety of these activities or systems is affected by the design of the structure.
A structure must be designed to eliminate the need to carry out a hazardous manual
Regulation 61
task and, where this is not reasonably practicable, the risks of musculoskeletal disorders
arising from hazardous manual tasks must be minimised.
Refer to the Code of Practice: Hazardous Manual Tasks for further guidance.
Table 2 outlines a framework for the preliminary hazard identification.
TABLE 2: FRAMEWORK FOR THE PRELIMINARY HAZARD IDENTIFICATION

Siting of structure Potential design issues that may affect safety include:
proximity to adjacent property or nearby roads

surrounding land use
clearances required for construction equipment and
techniques
demolition of existing assets
proximity to underground or overhead services — especially
electric lines
exposure of workers to adjacent traffic or other hazards
site conditions — including foundations, and construction
over other assets or over water
safety of the public
use of adjacent streets.
High consequence The storage and handling of dangerous goods, or work with
hazards high energy hazards (for example, pressure) and health
hazards such as biological materials.
Systems of work The systems of work (including cleaning and maintenance

(involving the activities) that pose risks, for example:
interaction of
persons with the rapid construction techniques, i.e. prefabrication versus in
structure) situ construction
materials to be used in construction
staging and coordination with other works

inadequate pedestrian or vehicle separation

restricted access for building and plant maintenance
hazardous manual tasks
working at height
exposure to occupational violence.

Consider both technical and human factors, including humans’
ability to change behaviour to compensate for design changes.
Anticipate misuse throughout the lifecycle.
Environmental Impact of adverse natural events such as cyclones, floods

conditions and earthquakes, inadequate ventilation or lighting, high
background noise levels and welfare facilities that do not
meet workplace needs.
Incident mitigation The possibility of the structure to exacerbate the consequences

after an incident due to inadequate egress, siting of assembly
areas, inadequate emergency services access.
3.3 Design development phase

In this phase the design concepts for the structure are converted into detailed drawings and
technical specifications. Control measures are decided and construction documentation is
prepared. The design is completed and handed to the client.
Control measures for common hazards may be chosen from known solutions. For other new
or complex hazards a risk assessment may be necessary to assist in determining the most
effective control measures. The design development phase should involve:
Developing a set of design options in accordance with the hierarchy of control

Selecting the optimum solution. Balance the direct and indirect costs of implementing
the design against the benefits derived.
Testing, trialling or evaluating the design solution
Redesigning to control any residual risks

Finalising the design, preparing the safety report and other risk control information
needed for the structure’s lifecycle.
IMPLEMENT SOLUTIONS FROM RECOGNISED STANDARDS

Other legislative provisions governing the design of buildings and structures in Australia
include the building laws in each jurisdiction and the National Construction Code of Australia
(NCCA). The Building Code of Australia (BCA) is part of the NCCA. In addition, there are
technical and engineering guidelines and standards produced by other government agencies,
Standards Australia and relevant professional bodies.
The primary focus of the NCCA is to ensure buildings and structures achieve acceptable
standards of structural sufficiency, safety, health and amenity. It contains technical provisions
for the design and construction of buildings and other structures relating to structural
sufficiency, fire spread within and between buildings, building occupant access and egress,
fire fighting equipment, smoke hazard management and fire brigade access to buildings.

In addition, health and safety amenity aspects such as ventilation, lighting, legionella controls,
sanitary facilities and damp and weatherproofing measures are covered in the NCCA.
The NCCA refers to Australian Standards, but designers should be aware that these may not
adequately control workplace risks if applied to a situation outside that contemplated in
the Standard or if the Standard is out-dated. The NCCA also does not provide guidance for
some specialised structures such as major hazard facilities (for example, refineries).
ASSESSING RISK
A risk assessment involves considering what could happen if someone is exposed to a
hazard and the likelihood of it happening.
It is a way of deciding how much effort should be focussed on designing out a hazard – the
more serious the risk of harm, the more time and effort should be dedicated to eliminating
or minimising the risk.
Risk assessment is not an absolute science, it is an evaluation based on available information.

Therefore, it is important those involved in a risk assessment have the necessary information,
knowledge and experience of the work environment and work process.
If similar tasks or processes apply for a number of projects, or the design is of a fairly routine
nature, a generic risk assessment model might be appropriate. However, the designer is still
responsible for ensuring that the generic assessment is valid for the project, before deciding
to adopt it.
Risk assessment methods for assessing design safety may include:
fact finding to determine existing controls, if any

testing design assumptions to ensure that aspects of it are not based on incorrect beliefs
of anticipations on the part of the designer, as to how workers or others involved will act
or react
testing of structures or components specified for use in the construction, end use
and maintenance
consulting with key people who have the specialised knowledge and/or capacity to
control or influence the design, (for example the architect, client, construction manager,
engineers, project managers and safety and health representatives), to identify and
assess risks; consulting directly with other experts, (for example specialist engineers,
manufacturers and product or systems designers) who have been involved with similar
constructions
when designing for the renovation or demolition of existing buildings, reviewing previous
design documentation or information recorded about the design structure and any
modifications undertaken to address safety concerns; and consulting professional
industry or employee associations who may assist with risk assessments for the type
of work and workplace.
Table 3 provides suggestions on ways to ensure all risks are addressed in the design and who
should be invloved.

TABLE 3: DESIGN PROCESS

Step Possible techniques By whom
Identify solutions Consult with all relevant persons to Designer led.

from regulations, determine which hazards can be Client approval
codes of practice addressed with recognised standards. of decisions.
and recognised
standards Plan the risk management process
for other hazards.
Apply risk Further detailed information may be Designer led.

management required on hazards, for example by: Client provides
techniques further information
using checklists and referring to as agreed in
codes of practice and guidance the planned risk
material management
job/task analysis techniques. process.
A variety of quantified and/

or qualitative risk assessment
measures can be used to check the
effectiveness of control measures.
Scale models and consultation with

experienced industry personnel may
be necessary to achieve innovative
solutions to longstanding issues that
have caused safety problems.
Discuss design Take into account how design Designer led.

options decisions influence risks when Client contributing.
discussing control options.
Design finalisation Check that the evaluation of design Designer led.

risk control measures is complete Client and designer
and accurate. agree with final
result.
Prepare information about risks to
health and safety for the structure
that remain after the design process.
Potential changes in Ensure that changes which affect Construction team

construction stage design do not increase risks, for in consultation with
example substitution of flooring designer and client.
materials which could increase slip/fall
potential and may introduce risks in
cleaning work.

THE HIERARCHY OF CONTROL
The ways of controlling risks are ranked from the highest level of protection and reliability
to the lowest, known as the hierarchy of control.
Elimination – The most effective control measure involves eliminating the hazard and
associated risk. By designing-in or designing-out certain features, hazards may be
eliminated. For example, designing components that facilitate pre-fabrication on the
ground can avoid the need for working at height and therefore eliminate the risk of
falls.
If it is not reasonably practicable to eliminate a hazard the following control measures
should be considered:
Substitution – replace a hazardous process or material with one that is less

hazardous to reduce the risk. For example:
Using pre-cast panels rather than constructing a masonry wall
Using pre-finished materials in preference to on-site finishing
Isolation – separate the hazard or hazardous work practice from people, for
example designing the layout of a building so that noisy machinery is isolated from
workstations
Engineering controls – use engineering control measures to minimise the risk,
for example, including adequate ventilation and lighting in the design, designing
and positioning permanent anchorage and hoisting points into buildings where
maintenance needs to be undertaken at height
Administrative controls – If engineering controls cannot reduce the risk sufficiently,
then administrative controls should be used, for example using warning signs or
exclusion zones where a hazardous activity is carried out.
Personal protective equipment – Personal protective equipment (for example
hard hats, respiratory protection, gloves, ear muffs) should be used to protect the
worker from any residual risk. It is the least effective control measure as it relies on
the worker’s behaviour and therefore requires thorough training and a high level of
supervision to be effective.
In many cases a combination of control measures will be required to minimise the risks
to health and safety. For example traffic flow at a workplace may be controlled by
incorporating traffic islands (engineering) and erecting warning signs (administrative).
When considering which control measures to implement:
look specifically at identifying any risks that a competent builder or user would not
be expected to be aware of
consider where residual risks remain, and ensure these are communicated to the
builder and/or other people likely to exercise control in the next stages of the
lifecycle of the structure, for example clients and maintenance contractors
take a holistic view on the interaction of hazards in the assessment of their risks and
implementation of control measures
assess alternative control measures for their applicability.

3.4 Reviewing control measures

As the design progresses and design decisions become more fine-tuned and detailed, there
are still opportunities for either eliminating or minimising risks. At various points in the
design process, designers should review design solutions to confirm the effectiveness of risk
controls and if necessary, redesign to minimise the risks so far as is reasonably practicable.
Wherever possible, design safety reviews should involve the people who will eventually
construct the structure. If this is not possible, the client and designer should make
every effort to include people with knowledge and experience in the construction and
maintenance processes in the design safety reviews. Their expertise will assist in identifying
safety issues which may have been overlooked in the design.
Health and safety aspects of the design should be reflected in the requirements of contract
documents for the construction stage and assist in the selection of suitable and competent
contractors for the project.
POST-CONSTRUCTION REVIEW
On completion of construction, the effectiveness of safety in design should be evaluated.
This will enable identification of the most effective design practices and any design
innovations that could be used on other projects. The review may be carried out in a post-
construction workshop attended by all relevant parties involved in the project.
Subsequent feedback from users to assist designers in improving their future designs may
be provided through:
post occupancy evaluations for buildings

defect reports
accident investigation reports
information regarding modifications
user difficulties
deviations from intended conditions of use.

4. DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS
This Chapter provides examples of design options to control risks in various stages of
the lifecycle.
4.1 Design for safe construction

Control measures for risks relating to the construction of a structure include:
Providing adequate clearance between the structure and overhead electric lines by
burying, disconnecting or re-routing cables before construction begins, to avoid ‘contact’
when operating cranes and other tall equipment.
Designing components that can be pre-fabricated off-site or on the ground to avoid
assembling or erecting at heights and to reduce worker exposure to falls from heights or
being struck by falling objects, for example fixing windows in place at ground level prior
to erection of panels.
Designing parapets to a height that complies with guardrail requirements, eliminating the
need to construct guardrails during construction and future roof maintenance.
Using continual support beams for beam-to-column double connections, be it adding a
beam seat, extra bolt hole, or other redundant connection points during the connection
process. This will provide continual support for beams during erection – to eliminate falls
due to unexpected vibrations, misalignment and unexpected construction loads.
Designing and constructing permanent stairways to help prevent falls and other hazards
associated with temporary stairs and scaffolding, and schedule these at the beginning
of construction.
Reducing the space between roof trusses and battens to reduce the risk of internal falls
during roof construction.
Choosing construction materials that are safe to handle.
Limiting the size of pre-fabricated wall panels where site access is restricted.
Selecting paints or other finishes that emit low volatile organic compound emissions.
Indicating, where practicable, the position and height of all electric lines to assist with
site safety procedures.
4.2 Design to facilitate safe use

Consider the intended function of the structure, including the likely systems of use, and the
type of machinery and equipment that may be used.
Consider whether the structure may be exposed to specific hazards, such as manual tasks in
health facilities, occupational violence in banks or dangerous goods storage in warehouses.
Risks relating to the function of a structure can be controlled by:
Designing traffic areas to separate vehicles and pedestrians.

