Question 1	Question 2	Question 3	Question 4	Question 4(a)	Question 4(b)	Question 5	Question 6	Question 7	Question 8	Question 9	Question 10	Question 11				
Timestamp	Your sector	Your region of work	Your position	How satisfied are you with current design codes?	"If you selected a rating of less than 6, please list two reasons why you feel that current design codes are inappropriate"	Can you list two examples of structures designed using codes of practice which have subsequently failed to meet client requirements on performance? 	To what extent do you think that existing design codes facilitate the design of structures which have minimal whole life (embodied and operational) energy use?	How comfortable would you be with the implementation of a design approach that uses measurements from real buildings to justify design decisions?	How frequently do you measure the as-built versus as-designed performance of your projects? 	How often do you utilise the post-construction performance of one or more structures to inform subsequent designs? 	"Which, if any, of the following actions and conditions have you attempted to measure in buildings that you have designed?"	What challenges have you met when trying to interpret sensor data to understand building/structure/infrastructure performance?	"In your experience, where can the use of sensing data and measurements make a difference for clients? (cost, material use, energy use, etc.)"	Would you be happy to be contacted to discuss your answers in more detail?	Your name	Email address	Telephone number
10/2/2015 11:28:28	Industry	Europe	Director	4	"- The codes make no allowance for the skill/quality of the designer or those building it.
- The design criteria (loads, deflections) are not realistic and do not equate to the real conditions. Mostly they will be conservative, but sometime perhaps unconservative."	"- Structures that are code-compliant in terms of deflections but fail on vibration limits (Millennium Bridge being the obvious example, but there are many more)
- The many buildings that are overdesigned; they fail the client requirement by being too costly for what is actually necessary."	3	6	2	3	"Vibration, Live loading"	None	"Initial construction costs, costs to modify the building, demonstrating adequate performance of the building (hence delaying demolition), material use..."	Redacted	Redacted	Redacted	Redacted
10/3/2015 14:55:47	Industry	Asia	Executive Officer	7		not that I could think of	6	5	4	4	"Vibration, Live loading, Durability, Cracking"	Nil	Materials	Redacted	Redacted	Redacted	Redacted
10/5/2015 11:57:41	Industry	Europe	Director	2	Loading codes are overly conservative as are load factors	The majority of structures are over designed because of the above and in my opinion the reason we don't get more failures is that  this overdesign provides overcapacity which compensates for many mistakes or misunderstandings of structural behaviour that are never discovered.	2	5	2	1	None		All of the above	Redacted	Redacted	Redacted	Redacted
10/5/2015 12:51:34	Industry	Europe	Graduate	6		No. 	5	6	4	3	"Vibration, Cracking, displacements"	"Very difficult to isolate structural effects from temperature movements, poor reliability of sensors, vandalism of data-logging equipment, access to data, time required to process data meaningfully often too long for it to contribute meaningfully during construction. "	"Only when designed with the end use in mind, See papers by Webb and Vardanaga for review of utility of SHM deployments in literature. See also case studies of deployments at Hammersmith Flyover, Leadenhall building and Nine Elms Bridge (REDACTED)"	Redacted	Redacted	Redacted	Redacted
10/5/2015 13:42:20	Industry	Europe	Associate	4	Overly prescriptive when often a performance-based approach would be better - particularly for special/unusual structures.		2	6	4	2	"Vibration, Live loading, Cracking, deflection/movement"			Redacted	Redacted	Redacted	Redacted
10/5/2015 14:27:28	Industry	Europe	Senior engineer	5	"- Too hard to follow in the sense that one looses the notion for what certain equations mean as regards physics
- Some codes do not give the engineer the freedom to design even if the engineering concepts are reasonably applied (the codes should define the limits)"	"- If all the EC8 criteria were adopted as they're put today, it would be very difficult to convince a client to spend all that money on the the structure of a building or eventually bridge.
