Drying flood damaged buildings
(Guidance and Standards)
Andy Tagg (thanks to CIRIA & University of
Wolverhampton)
Overview of CLG project
To address concerns over drying buildings,
highlighted by Pitt Review
> ‘a significant dissatisfaction with the time it took
to dry out and stabilise properties’
> Conflicting advice on when it was suitable to
return to a damp house
> ‘undue delay may be due to the absence of
definitive guidance about drying methods’
Page 2
© HR Wallingford 2012
Drying times
Pitt Review surveys (GfK NOP Research)
 October 2007 and summer 2008
 37% had to wait > 1 week to see loss adjustor
 31% had to wait > 1 month for any work to start
 30% had to wait > 4 months to see any building
work
 12% did not see any building work start within 6
months
Page 3
© HR Wallingford 2012
Recommendation 73 (Pitt)
“The Government, the Association of British Insurers and other relevant organisations
should work together to explore any technological or process improvements that can be
made to speed up the drying out and stabilising process of building recovery after a
flood.”
Page 4
© HR Wallingford 2012
Project objectives
> Examine existing guidance and practices on
drying of flooded properties, and current use of
such guidance
> Produce generic guidance based on above
review (implies improved?)
> How could the guidance be made more widely
available and adopted
> Identity areas where knowledge gaps exist and
further research is needed
Page 5
© HR Wallingford 2012
Project tasks
Review guidance
Stakeholder views
HRW
W.U.
Research needs
New guidance
CIRIA
Communication
strategy
Page 6
© HR Wallingford 2012
Deliverable 1 – Review Document
1.
2.
3.
4.
Introduction / background
History of available guidance
Overview of drying equipment and moisture measurement
Review
•
Guidance documents
•
Technical publications
•
International sources
•
5.
6.
7.
8.
Historic buildings
Consultations
Findings
New guidance
Conclusions & recommendations
Page 7
© HR Wallingford 2012
Existing guidance
Title
Author
Date of Publication
Type of Publication
Just Drying
UK
Drying out buildings
BRE
1974
Digest 163
Y
Y
Repairing your flooded home
FEMA/ Red cross
1992
Advice Booklet
N
N
Repairing flood damage:
immediate action
BRE
1997
Guide 11 Part 1
N
Y
Repairing flood damage: ground
floors and basements
BRE
1997
Guide 11 part 2
N
Y
Repairing flood damage
foundations and walls
BRE
1997
Guide 11 part 3
N
Y
Preparing for floods. Interim
guidance for improving the flood
resistance of domestic and small
business properties
(2003 reprint)
Office of the Deputy
Prime Minister
(ODPM)
2003
Advice Booklet
N
Y
Flood damaged property: a guide
to repair
D.G. Proverbs and R
Soetanto
2004
Book
N
Y
Flooding and historic buildings
English Heritage
2004
J. Fidler, C. Wood and B.
Ridout
Technical advice note
N
Y
Moisture measurement guide for
building envelope applications
Institute for research in
construction (Canada)
2004
Technical guidance
Y
N
Standards for the repair of
buildings following flooding
S. Garvin, J Reid & M
Scott
2005
Book (CIRIA c673)
N
Y
Page 8
© HR Wallingford 2012
Guidance review
Project Team’s key issues:
> Advice to homeowners
> Advice on emergency organisation immediately after a
flood
> Survey of property after flood (inc. flood characteristics)
> Assessment of stakeholder needs and drying goals
> Equipment / process to use
> How to measure and record moisture (when is it ‘dry’)
> Health & Safety aspects (inc. vermin and security)
> Links between different stakeholders (drying
contractors, insurers, homeowners etc.)
Page 9
© HR Wallingford 2012
Summary of guidance vs. key
issues
Issue
BRE
(1974)
Advice to homeowners
Advice on emergency organisation immediately after flood
Survey of property after flood (including flood characteristics)
Assessment of stakeholder needs and drying goals
Options for drying
Equipment / process to use based on flooding / property type
How to measure and record moisture (when is it ‘dry’)
Health and safety aspects (including vermin)
Links between drying & repair contractors (& homeowner and
insurers)









Issue
Advice to homeowners
Advice on emergency organisation immediately after flood
Survey of property after flood (including flood characteristics)
Assessment of stakeholder needs and drying goals
Options for drying
Equipment / process to use based on flooding / property type
How to measure and record moisture (when is it ‘dry’)
Health and safety aspects (including vermin)
Links between drying & repair contractors (& homeowner and
insurers)
BRE
GRG
11 – 1
(1997)









Soetanto
&
Proverbs
(2003)









BRE
GRG
11-2
(1997)









Proverbs
&
Soetanto
(2004)









BRE
GRG
11 – 3
(1997)