Using non-slip materials on floor surfaces in areas exposed to the weather or dedicated
wet areas.

Providing sufficient space to safely install, operate and maintain plant and machinery.
Providing adequate lighting for intended tasks in the structure.
Designing spaces which accommodate or incorporate mechanical devices to reduce
manual task risks.
Designing adequate access, for example, allowing wide enough corridors in hospitals and
nursing homes for the movement of wheelchairs and beds.
Designing effective noise barriers and acoustical treatments to walls and ceilings.
Specifying plant with low noise emissions or designing the structure to isolate
noisy plant.
Designing floor loadings to accommodate heavy machinery that may be used in the
building and clearly indicating on documents design loads for the different parts of
the structure.
4.3 Design for safe maintenance

Risks relating to cleaning, servicing and maintaining a structure can be controlled by:
Designing the structure so that maintenance can be performed at ground level or safely
from the structure, for example, positioning air-conditioning units and lift plant at ground
level, designing inward opening windows, integrating window cleaning bays or gangways
into the structural frame.
Designing features to avoid dirt traps
Designing and positioning permanent anchorage and hoisting points into structures
where maintenance needs to be undertaken at height.
Designing safe access, such as fixed ladders, and sufficient space to undertake structure
maintenance activities.
Eliminating or minimising the need for entry into confined spaces (refer to the Code of
Practice: Confined Spaces for further guidance)
Using durable materials that do not need to be re-coated or treated.
4.4 Modification
Design is not always focussed on the generation of an entirely new structure. It can involve
the alteration of an existing structure which may require demolition in part or whole.
Any modification of a structure requires reapplication of the processes detailed in the design
phases. Consultation with professional engineers or other experts may be necessary in
order to assess the impact of any proposed modifications or changes in design, for example
changes in the load spread across a building floor when heavy equipment is relocated,
modified or replaced.
This ensures that any new hazards and risks are identified and controlled, and that the safety
features already incorporated into the design are not affected. Additional design issues
identified in these phases should be passed back to the designer.

4.5 Demolition and dismantling

In relation to the proper demolition or disposal of a structure, designers also have a
Section 22
duty to:
carry out, or arrange the carrying out of, any calculations, analysis, testing or
examination that may be necessary for the structure to be without risks to health
and safety, and
provide adequate information to each person who is provided with the design
concerning any conditions necessary to ensure that the structure is without risks
to health and safety.
This is particularly important with modern designs where ‘limit state’ design techniques
are used by the structure designer. In this system, the designer considers the structure in
its completed form with all the structural components, including bracing, installed. The
completed structure can withstand much higher loads (for example, wind and other live
loads) than when the structure is in the construction or demolition stage.
A structure should be designed to enable demolition using existing techniques. The designer
should provide information so that potential demolishers can understand the structure, load
paths and any features incorporated to assist demolition, as well as any features that require
unusual demolition techniques or sequencing.
Designers of new structures are well placed to influence the ultimate demolition of a
structure by designing-in facilities such as lifting lugs on beams or columns and protecting
inserts in pre-cast panels so that they may be utilised for disassembly. Materials and finishes
specified for the original structure may require special attention at the time of demolition
and any special requirements for the disposal and/or recycling of those materials or finishes
should be advised to the client through the risk assessment documentation.
Further guidance on the demolition of buildings and structures can be found in the
Code of Practice: Demolition Work.

APPENDIX A – ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES
Some design tasks, although related, may be controlled by different parties due to contractual arrangements.
For a traditional project delivery model — where the client directly engages a designer to undertake detailed
design — the project safety decisions during the design stage are the result of collaboration between the
designer and the client. However, in a design and construct or a collaborative project delivery model, the
primary collaboration will be between the constructor and the client, with participation of the designer
subject to the terms of their engagement.
Figures 2A-E show some of the often complex arrangements established for construction projects, and how
the parties can consult, co-operate and co-ordinate with each other in relation to safe design.
Note: A construction project is a project where the cost of the construction work is $250 000 or more. There can only be one principal
contractor for a construction project. The client may appoint the Construction Manager or one of the contractors as the Principal
Contractor depending on who will have management and control of the workplace.
FIGURE 2A – This model represents design and build arrangements where all parties are contractually
bound
A person who commissions

CLIENT construction work must
consult with the designer.
The person who commissions
work must also pass on to
the constructor information
provided by the designer.
An entity bound by design

and build contractual
DESIGN-BUILD arrangements for a
ENTITY construction project may be
appointed as a principal
contractor
DESIGNER A team contractually bound

CONSTRUCTOR
to deliver a building or
structure to the client has a
greater opportunity to
ensure that consultation
takes place more frequently
and effectively during the
design stage and in
construction.
DESIGN – BUILD TEAM
Contracted responsibilities
Consultation, co-operation and co-ordination duties

FIGURE 2B – This model may apply where design and construction are carried out separately, for
example when a client is seeking to finance construction at a later date
In design-build models,
DESIGNER
contractual arrangements may
limit the ability of the designer
to communicate directly with
the constructor. The designer
must ensure that a safety report
is provided to the client. The
CLIENT client must provide that
information to the constructor.
TENDER PROCESS
CONSTRUCTOR or Where there is no contractual
Principal Contractor arrangement between the
constructor and the designer, the
constructor should ensure that
the client is informed of any new
The tender process provides an hazards identified in the course
opportunity to inform potential of construction. Constructors
constructors of hazards identified amending the design will assume
by the designer. the designers duty.
FIGURE 2C – This model may apply where the design and construction activities are integrated such as
a domestic residence or apartment complex
Clients must consult with the

CLIENT designer and inform the
constructor of the designers’
recommendations regarding
risk control.
DESIGNER CONSTRUCTOR
(Principal Contractor)
Designers have a duty to report to Constructors must inform the

the client any hazards identified in designer of any new hazards
the course of designing a building identified in the course
or structure and that have not been constructing a building.
eliminated or minimised.

FIGURE 2D – This model may apply to a complex construction project such as a hospital or airport
terminal where specialist contractors carry out large parts of the project
CLIENT
Principal contractor may have

PRINCIPAL CONSTRUCTION no contractual obligation to
DESIGNER MANAGER the designer but where the
actions of each party may
affect health and safety they
CONTRACTOR must consult, co-operate and
co-ordinate activities with
each other so far as is
CONTRACTOR reasonably practicable.
DESIGN
CONSULTANTS
FIGURE 2E – This model may apply to large construction projects where the management role is carried
out by a specialist construction manager
Each party must consult,

CLIENT co-operate and
co-ordinate activities with
each other so far as is
reasonably practicable to
ensure safety in design.
DESIGNER CONSTRUCTION Sub-contractors may only

MANAGER have contractual obligations
to the construction
manager but as PCBU’s they
also have duties to ensure
that their activities do not
affect the health and safety
of workers and others.
MULTIPLE SUB-CONTRACTORS

APPENDIX B – SAFETY IN DESIGN CHECKLIST
The following list may be used to assist in identifying hazards and controlling risks associated with
the design of a structure throughout its lifecycle.
ELECTRICAL SAFETY
Earthing of electrical installations
Location of underground and overhead power cables
Protection of leads/cables
Number and location of power points
FIRE AND EMERGENCIES

Fire risks
Fire detection and fire fighting
Emergency routes and exits
Access for and structural capacity to carry fire tenders
Other emergency facilities
MOVEMENT OF PEOPLE AND MATERIALS

Safe access and egress, including for people with disability
Traffic management
Loading bays and ramps
Safe crossings
Exclusion zones
Site security
WORKING ENVIRONMENT
Ventilation for thermal comfort and general air quality and specific ventilation requirements for
the work to be performed on the premises
Temperature
Lighting including that of plant rooms
Acoustic properties and noise control, for example, noise isolation, insulation and absorption
Seating
Floor surfaces to prevent slips and trips
Space for occupants
PLANT
Tower crane locations, loading and unloading
Mobile crane loads on slabs
Plant and machinery installed in a building or structure
Materials handling plant and equipment
Maintenance access to plant and equipment
The guarding of plant and machinery
Lift installations
AMENITIES AND FACILITIES

Access to various amenities and facilities such as storage, first aid rooms/sick rooms, rest
rooms, meal and accommodation areas and drinking water

APPENDIX B – SAFETY IN DESIGN CHECKLIST
EARTHWORKS
Excavations (for example, risks from earth collapsing or engulfment)
Location of underground services
STRUCTURAL SAFETY
Erection of steelwork or concrete frameworks
Load bearing requirements
Stability and integrity of the structure
MANUAL TASKS
Methods of material handling
Accessibility of material handling
Loading docks and storage facilities
Workplace space and layout to prevent musculoskeletal disorders, including facilitating use of
mechanical aids
Assembly and disassembly of pre-fabricated fixtures and fittings
SUBSTANCES
Exposure to hazardous substances and materials including insulation and decorative materials
Exposure to volatile organic compounds and off gassing through the use of composite wood
products or paints
Exposure to irritant dust and fumes
Storage and use of hazardous chemicals, including cleaning products
FALLS PREVENTION
Guard rails
Window heights and cleaning
Anchorage points for building maintenance and cleaning
Access to working spaces for construction, cleaning, maintenance and repairs
Scaffolding
Temporary work platforms
Roofing materials and surface characteristics such as fragility, slip resistance and pitch
SPECIFIC RISKS
Exposure to radiation, for example, electromagnetic radiation
Exposure to biological hazards
Fatigue
Working alone
Use of explosives
Confined spaces
Over and under water work, including diving and work in caissons with compressed air supply
NOISE EXPOSURE
Exposure to noise from plant or from surrounding area