- Structural solutions such as external post-tensioning systems have restrictions for durability reasons (namely steel corrosion) that make certain architectural conception of buildings and bridges discarded. However, equivalent systems with sufficient protection are allowed to be built, for example, cable-stay bridges where the cables are external and therefore not involved in concrete."	3	2	6	5	"Vibration, Durability, Cracking"	"Time dependence and quantity of sample data. It's hasty to draw conclusions in the short time and with little data. Needs to consider seasonal effects, whether it regards the weather or the frequency of use/loads."	"Accurate assessment of the performamce of the structure, which leads to proactive measures before the structure reaches an underperformance level that may include more intrusive intervention and costly than the maintenance approach."	Redacted	Redacted	Redacted	Redacted
10/6/2015 11:47:24	Industry	Europe	Associate	5	"There are missing design loads
Design codes needs to be updated to take into account recent knowledge about climate for instance (statistics, climate change,...)"		6	6	3	3	None			Redacted	Redacted	Redacted	Redacted
10/6/2015 12:42:54	Industry	Europe	Director	6		We use both codes of practice and other guidance to ensure that our designs meet the requirements of the client in terms of structural performance. 	5	3	2	4	"Vibration, Cracking"	Lack of staff that understand this data and are able to interpret this in a meaningful manner	Clients are often concerned about using this sort of data and putting their particular project at risk if it is constructed. 	Redacted	Redacted	Redacted	Redacted
10/6/2015 15:02:02	Industry	Europe	Associate Director	3			4	6	2	6	Vibration		"This answer relates to building vibration only. Current methods of predicting vibration response, particularly of buildings located above or adjacent to railways, are based on either (a) semi-empirical methods that are based on a very small data set of measurements undertaken on completed buildings, much of which is quite old, of undetermined accuracy and derives from the US and Europe (but not the UK); or (b) numerical models (finite-element or finite-difference) for which there is a lack of measurement data to validate the numerical models. This creates a great deal of uncertainty in predicting vibration response. Obtaining more sensing / measurement data to improve the prediction methods can only be of help to clients. The cost of obtaining such data may be relatively high, but still small given the typical cost of high rise development over railways."	Redacted	Redacted	Redacted	Redacted
10/6/2015 15:31:54	Industry	Europe	Associate	2	"Insufficient research into the vibration response of buildings. 
Insufficient data on the response to vibration of tall buildings, built using modern techniques. "	Not in the area of vibration that I work in. 	4	7	5	3	Vibration	Obtaining suitable data on vibration propagation/building response for modern building types. 	"Increased accuracy of assessment
Cost
Material use
Lower maintenance costs
Potentially easier to secure funding at the outset."	Redacted	Redacted	Redacted	Redacted
10/6/2015 15:36:09	Industry	"Europe, North America, South America, Asia, Oceania, Africa"	Director	4	"1.Given the range of buildings codes cover there are inevitable conservatisms which become worse for larger more unusual structures.  These conservatisms become so high in some cases that they are inappropriate.
2. There is some scope for interpretation in some codes which means that you can get 2 different interpretations and therefore 2 different answers in some parts of the code. "	"There are cases but couldn't mention them due to client confidentiality,"	4	6	2	5	Vibration	Not applicable	"Future material use, future energy use"	Redacted	Redacted	Redacted	Redacted
10/6/2015 16:28:22	Industry	Europe	Associate Director	3	"Overly conservative
Codes have become more important than they should be and innovation can be stifled due to the insistance of using the codes"		3	5	2	2	"Vibration, Live loading"			Redacted	Redacted	Redacted	Redacted
10/6/2015 19:55:02	Industry	"Europe, North America, South America, Asia"	Associate Director	5	"Many methods are outdated and do not reflect available analysis techniques.
Do not deal adequately with certain serviceability issues."	"1/ High rise buildings - stiffness requirements are not spelled out in most codes of practice.  Leads to inconsistency in implementation.  Acceleration limits in wind loading are based upon research, but there is little data on user experience.
2/ Seismic engineering retrofit.  Current methods will often lead to overconservative results when assessing buildings."	5	3	2	2	Vibration	Getting enough of it.	"Not really.  For structural applications, the governing factor is often the extreme event, which will probably never happen.  For seismic engineering, you have to wait for a building to be badly damaged, so that you can learn lessons."	Redacted	Redacted	Redacted	Redacted
10/7/2015 6:55:15	Industry	Europe	Undergraduate engineer	5	"They don't cover as much of structural design as the British Standards, and frequently over design due to multiple factors of safety on either side. 