ODPM
(2003)
PAS
64
(2005)
CIRIA
(2005)
RFB
(2006)
BDMA
(2007)
EA
leaflet
(2007)






















































CIRIA
(2005a)
CIRIA
(2006)
CIRIA
(2007)
Phillipson
et al
(2007)




































Page 10
Rhodes
&
Proverbs
(2008)









© HR Wallingford 2012
Role of new guidance
> Cover fully the issues that are seen to be
important in addressing the concerns
expressed in the Pitt review
> Promote best practice in monitoring and
recording moisture levels
> Advice on specifying appropriate drying targets
for different property and flooding types
> Improve understanding of the whole recovery
process (especially roles)
> Additional dissemination routes
Page 11
© HR Wallingford 2012
Stakeholder workshop
> Drying should take 4-8 weeks (best case)
> Re-occupation within 10-24 weeks
> Homeowners need to be given clear information
on the process and timescales at the start
> Needs to be better recording of drying process
and communication of when the drying target
has been achieved
> The appointment of a single point of contact
(the “project manager”) would help streamline
the process and improve customer liaison
Page 12
© HR Wallingford 2012
Actual drying times
350
100
90
300
80
70
60
200
50
150
40
% of properties
No. of properties
250
30
100
20
50
10
0
0
0-10
11-20
21-30
31-40
41-50
51-60
61-70
71-80
81-90
91-100
Days
Page 13
© HR Wallingford 2012
Finally..the Report
Published in
November 2010
Contains all outputs
from study (to March
2009)
Page 14
© HR Wallingford 2012
Content of report
> Flowchart of activities
in restoration of
buildings
> Each section covers
> Issues
> Example guidance
> Further information
needs
Page 15
© HR Wallingford 2012
Addendum
Flood product testing
Page 16
© HR Wallingford 2012
Constructed test rigs
Page 17
© HR Wallingford 2012
Successful Open Day (2 Feb 2010)
Page 18
© HR Wallingford 2012
Tanks with fitted products
Page 19
© HR Wallingford 2012
www.hrwallingford.com
HR Wallingford
Howbery Park, Wallingford, Oxfordshire OX10 8BA, United Kingdom
tel +44 (0)1491 835381
fax +44 (0)1491 832233
email info@hrwallingford.com
BSi PAS 64:2012
Mitigation and recovery of water
damaged buildings – Code of
practise.
Project Manager and Technical Author of BSi
PAS 64:2012
Chris J Netherton B.Sc.(Hons.)
Managing Director
National Flood School
Historical Perspective






1980’s fragmented industry
1988 National Flood School established
1990’s Restoration companies develop to
become National - standards still hit & miss
2000’s BDMA formed from main industry players
to promote standards – What standards?
2003 Talks with British Standards Institution
began
1st PAS 64 published in 2005.
Re-development Process




Full British Standard not applicable
PAS is generally a Code of Practise taking
the form of guidance & recommendations
Technical team with experience to
facilitate the development process and to
agree it’s content.
18 months – 2 year process
Scope
PAS 64:2012 provides:




good practice guidance for professional damage
management practitioners:
quality and performance management
information for the insurer;
information for building owners and occupiers;
information for those involved in the subsequent
re-instatement of the building.
Contents




Initial inspection
methodology
Establishing ‘Drying
Goals’
Health & Safety
Considerations
Monitoring the drying
phase





Cleaning
Equipment usage
Consumer guide
Documentation and
project sign-off
Annex – sample
documents
Seven steps in restorative drying

1st question should always be – “where
are we at?” – take stock of moisture
levels in the materials and surrounding
atmosphere.
Relative humidity; temperature; use of moisture
meters to define moisture content.
Seven steps in restorative
drying



“Where do we want to get to?” What
moisture content is acceptable? What are
our ‘drying goals’.
Step 3 - the project constraints – speed,
cost, health & safety, other constraints e.g.
security.
Step 4 - Design the drying regime best
suited to achieve the drying goals within
the project constraints.
Seven steps to restorative
drying
Step 5 – Achieve agreement with all
interested parties!
 Step 6 – Go do it!
 Step 7 – Monitor progress & re-assess, if
not achieving desired result go back to
Step 1;
if achieving result continue until drying goals
reached.