APPENDIX C – CASE STUDIES
EXAMPLE 1: INCORPORATING SAFETY IN DESIGN AT THE ALICE SPRINGS

TO DARWIN RAIL LINK
This was a Build, Own, Operate and Transfer (BOOT) project to construct a railway from Alice Springs to
Darwin and take over an existing railway from Tarcoola to Alice Springs. It was a design and construct
contract. A design working group was developed by the client, and included representatives of the client,
state and territory governments and other external stakeholders.
Weekly meetings were held during the design stage to ensure that the design was both practical and safe
to build and operate. An independent reviewer was engaged by the client to audit and certify all work
performed by the design working group.
Monthly design reports were required, documenting (among other things) the safety aspects of the
design. Members of the design working group were located on-site during the construction work and
were able to be directly involved. All subcontractors were required to submit a safety plan describing how
they would manage safety in the project. These plans were reviewed by the client, with input from the
design and construct team.
EXAMPLE 2: CONSTRUCTION HAZARD ASSESSMENT IMPLICATION REVIEW

A company managing a multi-million dollar construction project made design changes to improve safety
after conducting a risk assessment using the CHAIR (Construction Hazard Assessment Implication
Review). They included:
corridors widened for safer access for movement of goods and people during construction which in
turn aided the end users of the building
standard doors enlarged by 25 per cent to improve access for equipment
lighting repositioned to allow for easier/safer maintenance access
windows changed to a ‘flip over’ style for cleaning from within the building
air conditioners moved to ground level, with the ducts remaining in the originally planned position.
EXAMPLE 3: LIGHTWEIGHT AIR DISTRIBUTION DUCTWORK

The use of pre-insulated ductwork in a large nursing home project has assisted in the labour intensive
installation process that took place in the congested roof spaces and ceiling cavities. The lightweight
ductwork was only 15% of the weight of traditional sheet metal ductwork and could be easily handled by
a single worker without the need for mechanical lifting equipment.
As the material was already insulated there was no need to for the ductwork to be lagged, as would have
been the case with metal ductwork, resulting in a considerable saving in time and in the need for workers
to manipulate mineral fibre insulation in already congested spaces.
Eliminating the need for mineral fibre insulation also eliminated the possible introduction of fibres into the
ducting system should there be a leakage in a joint. This also means that the ductwork could be located
some 200mm higher in a false ceiling.
The reduced time taken in installation meant that fewer workers were required on-site and that they
worked at height for a minimum amount of time.
EXAMPLE 4: USE OF 3 DIMENSIONAL (3D) MODELLING AS A TOOL FOR DESIGNERS

A building designer had traditionally used sketches and 2D drawings in early project discussions with
clients. Not all clients could appreciate the three dimensional implications from 2D drawings and fewer
could afford the expense of scale models.
With the advent of downloadable 3D modelling software it became possible (and feasible) to provide the
client with a fully rendered, coloured, and three dimensional representation of their project. Capable of
being submitted electronically, the file allows the client to view the proposal from any direction.

APPENDIX C – CASE STUDIES
This software also allowed the designer to work with the client to explain the construction process as well
as identifying safety issues such as excavations, work at heights and traffic movements that could be
resolved by adjusting the design. The designers’ clients are also better informed so that they can consider
the use of the building after construction is completed and to make any adjustments to the design at the
earliest possible stage.
EXAMPLE 5: PRE-ASSEMBLY OF STAIR FRAMES

An analysis of an early design for the steel framing for a multi-level stairway in a high rise car park
revealed that the original design would not allow the framework to be pre-assembled and would require
the framework to be assembled in small pieces while working at height. The original design called for a
beam running the full width of the stairway at each landing and this prevented the structure from being
pre-assembled.
The designer reviewed the original design in consultation with the steelwork fabricator and determined
that by splitting the original tie-beam and replacing it with smaller beams tied via fin plates, that the
stair flights could be pre-assembled at ground level and lifted into place as a whole including decks, stair
treads and handrails. This small modification greatly reduced the amount of time spent by the framework
erector at height and provided a greater level of safety for workers as the framework installation
proceeded.
EXAMPLE 6: DESIGN CHANGES TO REDUCE RISK FOR CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE

In a design and construct project in Melbourne, the design process identified a number of risks relating to
the ongoing maintenance of the building under construction. As a result, design changes were made.
The building consisted of a glazed sawtooth roof with suspended lighting. Inside was a fully glazed atrium
covering all nine floors. In the initial design, there had been some consideration given to the maintenance
of all the glazing components and access to services installed on the roof. In the original design,
protection from falling during maintenance work consisted of a railing with rope access. The design team
deemed this to be unsuitable and designers investigated ways in which maintenance work could be
performed more safely.
The final design included a purpose-designed gantry to be installed across the atrium. On top of the
gantry was a safe working platform. The platform was installed on hydraulic lifts enabling safe access
to the services located high in the ceiling space. When the platform was not in use it was retracted and
positioned on top of the gantry. Another moveable working platform was suspended under the gantry,
allowing access to the glazed atrium below. Not only did this arrangement provide a safe environment
for routine maintenance, but the gantry, which was erected early in the construction process, was also
used for access during the construction of the atrium and roofing. The gantry design also contributed
to substantial cost savings and improved constructability of the atrium and roof, thus reducing
construction time.

THIS CODE OF PRACTICE PROVIDES
PRACTICAL GUIDANCE ON THE
SAFE DESIGN OF BUILDINGS AND
OTHER TYPES OF STRUCTURES
THAT ARE USED AS WORKPLACES.
REF: ASI TN005 Version 3
ASI Head Office

Level 13, 99 Mount Street
North Sydney NSW 2060
Tel: 02 9931 6666
Email: enquiries@steel.org.au
Author: T J HOGAN
(ABN)/ACN (94) 000973 839
www.steel.org.au
Date: February 2012 Page 1 of 7
ASI TECHNICAL NOTE TN005 V3
GUIDELINES FOR DESIGNING TO AS 4100 WHEN

IMPORTED MATERIALS ARE INVOLVED
INTRODUCTION
The goal of the Building Code of Australia (BCA) is to achieve and maintain minimum standards
of structural safety, health, fire safety, amenity and sustainability for the benefit of the Australian
community now and in the future. The BCA sets out the technical requirements for building
design professionals to meet in order to achieve these goals.
The BCA calls up AS 4100 “Steel Structures” as the only complying standard for the design of
structural steel in buildings in Section B Part B1 of the BCA. No other Australian or overseas
standard is specified for this purpose. The guidelines in this Technical Note are intended to
allow structural engineers to assess the risks and a method of proceeding when designing
structural steel members and connections in accordance with AS 4100 where imported
materials are involved.
BACKGROUND TO AS 4100 PROVISIONS ON MATERIALS
Clause C2.2 of the Commentary to AS 4100 (AS 4100 Supplement 1—1999) states:
‘C2.2 STRUCTURAL STEEL
The Standard has been written around the range of structural steels manufactured in
Australia to the Australian Standards quoted in Clause 2.2.1. The Standards quoted are
product type Standards.’
Therefore, the assumption central to AS 4100 is that all steel is manufactured in accordance
with the Standards quoted in Clause 2.2.1 of AS 4100 in all respects. That is what a test
certificate from a steel manufacturer is intended to warrant when it is supplied. AS 4100 relies
on guaranteed values of chemical composition, mechanical properties, dimensional tolerances
and methods of manufacture as specified in the nominated standards AS/NZS 1163,
AS/NZS 1594, AS/NZS 3678, AS/NZS 3679.1, AS/NZS 3679.2 and AS 3597.
The member design Sections (5, 6, 7, 8) of AS 4100 use general expressions for steel member
capacity applicable over a wide range of steels, provided that the yield stress used in design
does not exceed the value of 690 MPa nominated in Clause 1.1.1(b) of AS 4100. The design
provisions in these Sections were developed for the known properties and behaviour of
Australian steels which comply with the above Standards.
The capacity factors nominated in Table 3.4 of AS 4100 were derived using statistical analysis
of results from steel testing of material complying with the Standards listed in Clause 2.2.1 of
AS 4100 using the normal distribution curves obtained from the manufacturers as at the date of
preparation of AS 4100. References cited in the Commentary to AS 4100 describe in detail how
the capacity factors were derived for different member types and design actions. The capacity
factors are related to the design expressions used in AS 4100 for the various nominal design
capacities. The Commentary to AS 4100 advises that (see C3.4 on page 13 of AS 4100
Supplement 1—1999):
DISCLAIMER: The Australian Steel Institute Limited shall not be liable or responsible in any way whatsoever and expressly
disclaims any liability or responsibility for any loss or damage, claim, proceedings costs or expenses howsoever incurred by any
person whether the client or any third party and whether accruing under statute or in negligence, contract or otherwise at common
law, including but without in any way limited to any loss or damage, claim proceedings costs or expenses incurred as a result of or in
connection with the reliance whether whole or partial by any person as aforesaid upon any part of the contents of this advice.
ASI TECHNICAL NOTE REF: ASI TN005 Version 3 Page 2 of 7
“The capacity factor takes the following into account:

(i) The probability of understrength members or connections due to variations in
material strength, material properties, sizes of members and connection elements,
and homogeneity.
(ii) The differences between the strengths in tests of isolated members, connections, or
test pieces and the strength of the member in the structure.
(iii) The inaccuracies in the design equations related to member or connection design
and inadequacies in our understanding of member and connection behaviour.
(iv) The degree of ductility and reliability required of the member or connection element
under the action effects being considered.
(v) The accidental eccentricities in columns, beams and connections.
The Standard is arranged on the basis of member-by-member or connection element
design. The design clauses for each member or connection element are formulated to
give the best possible estimates of the nominal capacity of the member or connection
element taking into account the conflicting requirements of accuracy and simplicity.
The capacity factors were derived by a process called ‘code calibration’ through the use
of a ‘safety index’. The safety index is a convenient measure of the notional safety taking
into account the variabilities of the loads and the structural capacities. From a
consideration of the values of safety indices for past successful designs to earlier Codes,
values of target safety indices were chosen for the Standard. The capacity factors were
then selected so that for designs to be standard, the associated safety indices are close
to the chosen target values.”
It is essential to understand that the quality of the steel and its guaranteed mechanical
properties and the distribution of those properties over a period of time are the basis on which
the capacity factors of AS 4100 have been derived. Steels not complying with the Standards
listed in AS 4100 may not have the same distribution of mechanical properties as those steels
which do comply and hence may require the use of different capacity factors to those listed in
Table 3.4 of AS 4100. The capacity factors are also related to the fabrication and erection
tolerances in Sections 14 and 15 of AS 4100.
Likewise, Section 9 of AS 4100 dealing with design of connection elements such as bolts, welds
and connection components is based on design expressions and capacity factors that are
directly related to the bolt / nut / washer standards specified in Clause 2.3.1 of AS 4100 and the
welding consumables / deposited weld metals specified in AS/NZS 1554. The relevant capacity
factors for bolts and welds were also derived using a statistical analysis of test results obtained
from complying bolt material and welding consumables, used with steels that comply with the
Australian Standards listed in Clause 2.2.1 of AS 4100.
There is also the question of weldability and brittle fracture to consider. If the steel does not
comply with a Standard nominated in AS/NZS 1554, which is specified in AS 4100 as the
relevant welding Standard, then Clause 2.1 of AS/NZS 1554.1 specifically requires that either:
1. testing of the material to determine compliance with any of the grade types in the
Standards nominated ….. has been carried out to the satisfaction of the Principal;
2. a comparison of supplied test certificates with the requirements of any of the grade types
in the Standards nominated ..... has been performed to the satisfaction of the Principal.
Since AS 4100 calls up AS/NZS 1554 as the suite of welding standards which must be met, this
means than any evaluation of the steel must consider the chemical properties in order that the
steel may be assigned the correct weld group number for use with AS/NZS 1554 in selecting
welding consumables and for use with Section 10 of AS 4100.
When either steel materials or welding consumables are not in conformity with the nominated
Australian Standards, prequalification of welding consumables is not possible and special
welding qualification tests are required to be undertaken using the methods specified in
AS/NZS 1554.
In summary, AS 4100 relies on guaranteed values for chemical composition, mechanical