The second order moments when designing slender columns in eurocodes can cause massive reinforcements in comparison to British standards, for no apparent reason. "		5	6	3	2	"Durability, Cracking"		"If you can measure precise deflections of structural members over larger spans you can decrease the size of beams, slabs and columns to lower cost. "	Redacted	Redacted	Redacted	Redacted
10/7/2015 7:20:56	Industry	Europe	Director	3	"very prescriptive, difficult & time consuming to interpret, conflicts with previous codes at times"	"Retaining walls, replacement structure following damage byfire, impact, etc."	4	6	1	2	Cracking			Redacted	Redacted	Redacted	Redacted
10/7/2015 8:39:46	Industry	Europe	Senior Engineer	3	"Too complex and theoretically based, very little guidance given, just rules that require a lot of background information to interpret
Difficult to carry our quick 'back of an envelope' calcs."		3	3	1	3	"Vibration, Cracking"	N/A	I feel the difficulty is convincing clients that we shouldn't be designing for current standards.  As an example in offices developers often ask for an imposed load 4+1kPa.  There is very little appetite to change this (even though it is very conservative) as a lesser loading allowance is seen as a 'worse' product.   I think challenging perceptions will be equally as difficulty as the technical aspect of this project.  Good luck!!	Redacted	Redacted	Redacted	Redacted
10/7/2015 8:49:32	Industry	Europe	Associate Director	5	"Overly complex formulae learnt by students gives no realistic feel for scale of loads, stresses, etc. now a mix of Eurocodes and BS; you need to be international with your efforts."	"No, but a lot must be over designed and are inefficient. This is slightly wasteful but more practical at a small scale, say residential beam design, when a 140mm deep is £10 more expensive than a 100mm but 'fits better' . Bigger scale there is so much scope (if the engineer understands all of the mechanics) to streamline this."	4	5	2	2	Cracking	practicalities of crack stud and tell-tale measurements	All of the above no doubt when there is a proven method of interpreting enough data on every part of as many different structures to give suitable design guidance for engineers. I like this grand idea and good luck.	Redacted	Redacted	Redacted	Redacted
10/7/2015 9:04:42	Industry	Europe	Graduate	4	Too many load combinations masking importance of clear load paths and straightforward design	No	6	5	5	6	Vibration			Redacted	Redacted	Redacted	Redacted
10/7/2015 10:02:54	Industry	Europe	Senior	4	"Sometimes arbitrary factors are used which have large implications on design and create fictional constraints.
New material developments are not quick to be accommodated, results increased bureaucracy as different codes and guidance from different source must be consulted and somehow balanced together."		2	5	2	2	"Vibration, Cracking"	Data can be difficult to convert into an easily usable form.	"During construction sensors are often used on adjacent buildings to monitor movement. This can inform the speed/method of construction of the new building.
During pile installation, especially driven piles, the installation method gives instant load capacity information which can be used to inform the required pile depth."	Redacted	Redacted	Redacted	Redacted
10/7/2015 11:38:35	Industry	Europe	Principal Structural Engineer	6			4	3	1	1	None	Monitoring cracks in existing buildings to establish the cause usually needs to be carried out over an extended period of time to get any useful data.	I have no experience in the use of other sensing data and measurements.	Redacted	Redacted	Redacted	Redacted
10/7/2015 11:40:29	Industry	Europe	Director	4	"The current eurocodes are over complex, the previous incarnation was simple if required or complex if a rigorous approach was required. Prior to that the permissible stress codes were also adequate"	"I have only experienced this twice, both from a servicablility aspect. Once with a timber floor, even though it was designed to BS5268-2 the natural frequency or response factor was such that the end user felt uneasy. The floor was a long span but the total load deflection was still within a 14mm limit and less than 0.003span. The second time was a composite floor, again serviceability issue with natural frequency close to the imposed frequency "	5	3	2	4	Vibration	noise from oversensitivity	not much	Redacted	Redacted	Redacted	Redacted
10/7/2015 14:10:47	Industry	Europe	Graduate	5	"Too complex... a development coming as a result of the infernal spiral of concurrence between different materials, associated industries, lobbying,... meaning ""producers and sellers"" and NOT end users."	No.	5	6	1	5	None	Have never done it.		Redacted	Redacted	Redacted	Redacted
10/7/2015 14:50:56	Industry	Europe	Director	6		"It's not a code issue but engineering judgement that counts
Codes are guides not black and white
Failures though typically relate to deflections and vibration issues"	7	7	2	5	"Vibration, Live loading, Durability, Cracking"			Redacted	Redacted	Redacted	Redacted
10/7/2015 15:40:44	Industry	Europe	Principal Engineer	5	Sometimes the flexibility of codes is not actually that helpful. Eurocodes want deflections to be agreed with clients - but most of our building clients are not regularly procuring buildings and are not familiar with what deflections might be acceptable. We have to guide them through this which means we tend to offer the same guidance.	I'm not certain design codes are the problem.	3	5	1	2	None		"Structural schemes often chosen for ease of construction and coordination, pure structural efficiency is not the only driver. Flat slabs are often chosen for buildings due to the speed of construction and simplicity of coordination with architecture and building services. Better understanding of long-term deflection of flat slabs would be very interesting in verifying our design methods. However large assumptions on cracked/uncracked, E-value achieved etc would need to be made unless huge amounts of sampling of concrete are undertaken.