Establishing drying goals
Rel
(RR)
MC %
WME
%
ERH %
Wood
160
16
16
N/A
Plasterboard
120
3
12
N/A
Plaster
150
0.3
15
N/A
Brick
150
1.5
15
75 @ 21 0C
Concrete
150
5
15
75 @ 21 0C
Sand & cement screed
150
6
15
75 @ 21 0C
Material
Monitoring drying
Failed drying effort
Example Environmental impact
Method of drying
No. of units
Estimated
Env. Imp. Cost of delivery
Estimated
required
duration (days)
maintenance & collection (£)
energy consum (£)
Total cost (£)
open drying
0
21
300
£300.00
refrigerant dehum
3
21
150
200
£350.00
desiccant dehum
2
14
150
150
£300.00
heat system - portable
2
4
60
120
£180.00
heat system - trailer
1
2
150
200
£350.00
air movement
3
21
150
200
£350.00
Example cost/benefit assessment
method of drying
open drying
total drying
£ impact on
£ Impact on
£ Impact
£ Environmental
Total
costs £
AA
building SOW
other
impact
costs
300
600
0
0
300
£1,200.00
refrigerant dehum
1000
600
0
0
350
£1,950.00
desiccant dehum
1200
400
0
0
300
£1,900.00
heat system - portable
1000
200
-1000
0
180
£380.00
heat system - trailer
3000
0
-1000
0
350
£2,350.00
500
0
0
0
350
£850.00
air movement
All drying systems have
constraints



Annexe - each major drying system
discussed, the most appropriate time to
use them and a visual guide on how they
work.
Methods of improving their performance
are included.
All this is included in the easy to read
consumer guide.
Cleaning & Sanitising
World Health Organisation (WHO)
guidelines for indoor air quality: dampness
and mould 2009:
Abstract: ‘The most important means for avoiding
adverse health effects is the prevention (or
minimization) of persistent dampness and
microbial growth on interior surfaces and in
building structures.’
Occupants who’s health and wellbeing are
at a higher risk of poor indoor air quality.










Those with respiratory tract illnesses or sensitivities (asthma,
allergic rhinitis, dyspnoea, cough, wheeze)
Under 2 years of age with developing immune systems
Those over 60 with diminishing immune systems
Those on long term prescription drugs
Those with long-term immune suppression illnesses (e.g. HIV ,
Cystic Fibrosis)
Drug and alcohol abuse
Those on chemo or radiotherapy
Those on transplant or anti rejection drugs
Those on cancer treatments
Smokers
WHO guidelines
Section 5.3. page 94
‘As the relationship between dampness,
microbial exposure and health effects
cannot be quantified precisely, no
quantitative, health-based guideline values
or thresholds can be recommended for
acceptable levels of contamination by
microorganisms.’

Occupant health ‘risk assessment’ matrix
Length of time
Type of water
score
since incident
High risk
score
occupants*
score
Clean
1 <24hrs
1 No occupants
1
Grey
2 24-48hrs
2 Occupied
2
Black
3 2-5days
3 High risk Occupant
3
Hazardous
4 5days+
4 Multiple High Risk Occupants
4
Risk Level
Visible suspected
pathogen
Environmental Survey
score
Result (optional)
Current Humidity
Score
Ratio g/kg
Score
None
1 None
1 < 4 g/kg
1
low
2 low
2 5-8 g/kg
2
medium
3 medium
3 9-12 g/kg
3
High
4 High
4 >13 g/kg
4
Risk Level
The result of the Health Risk assessment undertaken on INSERT DATE indicates
that there is a XXXXX ( low, medium, high, very high) risk of exposure to
pathogens that may compromise the health of occupants pre and/or post
restoration.
Documentation

Examples of required documentation in
the annexe which can be used as
templates.

Loss assessment; Risk assessment;
moisture reading forms. Drying report
form.
Drying certificate?

If the individual responsible for the drying phase of the
building is not responsible for the building repair phase,
then a hand-off document should be made available to
the building repair contractor detailing important aspects
of the drying works.
Drying report
This should include for example:




the specification of internal finishes if removed as part of the drying
process.
material drying goals.
the residual moisture contents of materials at the end of the drying
phase.
any identified building defects or pre-existing moisture ingresses that
were not specified as part of the loss event.
This is to ensure that the building repairer can specify the
re-instatement works correctly.
PAS 64:2012

Does not define the drying method that
must be used, it is not prescriptive. It puts
parameters in place to ensure that what
has been done, has been done according
to a method statement and in a controlled
manner.

It is not a ‘how to’ or training guide.
A PAS 64 compliant
contractor

Transparency of process, costs and
decision making regarding drying and
cleaning methods.

Well documented procedures for the
consumer.

Engage the consumer, where appropriate.
Timescales




Next draft to Steering Group by April 2012
Final Draft released for public input May –
June
Final amendments agreed by SG – July
Published September 2012
The Future?

Insurers - adopt PAS64:2012, require
their contractors to comply with its
requirements.

Consumers – Insurers and contractors
distribute the consumer guide to raise
public awareness & educate, there is a lot
the public can do for themselves after a
loss.
Future

DR Contractor – embrace PAS64:2012
and innovate drying technologies and
processes for a faster, greener service.