properties, tolerances on dimensions, method of manufacture and quality control provisions for
all material used in a steel structure designed to AS 4100. There is a statistical relationship
between the capacity factors used to determine design capacities and the test data reflected in
the Australian Standards nominated in AS 4100, Section 2 and the AS/NZS 1554 suite of
welding standards.
Although many of the design rules are similar to those in equivalent codes in other countries,
the capacity factors are directly related to Australian steels produced to the Standards quoted in
Clause 2.2.1 of AS 4100, as are other design provisions such as weldability (AS/NZS 1554),
brittle fracture (Section 10 of AS 4100 and AS/NZS 1554), behaviour in fire (Section 12 of
AS 4100) and behaviour under seismic loading (Section 13 of AS 4100).
ACCEPTANCE OF STEEL IN AS 4100
Clause 2.2.2 of the 1990 and 1998 editions of AS 4100 states that “Certified mill test reports, or
test certificates issued by the mill, shall constitute sufficient evidence of compliance with the
Standards referred to in this Standard”. Hence, such certificates should be sought when seeking
to obtain evidence of compliance.
AS/NZS 1163, AS/NZS 3678, AS/NZS 3679.1 and AS/NZS 3679.2 all now have enhanced
requirements for certificates which can be summarised as follows:
—written in English alphanumeric characters

—issued by the steel manufacturer
—contain the manufacturers and suppliers and testing authority names
—test certificate number and date
—product testing specification and grade of steel (e.g. AS/NZS 3679.1, 300 Grade)
—product designation and all relevant dimensions
—product steelmaking process (e.g. Basic Oxygen—Slab cast)
—length, bundle, pack or unique identifier to which test certificate applies
—heat number (from casting)
—mechanical properties from tensile tests (all values cited in AS or AS/NZS Standard)
—whether each measured mechanical property complies with Australian Standard
—chemical analysis results and type of analysis undertaken (e.g. cast analysis L or P)
Clause 2.2.2 of AS 4100 was amended in the 2012 Amendment to align better with the
requirements of the material standards listed above so that it now requires the following:
“Test reports or test certificates that comply with the minimum requirements of the
appropriate Standard listed in Clause 2.2.1 shall constitute sufficient evidence of
compliance of the steel with the Standards listed in Clause 2.2.1. The test reports or test
certificates shall be provided by the manufacturer or an independent laboratory accredited
by signatories to the International Laboratory Accreditation Corporation (Mutual
Recognition Arrangement) (ILAC (MRA)) or the Asia Pacific Laboratory Accreditation
Cooperation (APLAC) on behalf of the manufacturer. In the event of a dispute as to the
compliance of the steel with any of the Standards listed in Clause 2.2.1, the reference
testing shall be carried out by independent laboratories accredited by signatories to ILAC
(MRA) or APLAC.”
Note that test reports or test certificates must be related to a specific heat number which in turn
must be able to be related to a specific product. Such test reports/certificates cannot be used to
change the grade of the steel—only the steel manufacturer can decide the grade of steel, as all
grades of steel will have a normal distribution of test results and a single test result is simply
one result in many thousands that make up the distribution.
The steel grade used in design must be the grade shown on the test report or test certificate.
The design engineer needs to be satisfied as to the veracity of the information received and
may consider it necessary to contact the certifying organisation to check the veracity if in any
doubt.
IMPORTED MATERIAL
Imported material may be either:
(a) material manufactured overseas and claiming to comply with one of the Australian
Standards cited in Clause 2.2.1 of AS 4100;
(b) material manufactured overseas and claiming to comply with one or more overseas
standard(s).
For type (a) material, Clause 2.2.2 of AS 4100 applies and a certificate complying with the
nominated standard should be available in order to indicate full compliance. The remainder of
this Technical Note deals with type (b) material.
IMPORTED MATERIAL NOT COMPLYING WITH AUSTRALIAN STANDARDS
For material (steel sections, steel plate, bolts, welding consumables) not manufactured in
Australia to Australian Standards specified in Section 2 of AS 4100, Clause 1.5.1 of AS 4100
provides a method whereby such material may be used as “new material”. The Commentary to
this Clause (Cl.5) in AS 4100 Supplement 1—1999 advised as follows:
“Standards Australia Committee BD/1, Steel Structures, is responsible for the Standard
and is available to offer opinions on new materials or methods. It is usually necessary to
seek approval from the appropriate building authority for the use of new materials or
methods.”
Consequently, although Standards Australia may consider offering an opinion on a new material
(a process likely to be very lengthy), approval from the “appropriate building authority” is also
required.
The “appropriate building authority” in most States will be the nominated Building Certifier
(private or government) who will have some difficulty given that he must be satisfied that any
building must comply with the Building Code of Australia which nominates AS 4100 as the
relevant design / fabrication / erection standard for steel buildings in Australia. Since the
Building Certifier is unlikely to be fully au fait with the background to the AS 4100 provisions,
convincing a Building Certifier in respect of imported materials different to those specified in
Clause 2.2 of AS 4100 could be an arduous or torturous process.
The easiest way out of the difficulty of using imported material would be to design to AS 4100
and seek to ensure that the imported materials used in the design process do comply with the
Standards nominated in Section 2 of AS 4100. This can be achieved by one of the following
processes for the structural steel:
(1) obtain sufficient statistical data on the chemical and mechanical properties of the
imported steels so that they can be assigned to one of the grades for the steels cited in
Clause 2.2 of AS 4100. The logical source of data is the manufacturer but the data must
be verified by way of an audit process. The volume of data required and the need to verify
it may mitigate against the practical use of this method but may be warranted if significant
quantities of material are involved over a period of time. Single test results are not
sufficient.
OR
(2) obtain test certificates from the mill certifying that the steel intended to be used or being
supplied complies with all requirements of the relevant Standard, either AS/NZS 1163,
AS/NZS 1594, AS/NZS 3678, AS/NZS 3679.1, AS/NZS 3679.2 or AS 3597. Fully
compliant test certificates should be provided which meet the requirements of
Clause 2.2.2 of AS 4100 (2012 amendment).
The imported material should comply with all the requirements of the relevant Australian
Standards in Clause 2.2 of AS 4100. The importer of the steel should be able to supply
this information from the manufacturer or should supply independent verification of the
information from an independent laboratory accredited by ILAC or APLAC in accordance
with Clause 2.2.2. If not available, independent verification must be carried out. It should
be noted that the quality and reliability of the original documentation will vary according to
source and country of origin and the design engineer needs to be satisfied as to the
veracity of the information received and may consider it necessary to contact the
certifying organisation to check the veracity if in any doubt. If no independent verification
is available, then independent testing as in item (3) below should be sought.
The latest editions of AS/NZS 1163, AS/NZS 3678, AS/NZS 3679.1 and AS NZS 3679.2
all require ILAC (MRA) accredited laboratory certification to demonstrate compliance. This
may be supplied by the manufacturer’s own laboratory (if so accredited) or by an
independent accredited laboratory. It would be consistent with this requirement for design
engineers to request the same independent testing for imported material. In the United
States and Canada, structural engineers are encouraged not to accept any imported steel
for structural purposes without independent laboratory certification to their relevant
standards.
OR
(3) have sufficient tests done by an independent ILAC or APLAC accredited laboratory (all
Australian NATA laboratories are ILAC accredited) under Clause 2.2.2 and obtain
certification from the accredited laboratory to enable the steel to be fitted into a grade in
the relevant Standard in terms of all parameters in the Standards. The independent
accredited laboratory should also assess the chemical composition so as to enable the
steel to be allocated a weld group number in terms of AS/NZS 1554 (weldability) and
Section 10 of AS 4100 (brittle fracture)
OR
(4) treat the steel as unidentified steel. As the Commentary to AS 4100 (AS 4100
Supplement 1—1999) notes:
“It is preferable that any unidentified steel should be tested in accordance with AS 1391,
but if this is not possible, the Standard requires the severe assumption that a design yield
stress not exceeding 170 MPa and a design tensile strength not exceeding 300 MPa be
used, as appropriate. Most steels will have a yield stress and tensile strength in excess of
these and testing may give a more economic result.”
It should be noted that this fourth approach is not going to be economic for realistic
scenarios. Also note that this option does not address the issues of the weldability of the
steel or the possibility of brittle fracture occurring.
Another option would be to use a reduced capacity factor for the imported steel material. An
arbitrary value should not be selected but rather it is necessary to obtain sufficient statistical
data on the mechanical properties and their normal distribution just as was done for the
materials listed in Section 2 of AS 4100. It is then necessary to carry out sufficient statistical
studies on the available data to derive new capacity factors, yield stress and tensile strength
using the approaches detailed in the references to the Commentary to AS 4100. Chemical
composition will also have to be assessed to allow assignment to a weld group in AS/NZS 1554
and Section 10 of AS 4100. This process would be very lengthy, thus mitigating against its use
also. The logical source of data required is the manufacturer but the data must be verified by
way of an audit process.
For bolts, options (2) or (3) are the feasible options. The bolt standards specified in Clause
2.3.1 of AS 4100 specify the requirements that must be met and also specify a number of
related standards that must be complied with. All requirements of all cited standards need to be
complied with including product chemistry, mechanical properties, thread dimensions and
properties, methods of manufacture, tolerances, dimensions. The extent of testing should
comply with the requirements of the Standards. The certificates supplied should comply with
Clause 2.3.1 of AS 4100 (2012 amendment), and cover all the items listed in the Appendix to
ASI Technical Note TN001 Version 3.
For welding consumables, options (2) or (3) are feasible. AS/NZS 1554 suite of welding
standards specifies a number of ancillary standards for welding consumables which must be
complied with and these ancillary standards specify the extent of testing that must be carried
out in order to ensure compliance. Welding procedure qualification of steel material,
consumables, joint preparation and welding parameters should be in accordance with
AS/NZS 1554. Note that prequalified consumables in AS/NZS 1554 are all related to material to
Australian Standards.
Conformity assessment by the manufacturer of the imported material under options (2) and (3)
should be carried out under a recognised scheme meeting ISO/IEC Guide 28 “Conformity
Assessment—Guidance on a Third Party Certification Scheme for Products” and should include
details of auditing carried out. (Note: this ISO/IEC Guide has been issued as Australian
Standard HB 18.28). The information should include all test / quality control checks carried out
to ensure conformity and should contain sufficient information to allow traceability.
The organisation providing the certification should comply with ISO/IEC Guide 65 “General
Requirements for Bodies Operating Product Certification Schemes”, issued as Australian
Standard HB 18.65.
IMPORTED FABRICATED STEEL
The above discussion relates to imported material that is fabricated in Australia. When imported
fabricated steelwork is used in an Australian project, another layer of complexity and
documentation is introduced.
The imported material must be supported by the same level of documentation that is indicated
earlier in this Technical Note, but the material in each fabricated item must be traceable back to
the original documentation. This usually cannot be done by the markings on the fabricated
sections as any initially present may be lost in the fabrication process as members and
components are cut from raw material supplied. The overseas fabricator needs a quality system
in place which identifies which piece of documentation relates to each fabricated piece.
Traceability becomes a major issue.
Additionally, fabrication tolerances in AS 4100 have been considered when formulating the
expressions for nominal design capacity, particularly those for straightness of flexural and
compression members. Just the same as fabrication tolerances need to be checked for steel
fabricated in Australia, any imported fabricated steelwork needs to have documentation to the
effect that the fabrication complies with AS 4100 requirements or the fabricated steelwork will
have to be measured and checked when landed in Australia.
Documentation on the welding carried out during fabrication also needs to be available, and
should state that the welding has been carried out and inspected in accordance with the
requirements of AS/NZS 1554 suite of welding standards.
Compliance issues relating to fabricated steel are discussed in detail in ASI Technical Note
TN007 “Compliance issues and steel structures”.
CONCLUSION
There is thus no bar to the use of steel not manufactured in Australia for the design of steel
members using AS 4100 if any one of the four paths identified in this Technical Note are
followed. In terms of design using the provisions of AS 4100, all Australian Standards
nominated in Section 2 of AS 4100 must be complied with for the reasons given earlier.
Compliance with another material Standard or Specification is not acceptable nor relevant.
Imported materials must be rigorously tested, either by the manufacturer / supplier or by
independent organisations, to ensure compliance with the Australian Standards nominated in
Section 2 of AS 4100. Then, certificates of compliance with these Standards can be issued and
design to AS 4100 can be carried out.
The onus is on the responsible design entity to ensure that all requirements of AS 4100 and
standards referenced in AS 4100 are complied with. The responsible design entity can then
issue a Certificate stating that design conforms to AS 4100 to the Building Certifier.
REFERENCES
Standards Australia, AS 4100, “Steel structures” (1998 edition and 2012 amendment).
Standards Australia, AS 4100 Supplement 1—1999, “Steel structures—Commentary”.
Standards Australia/Standards New Zealand, AS/NZS 1163—2009, “Cold formed structural
steel hollow sections”.
Standards Australia/Standards New Zealand, AS/NZS 1554, “Structural steel welding” Part 1:
“Welding of steel structures”, Part 4 “Welding of high strength quenched and tempered steels”,
Part 5: “Welding of steel structures subject to high levels of fatigue loading”.
Standards Australia/Standards New Zealand, AS/NZS 3678—2011, “Hot rolled steel flat
products”.
Standards Australia/Standards New Zealand, AS/NZS 3679.1—2010, “Structural steel, Part 1:
Hot rolled bars and sections”.
Standards Australia/Standards New Zealand, AS/NZS 3679.2—2010, “Structural steel, Part 2:
Welded I sections”.
ASI Head Office