I don't see codes as a helpful to measuring embodied energy - but nor are they a hindrance. "	Redacted	Redacted	Redacted	Redacted
10/7/2015 17:15:14	Industry	North America	Executive Officer	3	"1) Overly complex and prescriptive, which inhibits creativity and innovation, as well as encouraging mistakes
2) Few codes directly account for real-world experience"	"1)  Parking garages (reasonable short term performance, premature deterioration)
2)  Seismic performance of buildings in Japan and New Zealand.  Reasonable engineering but poor design basis"	1	5	4	5	"Durability, Cracking"			Redacted	Redacted	Redacted	Redacted
10/7/2015 17:57:21	Industry	"Europe, North America, Asia"	Director	4	"1. uncertainty about which design code to apply and how to apply correctly.
2. leading to overly conservative designs"		3	6	2	2	"Fatigue, Vibration"	"data noise level
operational robustness 
efficient database management (due to quantity of data)"	"reduction of number of sensors (i.e. use calibrated FE models as virtual strain gauges)
increased safety
reduced material cost"	Redacted	Redacted	Redacted	Redacted
10/8/2015 9:32:43	Industry	Europe	Associate Director	6		No	4	7	1	5	None	None	Cost/embodied energy in terms of re-use of existing structures.	Redacted	Redacted	Redacted	Redacted
10/8/2015 9:42:31	Industry	Europe	Graduate	6		Deflection limits for cantilevers. a better performance specification had to be agreed.	1	6	3	3	Vibration			Redacted	Redacted	Redacted	Redacted
10/8/2015 14:14:16	Industry	"Europe, Asia"	Director	3	"to complicated
to inefficient to use"		5	5	1	1	None	none	none for that client unless they build multiple similar buildings	Redacted	Redacted	Redacted	Redacted
10/9/2015 9:44:23	Industry	Europe	Associate	6			1	6	1	1	"Vibration, Cracking"			Redacted	Redacted	Redacted	Redacted
10/10/2015 16:28:00	Industry	Asia	Executive Officer	4			6	2	2	4	"Vibration, Durability"	Interpretation by specialists is often required making it rather remote from the people who are actually maintaining the structures	In helping to determine when intervention is required to maximise the life of a structure	Redacted	Redacted	Redacted	Redacted
10/12/2015 7:52:08	Industry	Europe	Design Manager	5	"Codes, especially German ECs, are developed by academia and are difficult to apply in design."		3	5	1	1	None		"costs!!, material use, environmental impact"	Redacted	Redacted	Redacted	Redacted
10/12/2015 10:28:53	Industry	Europe	Director	5	"I have less issue with the codes than the way they are used. Codes used to be concise and one needed to know the ""folklore"" behind them. Modern codes are deemed by many to be too complex to understand/assimilate and many just delegate this work to a computer. In my view this is a mistake. Engineers then have blind faith in the computer run with little understanding of the limits of applicability of the method used. Often the codes offer a simplified approaches and then more exact methods. The standard computer program tends towards the more exact methods so that they cover more options which is easier to computer encode than something with opt outs, cul de sacs, etc. I do not feel the code writers can be held responsible for this. I think this allows an engineer to produce a design which is reasonably economic both in terms of design time and material usage with an acceptably low element of risk, But current usage means that people are not as au fait with the limits of applicability. Or that they are starting in the wrong place and trying to force the wrong solution."	"Vibration serviceability where intial natural frequency and them SLS FE model showed that the results were acceptable. The client's criteria was more onerous than the recommended requirements and it took some time to show that we had achieved the recommendations - which we all know to be unconservative.
Misuse of code of practice for sampling concrete for Forensic applications. The code is for sampling from a batch at source and the sample size is large enough that one can assume the cement content is as mixed. This is not the case when using 3gramme dust samples where it could be mainly aggregate or cement paste. The codified method is for different test on different sample. This resulted in each test being carried out on different cement content in each sample but an assumed value being used and then each test compared with each other. The results were so imprecise to be meaningless. The test centre was adamant that was what the code said so that is what one did. Blind misapplication of code in the face of basic scientific principles showing it was wrong.
shear in concrete where the principle stresses from a signifcant column load in concert with shrinkage stesses caused failure at lower than predicted values. A pragmatic engineer would have known to soften the change in section size which acted as a stress raiser and put in a bit of steel in addition to what the code said. This links into an area of concern for me which is design of heavily loaded slabs where most of the load is transferred from slab to column (especially edge cols) with problems of compression anchorages, bend radii, where the punching shear is outside the data set for the basis of the empicial design and the cols are more like walls than cols and possibly don't allow Kirchoff forces to generate to same degree as for an internal equal column"	4	4	5	6	"Vibration, Live loading, Durability, Cracking, temperature, humidity, chemical content, material strength, load capacity, deflections, probably a few more as well"	"normal issues with interpretation of DSP type data which many other people responding to this survey will have experienced more and know more about.