Overall cost savings based on a controlled
and co-ordinated response to EOW and
Flood peril.
Questions
PROMOTING PROFESSIONAL STANDARDS
IN THE RECOVERY AND RESTORATION INDUSTRY
www.bdma.org.uk
JONATHAN DAVISON
BDMA Strategic Development Director
strategicdevelopment@bdma.org.uk
www.bdma.org.uk
BDMA Insurer & Adjuster Education,
Training & Accreditation Programme
• Enabling insurers, adjusters and others to recognise
professional activity, challenge inappropriate
solutions and engage in informed discussion with
contractors
• Creating an environment where value for money can
be clearly tested and understood
• Ensuring a smoother claims management process
• The positive impact professional damage
management has on overall spend and life cycle
• Delivering the very best solution for the consumer
BDMA STANDARD
• Promotion of professional practice
• Adoption of common approach
• Ensuring procedural transparency
• Enabling more appropriate appointment
• Providing further tools for a robust audit trail
• A damage management ‘technical’
procurement specification?
TRAINING OBJECTIVES
• Be aware of the main types of moisture measuring
instruments and be able to make an informed judgement on
their appropriate use
• Understand the method of interpretation (of these
instruments) used by drying technicians to make
recommendations to deploy or adjust drying equipment
• Have an understanding of the techniques and equipment
that can be deployed to avoid or reduce interior demolition
being carried out (where not required)
• Have an understanding of the differing drying equipment
designs, methods of operation & when their use is
appropriate
TRAINING OBJECTIVES (contin)
• Understand the parameters used to assess an appropriate
level of equipment deployment
• Understand the classification system for water, fire and
smoke damage incidents used to aid decision making and
cost predictions
• Understand triage principles and key methods required to
avoid secondary water, fire and smoke damage and thus
control unnecessary claims costs
• Be better able to recognise what key elements should be
present in a well run damage management project to enable
better cost and scope control, ensuring prompt claim
resolution and increased customer satisfaction
INCIDENT
OVERVIEW
INTAKE
STABILISATION
RECOVERY
CLASSIFY INCIDENTS
EOW CATEGORY 3
QUESTIONS
JONATHAN DAVISON
Strategic Development Director
www.bdma.org.uk
RICS Project management of water damaged
buildings
22 March 2012
Alan Cripps FRICS FBEng FCILA FUEDI-ELAE MCIAT
Associate Director - Built Environment
RICS Project management of water damaged buildings
Flooding
consumer guide
Building Control
Surveyors
Roadmap
Project
Management
Surveyors
2,500 members
30,000 members
RICS
Training
Attendance
certificate
RICS Project management of water damaged buildings
PROJECT MANAGEMENT OF WATER DAMAGED BUILDINGS
RICS
CUSTOMER
SOFTWARE
PACKAGE
GUIDANCE NOTES
CLAIMS
MANAGEMENT
TRAINING
INSURANCE RELATED
ISSUES
BCIS DATABASE
REPAIR RATE M² PROPERTY TYPE
RENT/STORAGE PROPERTY TYPE
DRYING RATES – FIXED PROPERTY TYPE
PROJECT
MANAGER
CERTIFICATE
STATUTORY
APPROVALS
DR SPECIALIST
CDMC
ALTERNATIVE
ACCOMMODATION
STRIP OUT
H&S
CONTAMINATION
COST MANAGEMENT
REPAIRS
ESCAPE OF WATER CLAIMS
(This section only relates to escape of water claims)
ENVIRONMENTAL
TESTING
RISK MANAGEMENT
RISK ASSESSMENT REDUCTIONS
RISK RATING
RECOMMENDATIONS
ASBESTOS
SPECIALIST
THERMAL
IMAGING
REMOTE
MONITORING
RESILIE
REINSTATEMENT REPAIRS
FLOOD
DEFENCE
COST BENEFIT
ANALYSIS
CENTRAL
INFORMATION
HUB DATA CAPTURE
THREE/FIVE DAY
CLAIM ASSESSMENT
RICS Project management of water damaged buildings
THE PROCESS
Trained project manager
Initial emergency works
Drying (types and duration)
Strip out (extent)
Repairs
Take into account other issues
(H&S, Statutory Approvals)
RICS Project management of water damaged buildings
EXTERNAL DATA
Property type and size
Location
Repair costs per m²
Rental per month
Storage per month
Drying fixed costs
RICS Project management of water damaged buildings
CAPTURE DATA HUB
Emergency works
Drying
Stripping out
Repairs
Alternative accommodation
All data accessible to the project manager
RICS Project management of water damaged buildings
COST MANAGEMENT
Allowing informed decision making
Drying cost benefit analysis (A/A)
Insurers added value
Non expert, training, data at fingertips
Customer benefits
RICS Project management of water damaged buildings
ESCAPE FROM WATER CLAIMS
Risk management
Risk assessment/ reduction
Risk rating
Recommendations
Questions
NEW YORK • LONDON • BRUSSELS • DUBAI • NEW DELHI • HONG KONG • BEIJING