Tel: 02 9931 6666
Author: T J HOGAN
(ABN)/ACN (94) 000973 839
www.steel.org.au
Date: February 2012 Page 1 of 6
COMPLIANCE ISSUES AND STEEL STRUCTURES

INTRODUCTION
Compliance requires being in accordance with specified rules, specifications, policies,
standards or laws.
Compliance for steel structures involves three stages:
(a) Compliance with the Building Code of Australia;
(b) Compliance with the design provisions of AS 4100 ‘Steel structures’;
(c) Compliance with the construction provisions of AS 4100.
This Technical Note outlines the requirements involved in ensuring compliance for all three
stages.
COMPLIANCE WITH THE BUILDING CODE OF AUSTRALIA (BCA)
The goal of the Building Code of Australia (BCA) is to achieve and maintain minimum standards
of structural safety, health, fire safety, amenity and sustainability for the benefit of the
Australian community now and in the future. The BCA sets out the technical requirements for
building design professionals to meet in order to achieve these goals.
The BCA calls up AS 4100 ‘Steel Structures’ as a complying standard for the design of
structural steel in buildings in Section B Part B1 of the BCA. No other Australian or overseas
Standard is specified for this purpose. Hence, for steel structures, compliance with the BCA
requires compliance with AS 4100 ‘Steel structures’.
COMPLIANCE WITH AS 4100 AT THE DESIGN STAGE
Structural engineers are often required to issue a certificate indicating that a particular design
complies with AS 4100 and therefore complies with the Building Code of Australia. The form of
this certificate may be dictated by the Principal Certifying Authority or may be of a form that is
decided by the structural engineer.
In issuing such a certificate, the structural engineer is warranting that the design complies in all
respects with Sections 1 to 13 inclusive (as applicable) of AS 4100. This includes the fact that
the materials on which the design is based comply with AS 4100.
In respect of materials, AS 4100 Section 2 specifies the materials which form part of the
provisions of AS 4100. All materials nominated are covered by Standards, either Australian
(AS prefix) or joint Australia/New Zealand (AS/NZS prefix).
The material Standards nominated in Section 2 of AS 4100 are as follows:
AS/NZS 1163 Structural steel hollow sections
AS/NZS 1594 Hot rolled steel flat products
AS/NZS 3678 Structural steel—Hot rolled plates, floorplates and slabs
AS/NZS 3679.1 Structural steel, Part 1: Hot rolled bars and sections
AS/NZS 3679.2 Structural steel, Part 2: Welded I sections
AS 1110 (series) ISO metric hexagon bolts and screws—Product grades A and B
AS 1111 (series) ISO metric hexagon bolts and screws—Product grade C
AS 1112 (series) ISO metric hexagon nuts
AS/NZS 1252 High strength steel bolts with associated nuts and washers for structural
engineering
All welding electrodes and deposited weld are required to comply with the AS/NZS 1554 suite
‘Structural steel welding’ Parts 1, 2, 4 and 5.
Clause C2.2 of the Commentary to AS 4100 (AS 4100 Supplement 1—1999) states:
‘C2.2 STRUCTURAL STEEL
The Standard has been written around the range of structural steels manufactured in
Australia to the Australian Standards quoted in Clause 2.2.1. The Standards quoted are
product type Standards.’
Therefore, the assumption central to AS 4100 is that all steel is manufactured in accordance
with the Standards quoted in Clause 2.2.1 of AS 4100 in all respects. AS 4100 relies on
guaranteed values of chemical composition, mechanical properties, dimensional tolerances and
methods of manufacture as specified in the above Standards.
The member design sections (5, 6, 7, 8) of AS 4100 use general expressions for steel member
design capacity applicable over the range of steels nominated in Clause 2.2.1 of AS 4100,
provided that the yield stress used in design does not exceed the value of 690 MPa nominated
in Clause 1.1.1(b) of AS 4100. The design provisions were developed for the known properties
and behaviour of Australian steels which comply with the above Standards.
The capacity factors nominated in Clause 3.4 of AS 4100 were derived using statistical analysis
of results from steel testing of material complying with the Standards listed in Clause 2.2.1 of
AS 4100 using the normal distribution curves obtained from the manufacturers as at the date of
the original preparation of AS 4100. References cited in the Commentary to AS 4100 describe
in detail how the capacity factors were derived for different member types and design actions.
The capacity factors are related to the design expressions used in AS 4100 for the various
nominal design capacities.
It is essential to understand that the quality of the steel and its guaranteed mechanical
properties and the distribution of those properties over a period of time are the basis on which
the capacity factors of AS 4100 have been derived. Steels not complying with the Standards
listed in AS 4100 may not have the same distribution of mechanical properties as those steels
which do comply and hence may require the use of different capacity factors to those listed in
Table 3.4 of AS 4100.
Likewise, Section 9 of AS 4100 dealing with design of connection elements such as bolts,
welds and connection components is based on design expressions and capacity factors that
are directly related to the bolt/nut/washer standards specified in Clause 2.3.1 of AS 4100 and
the welding consumables/deposited weld metals specified in AS/NZS 1554. The relevant
capacity factors for bolts and welds were also derived using a statistical analysis of test results
obtained from complying bolt material and welding consumables, used with steels that comply
with the Australian Standards listed in Clause 2.2.1 of AS 4100.
In summary, AS 4100 design provisions are specifically related to materials that comply with
the Standards listed in Section 2 of AS 4100. The onus is on the responsible design entity to
ensure that all requirements of AS 4100 and standards referenced in AS 4100 are complied
with. The responsible design entity is only then in a position to issue a certificate stating that
design conforms to AS 4100 to the Principal Certifying Authority.
Since there are currently imported steels also being used in Australia, guidance on how design
using such steels may be undertaken using the provisions of AS 4100 is discussed in a
separate ASI Technical Note TN005 ‘Guidelines for designing to AS 4100 when imported
materials are involved’. A number of possible paths are provided in TN005.
COMPLIANCE WITH AS 4100 AT THE CONSTRUCTION PHASE

Clause 1.7 of AS4100 states that:
‘All steel structures, designed in accordance with this Standard, shall be constructed to
ensure that all the requirements of the design as contained in the drawings and
specification, are satisfied.’
Structural engineers or fabricators and/or erectors may be required to issue a certificate
indicating that the structure as erected complies with AS 4100 and therefore complies with the
Building Code of Australia. The form of this certificate may be dictated by the Principal
Certifying Authority or may be of a form that is decided by the provider of the certificate.
Compliance at the construction phase involves the following steps:
(1) Ensuring that the materials used conform to those used in design, which means that all
the materials comply with Section 2 of AS 4100;
(2) Ensuring that the fabrication complies with Section 14 ‘Fabrication’ of AS 4100;
(3) Ensuring that the erected structure complies with Section 15 ‘Erection’ of AS 4100.
ENSURING MATERIAL COMPLIANCE
The steel material standards listed in Section 2 Clause 2.2.1 of AS 4100 all contain specific
provisions which enable the purchaser or his representative to check whether the material
supplied complies with the provisions of the nominated Standard.
The main features of the current editions of these steel material Standards are as follows:
(a) In-line marking at the time of manufacture which allows the product to be inspected and
its provenance checked;
(b) Test certificates or reports provided on behalf of the manufacturer by a laboratory
accredited to ILAC (International Laboratory Accreditation Cooperation) through their
Mutual Recognition Agreement (MRA) which allows the actual test values for a heat to be
compared against the requirements of the relevant Standard. A manufacturer may have
its own ILAC accredited laboratory or may employ an independent laboratory.
AS 4100 Clause 2.2.2 ‘Acceptance of steels’ states in the 1990 and 1998 editions that
“Certified mill test reports, or test certificates issued by the mill, shall constitute sufficient
evidence of compliance with the Standards referred to in this Standard’.
AS/NZS 1163, AS/NZS 3678, AS/NZS 3679.1 and AS/NZS 3679.2 all now have enhanced
requirements for test certificates which can be summarised as follows:
- Written in English alphanumeric characters;
- Issued by the steel manufacturer;
- Contain the manufacturers and suppliers and testing authority names;
- Test certificate number and date;
- Product testing specification and grade of steel;
- Product designation and all relevant dimensions;
- Product steel making process;
- Length, bundle or pack or unique identifier to which the certificate applies;
- Heat number (from casting);
- Mechanical properties from tensile tests (all values cited in AS/NZS Standard);
- Whether each measured mechanical property complies with AS/NZS Standard;
- Chemical analysis results and type of analysis undertaken.
The OneSteel website www.BuildWithStandards.com.au contains details of the requirements of
the above Australian Standards as well as details of the requirements for test certificates.
Clause 2.2.2 of AS 4100 was amended in the 2012 Amendment to align better with the
requirements of the material standards listed above so that it now requires the following:
‘Test reports or test certificates that comply with the minimum requirements of the
appropriate Standard listed in Clause 2.2.1 shall constitute sufficient evidence of
compliance of the steel with the Standards listed in Clause 2.2.1. The test reports or test
certificates shall be provided by the manufacturer or an independent laboratory

accredited by signatories to the International Laboratory Accreditation Corporation
(Mutual Recognition Arrangement) (ILAC (MRA)) or the Asia Pacific Laboratory
Accreditation Cooperation (APLAC) on behalf of the manufacturer. In the event of a
dispute as to the compliance of the steel with any of the Standards listed in Clause 2.2.1,
the reference testing shall be carried out by independent laboratories accredited by
signatories to ILAC (MRA) or APLAC.’
Note that test reports or test certificates must be related to a specific heat number which in turn
must be able to be related to a specific product. Such test reports/certificates cannot be used to
change the grade of the steel—only the steel manufacturer can decide the grade of steel, as all
grades of steel will have a normal distribution of test results and a single test result is simply
one result in many thousands that make up the distribution.
The steel grade used in design must be the grade shown on the test report or test certificate.
The bolt Standards listed in Clause 2.3.1 of AS 4100 do not contain specific requirements for
test certificates. ASI Technical Note TN001 ‘High strength structural bolt assemblies to
AS/NZS 1252’ discusses quality issues related to bolts, nuts and washers claiming to comply
with AS/NZS 1252 and discusses how compliance with the Standard might be achieved and
what a test certificate should contain. The principles are essentially the same as for steel
material as listed above.
The 2012 Amendment to AS 4100 contains very specific provisions, as follows:
‘Test certificates that state that the bolts, nuts and washers comply with all the provisions
of the appropriate Standard listed in Clause 2.3.1 shall constitute sufficient evidence of
compliance with the appropriate Standard. Such test reports shall be provided by the bolt
manufacturer or bolt importer and shall be carried out by an independent laboratory
accredited by signatories to the International Laboratory Accreditation Corporation
(Mutual Recognition Arrangement) (ILAC(MRA)) or the Asia Pacific Laboratory
Accreditation Cooperation (APLAC) on behalf of the manufacturer, importer or customer.
In the event of a dispute as to the compliance of the bolt, nut or washer with any of the
Standards listed in Clause 2.3.1, the reference testing shall be carried out by
independent laboratories accredited by signatories to ILAC(MRA) or APLAC.’
ENSURING COMPLIANCE FOR FABRICATION STAGE
Section 14 ‘Fabrication’ of AS 4100 applies to fabrication work done both in the fabrication
shop and on site.
Clause 14.2.1 of AS 4100 requires that ‘All material shall satisfy the requirements of the
appropriate material standard specified in Clauses 2.2, 2.3 and 2.4’, while Clause 14.2.2
requires that ‘The steel grade shall be identifiable at all stages of fabrication ...’ which can be
satisfied by the in-line marking system contained in the steel material Standards referred to
previously.
The initial responsibility for ensuring that the material complies with the relevant material
Standard rests with the fabricator who should insist on being supplied with the compliant test
reports or certificates by the steel distributor or manufacturer. If the fabricator is not certifying
that the fabricated steel complies with AS 4100, then the fabricator should pass on all the
material test certificates to the certifying party.
Section 14 of AS 4100 contains specific provisions for:
- When fabricated steel needs to be rejected (Clause 14.1);
- Straightening methods (Clause 14.3.1);
- Contact surfaces in full contact splices (Clause 14.3.2);
- Cutting and cut surface roughness (Clause 14.3.3);
- Welding (Clause 14.3.4);
- Holing (Clause 14.3.5);
- Bolting generally (Clause 14.3.6.1);
- Preparation of surfaces in contact in bolted connections (Clause 14.3.6.3);
- Tolerances (Clause 14.4).
The reality in the current marketplace is that reliance is usually placed on the quality system of
the fabricator to guarantee that compliance with all of the above provisions of AS 4100 is
achieved. If the fabricator is certifying that the fabricated steel complies with AS 4100, then it is
up to the fabricator to ensure that this is so. If another party is certifying that the erected
steelwork complies with AS 4100, then the fabricator should provide the relevant
documentation from their quality system to the certifier.
Any documentation supplied should include details of measurements carried out to ensure that
the tolerances specified in Clause 14.4 are all complied with.
Clause 14.3.4 Welding of AS 4100 refers to AS/NZS 1554.1, AS/NZS 1554.4 or AS/NZS 1554.5
as appropriate for all welding requirements and these Standards have their own set of
provisions that must be met in order for the welding to be compliant. A general discussion of
the requirements of AS/NZS 1554.1 is contained in the ASI publication ‘Design Guide 2:
Welding in steel connections’. AS/NZS 1554.4 and 1554.5 contain similar provisions.
AS/NZS 1554.1 requires that the welding procedure be qualified before welding commences
and that the fabricator establish a welding procedure and list the applicable parameters on a
welding procedure qualification record which must be available for inspection. Prequalified
welding procedures are permitted subject to nominated provisions being complied with. If
another party is certifying that the fabricated steelwork complies with AS 4100, then the
fabricator should provide the relevant documentation for the welding procedure and any
associated testing undertaken to the certifier.
AS/NZS 1554.1 also contains specific provisions related to the welding process including:
- Edge preparation and assembly;
- Preheat;
- Tack welds;
- Distortion and residual stress;
- Cleaning and dressing welds.
the fabricator to guarantee that compliance with AS/NZS 1554.1, 1554.4 or 1554.5 is achieved.
If the fabricator is certifying that the welding complies with AS/NZS 1554.1, 1554.4 or 1554.5,
then it is up to the fabricator to ensure that this is so. If another party is certifying that the
fabricated steelwork complies with AS 4100, then the fabricator should provide the relevant
documentation from their quality system regarding the welding to the certifier.
Welds are either weld category SP or GP in AS/NZS 1554.1 and each category has different
inspection requirements and permissible imperfection levels. AS/NZS 1554.5 has different
inspection and permissible imperfection levels for welds subject to fatigue loading. Inspections
may involve one or more of the following: visual examination, magnetic particle examination,
liquid penetrant examination, radiographic examination or ultrasonic examination—as specified
by the structural design engineer in the design documentation.
The fabricator needs to carry out the relevant inspections using either the fabricator’s own
facilities or those of a specialised welding inspection service. Weld inspection reports should
indicate that the welds have imperfection levels below the permissible values specified in
AS/NZS 1554.1 or AS/NZS 1554.4 or AS/NZS 1554.5 as applicable for the weld category. If
another party is certifying that the fabricated steelwork complies with AS 4100, then the
fabricator should provide the relevant documentation for the welding inspection results to the
certifier.
ENSURING COMPLIANCE FOR ERECTION STAGE
Section 15 of AS 4100 contains specific provisions for:
- When erected steel needs to be rejected (Clause 15.1);
- Contact surfaces in full contact splices (Clause 14.3.2);
- Cutting and cut surface roughness (Clause 14.3.3);
- Welding (Clause 14.3.4);
- Holing (Clause 14.3.5);
- Bolting generally (Clause 14.3.6.1);
- Preparation of surfaces in contact in bolted connections (Clause 14.3.6.3);
- Tolerances (Clause 15.3);

- Delivery, storage and handling (Clause 15.2.2);
- Assembly and alignment (Clause 15.2.3);
- Assembly of a connection involving tensioned bolts (Clause 15.2.4);
- Methods of tensioning bolts (Clause 15.2.5);
- Inspection of bolted connections (Clause 15.4);
- Grouting at supports (Clause 15.5).
the erector to guarantee that compliance is achieved. If the fabricator or the erector is certifying
that the erected steel complies with AS 4100, then it is up to the erector to ensure that this is
so. If another party is certifying that the erected steelwork complies with AS 4100, then the
erector should provide the relevant documentation from their quality system to the certifier.
If a structural engineer is carrying out the construction certification, either directly for the
purchaser or for the fabricator or the erector, then he may wish to carry out an independent
inspection to ascertain the condition of the erected steelwork.
Any documentation supplied should include details of measurements carried out to ensure that
the tolerances specified in Clause 15.3 are all complied with. This may involve an accurate
survey, arranged by either the erector or the purchaser.
A significant issue is that of tensioning bolts in accordance with Clause 15.2.4 in the case of
bolting categories 8.8/TB and 8.8/TF. Clause 15.2.4 permits two alternative methods of
tensioning, namely the part-turn method and the direct tension indication device method, and
the question arises as to the evidence of compliance that is possible with each method.
More details of the above two tensioning procedures may be found in the ASI publication
‘Design Guide 1: Bolting in structural steel connections’. Note that the torque control method is
not permitted as an installation method but is permitted under Appendix K of AS 4100 in order
to detect gross under-tensioning.
The part-turn method requires that location marks be placed on the bolt and the nut once snug-
tightening is complete and that the nut then be turned a prescribed amount depending on the
bolt length and the disposition of the outer faces of the bolted parts. Hence, a permanent
record should exist of the tensioning for each bolt via the mark on the nut being rotated the
requisite amount of turn. The use of a direct tension indication device (such as a load indicating
washer or part of the bolt shearing off) should also leave a permanent record.
Ideally, an independent inspection in terms of Clause 15.4 of AS 4100 should be carried out to
observe the permanent records left for each bolt but, if this is not done, then reliance has to be
placed on the quality system records of the erector and the earlier comments about this
information being supplied apply.
Any site welding should comply with Clause 14.3.4 and the comments made earlier under
‘Fabrication’.
REFERENCES
Standards Australia, AS 4100, ‘Steel structures’ (1990, 1998 editions and 2012 amendment).
Standards Australia, AS 4100 Supplement 1—1999, ‘Steel structures—Commentary’.
Australian Steel Institute, ‘Design Guide 1—Bolting in Structural Steel Connections’, 2007,
Author Hogan, T.J., Contributing Author and Editor, Munter, S.A.
Australian Steel Institute, ‘Design Guide 2—Welding in Structural Steel Connections’, 2007,
Author Hogan, T.J., Contributing Author and Editor, Munter, S.A.
ASI Head Office

Tel: 02 9931 6666
Authors: T. J. HOGAN and P.W. KEY

(ABN)/ACN (94) 000973 839
www.steel.org.au
Date: July 2012 Page 1 of 6
THIRD-PARTY STEEL PRODUCT CERTIFICATION

INTRODUCTION
“The globalisation of the steel industry and the increase in the number of domestic suppliers
and processors has created the potential for the supply of construction steels of unconfirmed
origin and quality. Due to the strong focus on quality and safety in the Australian construction
industry, local builders, specifiers, designers and customers expect construction materials to
comply with all relevant Australian and New Zealand Standards.
However, with reinforcing, prestressing and structural steels now sourced from multiple
suppliers both from within Australia and from other parts of the world, often even within a single
project, designers, specifiers and contractors can no longer assume that the construction steel
delivered to the construction site will necessarily meet their minimum requirements”.
The abovementioned quote from the Australian Certification Authority for Reinforcing Steels
(ACRS) website sets the context and rationale for having third-party certification. The fact is
that not all structural steel products sold in Australia actually comply with all the requirements of
the relevant Australian Standards. Failures of products during erection and in service are known
to have occurred with the cause being traced to non-compliant products.
This Technical Note is intended to provide guidance on the background to and process of third-
party certification, which can provide confidence as to the quality of steel products supplied for
Australian projects.
DEFINITIONS
ACRS – Australian Certification Authority for Reinforcing Steels
APCC – Australasian Procurement and Construction Council is the peak council of departments
responsible for procurement, construction and asset management policy for the Australian,
State and Territory governments and the New Zealand Government
ATIC - Australian Technical Infrastructure Committee, a technical group under the umbrella of
APCC with endorsement from Austroads
Conformity assessment – demonstration that specified requirements relating to a product
process, system, person or body are fulfilled. The concept of conformity assessment is
concerned with the fulfilment of specified requirements, not with the wider concept of
conformity. (From AS ISO/IEC 17000)
First-party conformity assessment – conformity assessment activity that is performed by the
person or organisation that provides the object. (From AS ISO/IEC 17000)
Second-party conformity assessment – conformity assessment that is performed by a person or
organisation that has user interest in the object. (From AS ISO/IEC 17000)
Third-party conformity assessment – conformity assessment activity that is performed by a
person or body that is independent of the person or organisation that provides the object, and of
the user interests in the object. (From AS ISO/IEC 17000)
Conformity assessment body – body that performs conformity assessment services. (From AS
ISO/IEC 17000)
Conformity assessment system – rules, procedures and management for carrying out
conformity assessment. (From AS ISO/IEC 17000)
JAS-ANZ – Joint Accreditation System of Australia and New Zealand.
NEED FOR THIRD-PARTY CERTIFICATION
The construction industry and the specifiers need certainty in respect of the material supplied to
Australian projects and need to minimise their risk with respect to steel quality. The reality is
that most people in the construction industry and many specifiers are not familiar with the
detailed requirements of material Standards and find it difficult to understand and interpret steel
mill certificates.
Australia now operates in the global economy and many products used in Australia are
imported. Variation in the quality of products from different sources and variation in reliability of
product from any one source is therefore possible. Government authorities and private
companies have all experienced quality issues at times with a variety of products being found
not to meet the requirements of the Australian Standards. A method of managing the risks
involved is required and third-party certification is suggested as a positive way forward.
Consumers and procurers benefit from third-party certification as they can have confidence that
the products they purchase are fit for purpose and because they can seek appropriate remedies
should the product fail to meet the specified requirements.
Although manufacturers pay for being part of a third-party certification scheme, they benefit
because they can be satisfied that the products delivered comply and they will avoid the costs
and loss of reputation associated with non-compliance. (They may also get a competitive edge.)
DESCRIPTION OF THIRD-PARTY PRODUCT CERTIFICATION
Third-party certification represents world best practice conformity assessment and involves an
independent specialist auditing organisation which may be accredited by JAS-ANZ or by a
governing body to a programme, associated with, for example, a Product, Quality Management
System or Occupational Health and Safety.
Product conformity assessment for a Product is the periodic assessment of a manufacturer to
check that the products produced by that manufacturer meet all the requirements of the relevant
product Standard. Conformity is measured against a number of compulsory requirements in
each relevant Standard.
In the case of steel products, Product Certification Bodies are engaged to audit a
supply/manufacturing facility for specific products (such as plate or rolled sections) made at that
facility. Compliance is whether the supplier/manufacturer meets the conformity requirements to
a satisfactory level and so can be certified.
In recent years, ISO/IEC has published a number of guidance documents on all aspects of
product certification and conformity assessment.
PREVIOUS METHODS USED TO ENSURE PRODUCT QUALITY
Australian Standards for supply of steel products (such as AS/NZS 1163, 3678 and 3679 parts 1
and 2 and their predecessors) have typically always required mill certificates to be supplied to
purchasers of the product. Since the testing was done by the supplier, this method is first-party
conformity assessment in terms of AS ISO/IEC 17000.
Some purchasers or government agencies in the past had inspectors in factories inspecting the
finished product. This method constituted second-party conformity assessment in terms of AS
ISO/IEC 17000.
Once quality assurance programmes conforming to AS 9000 were introduced into Australia,
more reliance was placed on these systems by purchasers which meant reversion back to first-
party conformity assessment at best. Whilst not the case for the large Australian steel product
manufacturers, who maintained strict first-party testing regimes, in some instances, no
conformity assessment was undertaken and complete reliance was placed on the quality
assurance system. Product quality verification through testing was overlooked and products
were accepted with inadequate validation of manufacturer’s claims of compliance.
Problems that have been identified in the past include:
• Inadequate product traceability
• Misleading or false supporting documentation/test certificates
• Excessive variation in material properties
• Inappropriate/incorrect product markings
INTERNATIONAL ACTIVITY
Over twenty countries now have third-party certification schemes.
Third-party product certification is probably at its most developed in Europe. In the steel product
area, respected third-party certifiers of long-standing in Europe include:
• UKCARES (www.ukcares.com)
• Deutsches Institut fűr Bautechnik (www.dibt.de), and
• IGQ – Instituto Italiano di Garanzia della Qualita (www.igq.it)
All operate under different operational and legal frameworks.
Third-party certification schemes are generally structured around the requirements of the
International Standard for such bodies – ISO/Guide 65 which has been published by Standards
Australia as AS/NZS 3843. A new International Standard ISO/IEC 17065 will replace the
ISO/Guide 65.
ISO/IEC Directives specify that the requirements for products shall be written in accordance
with the neutrality principle such that conformity can be assessed by first-party or second-party
or third-party conformity assessment. In addition, no Standard containing requirements for
products shall make conformity assessment dependent upon a quality management system.
AUSTRALIAN ACTIVITY AND ORGANISATIONS
In Australia, very few materials Standards include conformity assessment requirements and
where they do, they can be either ‘Normative’ (compulsory) or ‘Informative’ (non-compulsory).
Unless the conformity assessment requirements are ‘Normative’ in the Standard, it is possible a
manufacturer can claim compliance to the Standard without actually doing any testing, or only
perform limited testing.
Australian governments are working to address the conformity issue with construction products
via ATIC, which coordinates an agenda of technical issues relevant to infrastructure
procurement for government agencies, including standard technical specifications. The current
ATIC specifications relating to steel products, which are freely downloadable from their website,
require third-party certification and mandate that the certifying body is JAS-ANZ accredited.
ACRS administers a specialist industry-based, independent, not for profit, third-party product
certification scheme which certifies reinforcing, prestressing and structural steels to Australian
Standards such as AS/NZS 1163, 3678, 3679 parts 1 and 2, 4671 and 4672 parts 1 and 2. This
scheme has been in place for steel reinforcing and prestressing materials since 2003, and for
structural steels since 2011. ACRS is currently working towards JAS-ANZ accreditation.
THIRD-PARTY PRODUCT CERTIFICATION AND STEEL MILL CERTIFICATES
Steel mill certificates supplied by the manufacturer as part of a first-party attestation have been
the traditional method of checking quality for a customer. The requirements for the content of
these certificates have been strengthened in the latest editions of AS/NZS 1163, 3678, 3679
parts 1 and 2. Appropriately obtained mill certificates provide documentation of the performance
characteristics of the particular steel product that has been sourced. However, they only
represent a snapshot of what has been manufactured at a certain point in time, with reliance
still needing to be placed on the assumption that mill quality is consistent and reproducible. The
third-party certification of a manufacturer for a range of products provides the surety that the
manufacturing processes provide consistent and reproducible product quality.
Third-party product certification provides a continuing level of assurance that products comply
with specified Standards and other normative documents which augments and extends that
provided by a steel mill certificate. The manufacturer is audited by the certifying body, usually
on an annual basis and, in the case of ACRS, with quarterly checks on production data. ACRS
checks all production from a certified location to ensure that it complies with the requirements of
the appropriate Australian Standard.
In many respects, third-party certification and steel mill certificates work hand in hand to provide
a comprehensive solution to minimise risk and ensure quality. Steel mill certificates provide
added surety and risk minimisation on specific steel product lots and may also provide a
convenient mechanism to ensure that the procurement, distribution and delivery processes (as
distinct from the production process) have been successful. Currently a number of government
departments and procurers on higher risk projects, request both ACRS certification and also mill
certificates.
BENEFITS OF THIRD-PARTY CERTIFICATION
The benefits of third-party certification to the construction industry, its specifiers and clients
include:
• Assured quality of product irrespective of source, provided the source is a part of a
recognised third-party accreditation scheme;
• Increased confidence in material quality;
• Reduced risk for all parties to a project;
• Reduced possibility of failure;
• Certainty that the products meet the requirements of the relevant Australian Standard;
• Avoids the need for separate inspections at the manufacturer;
• Avoids the need for separate independent testing;
• Reduced possible need for remedial work or delay;
• Improved traceability and identification;
• Reduced likelihood of material substitution and/or misrepresentation.
RELEVANT PRODUCTS NEEDING COVERAGE

The following steel products are suggested for coverage under third-party certification:
• Steel reinforcing (AS/NZS 4671)
• Steel prestressing (AS/NZS 4672 parts 1 and 2)
• Steel sheet and strip (AS 1397)
• Hot-rolled steel flat products (AS/NZS 1594)
• Cold formed structural steel hollow sections (AS/NZS 1163)
• Hot rolled steel flat products (AS/NZS 3678)
• Hot rolled bars and sections (AS/NZS 3679.1)
• Welded I sections (AS/NZS 3679.2)
• Structural and pressure vessel steel – quenched and tempered plate (AS 3597)
• Bolts
• Welding consumables
A number of these products are already covered by a third-party certification scheme run by
ACRS, as noted earlier.
IMPLICATIONS FOR DESIGN

AS 4100 ‘Steel structures’ and AS 4600 ‘Cold-formed steel structures’ both rely on guaranteed
values for chemical composition, mechanical properties, methods of manufacture and
tolerances as contained in the Australian Standards referenced in Section 2 of AS 4100. The
design parameters, particularly the design capacity factors, have been calibrated against the
requirements of the Standards and may not be applicable to products that do not comply in their
entirety with the requirements of the relevant Standard. The full implications of the required
activities to enable design to AS 4100 to be carried out on Australian sourced or imported
material is contained in ASI Technical Note TN005 ‘Guidelines for designing to AS 4100 when
imported materials are involved’.
ASI RECOMMENDATIONS
ASI recommends both third-party certification and steel mill certificates are required for all
structural steel products. We view this as an appropriate method of ensuring compliant product
(whether locally produced or imported) is used on all Australian projects in order to ensure that
all project stakeholders meet their duty of care responsibilities and legislated OH&S
requirements.
Material suppliers/manufacturers obtain third-party certification from a certifying organisation
which is named on the product documentation. All stakeholders in the process must ensure that
their documentation includes the requirement that third-party certification is required on all
specifications, drawings, tender and contract documentation.
Steel mill certificates are available from the steel product manufacturer and can be requested
from the steel distributor.
SUGGESTED NOTE FOR STRUCTURAL DRAWINGS
The following wording is suggested for drawings and specifications:
‘Structural steel shall comply with all requirements of the relevant Australian Standards.
Manufacturers of structural steel shall hold a valid certificate of approval issued by an
acceptable third-party compliance assessment body (such as the Australian Certification
Authority for Reinforcing Steels (ACRS)). Evidence of compliance must be submitted when
tendering and as part of the quality assurance process’.
REFERENCES
Standards Australia, AS ISO/IEC 17000-2005 [ISO/IEC 17000] ‘Conformity assessment –
Vocabulary and general principles’.
Standards Australia/Standards New Zealand, AS/NZS 1163:2009 ’Cold-formed structural steel
hollow sections’.
Standards Australia/Standards New Zealand, AS/NZS 1594:2002 ’Hot-rolled steel flat products’.
Standards Australia, AS 3597-2008 ’Structural and pressure vessel steel – Quenched and
tempered plate’.
Standards Australia/Standards New Zealand, AS/NZS 3678:2011 ’Structural steel - Hot-rolled
plates, floorplates and slabs’.
Standards Australia/Standards New Zealand, AS/NZS 3679.1:2010 Structural steel - Hot rolled
bars and sections’.
Standards Australia/Standards New Zealand, AS/NZS 3679.2:2010 ’Structural steel - Welded I
sections’.
Standards Australia, AS 4100-1998 ‘Steel structures’ (includes Amendment 1, 2012).
Standards Australia/Standards New Zealand, AS/NZS 4600:2005 ‘Cold-formed steel structures’.
Standards Australia/Standards New Zealand, AS/NZS 4671:2001 ’Steel reinforcing materials’.
Standards Australia/Standards New Zealand, AS/NZS 4672:2007 ’Steel prestressing materials’.
Standards Australia/Standards New Zealand, AS/NZA 3843:1998 [ISO/IEC Guide 65] ‘Guide 65:
General requirements for bodies operating product certification schemes’.
International Standards Organisation/International Electrotechnical Commission, ISO/IEC Guide

28:2004 ‘Conformity assessment – Guidance on a third-party certification scheme for products’.
(SAA HB18.28-1991 has not been updated and is available superseded.)
International Standards Organisation/International Electrotechnical Commission, ISO/IEC
Directives, Part 2:2011, ‘Rules for the structure and drafting of International Standards’. (This
Standard has been used to create a Standards Australia document ‘Standardisation Guide 006:
Rules for the structure and drafting of Australian Standards’.)

Safe Design of Structures

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Safe Design of Structures

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

SAFE DESIGN OF STRUCTURES

ISBN 978-0-642-78546-6 [PDF]

SCOPE AND APPLICATION 2

1.1 What is safe design? 4

1.2 Who has health and safety duties in

1.3 What is ‘reasonably practicable’ in

2. KEY ELEMENTS OF SAFE DESIGN 7

2.1 Use a risk management approach 7

2.2 Consider the lifecycle 7

2.3 Knowledge and capability 7

2.4 Consultation, co-operation and co-ordination 8

2.5 Information transfer 8

3. INTEGRATING DESIGN AND RISK

3.1 Pre-design phase 10

3.2 Conceptual and schematic design phase 13

3.3 Design development phase 13

3.4 Reviewing control measures 19

4.1 Design for safe construction 20

4.2 Design to facilitate safe use 20

4.3 Design for safe maintenance 21

4.5 Demolition and dismantling 22

APPENDIX A – ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES 23

APPENDIX B – SAFETY IN DESIGN CHECKLIST 26

APPENDIX C – CASE STUDIES 28

CODE OF PRACTICE | SAFE DESIGN AND STRUCTURES 1

An inspector may refer to an approved code of practice when issuing an improvement or

SCOPE AND APPLICATION

2 CODE OF PRACTICE | SAFE DESIGN OF STRUCTURES

HOW TO USE THIS CODE OF PRACTICE

CODE OF PRACTICE | SAFE DESIGN OF STRUCTURES 3

Safe design can result in many benefits, including:

 more effective prevention of injury and illness

1.1 What is safe design?

 the design and its intended purpose

1.2 Who has health and safety duties in relation to the

4 CODE OF PRACTICE | SAFE DESIGN OF STRUCTURES

A designer is a person conducting a business or undertaking whose profession, trade or

 preparing sketches, plans or drawings for a structure, including variations to a plan or

 architects, building designers, engineers, building surveyors, interior designers, landscape

A person conducting a business or undertaking that commissions construction work (the

 commissions the construction project (the client), or

CODE OF PRACTICE | SAFE DESIGN OF STRUCTURES 5

A person conducting a business or undertaking who commissions a design or construction

1.3 What is ‘reasonably practicable’ in relation to the

 the likelihood of the hazard or the risk occurring

 applying risk management processes to more traditional designs and considering

6 CODE OF PRACTICE | SAFE DESIGN OF STRUCTURES

2.1 Use a risk management approach

2.2 Consider the lifecycle

2.3 Knowledge and capability

CODE OF PRACTICE | SAFE DESIGN OF STRUCTURES 7

 an appreciation of construction methods and their impact on the design

2.4 Consultation, co-operation and co-ordination

CONSULTING YOUR WORKERS

CONSULTING, CO-OPERATING AND CO-ORDINATING ACTIVITIES WITH OTHER DUTY

8 CODE OF PRACTICE | SAFE DESIGN OF STRUCTURES

Appendix A provides examples of consultation, co-operation and co-ordination between

2.5 Information transfer

 the purpose for which the structure was designed

Points for designers to consider when providing information include:

 making notes on drawings, as these will be immediately available to construction workers

CODE OF PRACTICE | SAFE DESIGN OF STRUCTURES 9

METHODS OF TRANSFERRING INFORMATION

A designer must provide a written report to the person conducting a business or

more effective prevention of injury and illness

the design and its intended purpose

preparing sketches, plans or drawings for a structure, including variations to a plan or

architects, building designers, engineers, building surveyors, interior designers, landscape

commissions the construction project (the client), or

the likelihood of the hazard or the risk occurring

applying risk management processes to more traditional designs and considering

an appreciation of construction methods and their impact on the design

the purpose for which the structure was designed

making notes on drawings, as these will be immediately available to construction workers

WHS and building laws, technical standards and codes of practice

industry statistics regarding injuries and incidents

Industry injury/illness profile

Guidance on structure hazards

High consequence hazards;

Purpose of the structure, including plant, ancillary

proximity to adjacent property or nearby roads

inadequate pedestrian or vehicle separation

exposure to occupational violence.

Developing a set of design options in accordance with the hierarchy of control

Redesigning to control any residual risks

fact finding to determine existing controls, if any

Substitution – replace a hazardous process or material with one that is less

post occupancy evaluations for buildings

Designing traffic areas to separate vehicles and pedestrians.