carrying out small sample population to see if there i a problem; on discovering there is a problem being asked to interpret the results from the same sample size. not having sufficient data to confirm or reject hypotheses. Further exacerbated by not knowing the history and thus not knowing what we should have been looking for. it took a lot of effort and then a bolt from the blue to work out the most likely but not definite situation"	Energy usage in buildings. often an organisation moves someone into the role of building manager because they are no good at their first job. this person then does not have the ability to use the complicated energy systems within the building and runs them uneconomically or in one instance had one section on cooling and another on heating with direct flow between the two.	Redacted	Redacted	Redacted	Redacted
10/13/2015 8:37:52	Industry	Europe	Associate Director	5	High safety factors		6	7	5	3	"Fatigue, Vibration, Live loading"	"Dynamic performance: natural freq and mode shapes, good likeness to design models. Damping ratio: very good for steel slender structures. No definition for masonry stiff structures: just numbers. "	"It can for sure make a difference in material use, thus also cost. Reducing resources in cases where design is overestimated."	Redacted	Redacted	Redacted	Redacted
10/13/2015 9:04:59	Industry	Europe	Director	5	"1) Appropriate guidance is not always available through codes of practice for 'non-standard' situations.
2) The reasoning behind code guidance is not usually very well expressed, making it difficult to tell whether the guidance is appropriate to be used in particular circumstances."	"1) (Arguably) the London Millennium Bridge - excessive movement in use.
2) REDACTED
3) The Glasgow Wing Tower - mechanical component failure."	3	5	2	1	"Cracking, Deflection, internal stress distribution in internally-ribbed stressed skin structural element"	"Difficulty of correlating 'directional' data from embedded strain gauges in relation to actual orientation of stresses
Elimination of false readings due to incorrect connection of wiring 
Understanding relative movements of sensors and reference points when measuring deflections"	"Use of signature mapping instrumentation of key plant items to facilitate planned maintenance of mechanical components such as pumps and motors.
Reducing energy consumption
Potentially reducing material use, though I have no examples of this actually happening personally."	Redacted	Redacted	Redacted	Redacted
10/13/2015 15:23:21	Industry	Europe	Associate	3	They describe indealized situations which are felt to be too restrictive or does not reflect actual circumstances. 		3	5	3	5	"Vibration, Live loading"	"Loading is difficult to measure, thus loading is often inferred from structural response"	Materials	Redacted	Redacted	Redacted	Redacted
10/14/2015 12:49:46	Industry	Europe	Director	3	"they constrain designs by their necessary assumptions in terms of form and connections.
they are material-specific and so force designers away from more effective solutions that might use combinations of materials."	"it is not a matter of failure to meet performance requirements.  That is not the only failure mode. There are missed opportunities for resource effectiveness and economy, constrained by code."	2	6	4	5	"Vibration, Durability, Cracking"	n.a	could make a difference on energy use.	Redacted	Redacted	Redacted	Redacted
10/15/2015 13:34:41	Industry	Europe	Director	5	"They are based on models that are often poorly understood and probably do not reliably and confidently represent real behaviour and so are often very conservative - but that conservatism cannot be relied up in itself.
The are sometimes gradual evolution of past practice to avoid step changes in practice or in finished products and so are calibrated to give the same results."	"An office floor in a steel/composite frame building failing to meet vibration SLS.
RC floor slabs failing expectations of static SLS."	4	6	2	4	"Vibration, Cracking"	Nobody wants to pay for this.	"Reduced conservatism - so less material/energy demand.
Higher quality where needed - i.e. targeted.
Feedback into design methodology."	Redacted	Redacted	Redacted	Redacted
10/19/2015 10:07:38	Industry	Europe	Consultant	1	"Over complicated - splits factors down into parts which are only relevant for research projects not normal engineering. 
Codes try to be relevant to every type of design and condition and fail to satisfy any fully and properly."	"Question is not specific enough.
Old codes failed in sizing of members and durability in service.
New codes should give better result but over complication coupled with lack of understanding leads to mistakes - failures are very rare.  "	4	7	2	2	Subsidence etc	Installation of instruments and tell tales can if negate the information / data obtained	"Huge question.
Huge field.

From nuclear detectors to house subsidence"	Redacted	Redacted	Redacted	Redacted
10/2/2015 8:01:44	Academia	Europe	Professor	4	I don't use design codes but I see their effects. Irrational designs with over-conservatism usually making up for deficiencies	"many not in public domain I'm afraid
Millennium Bridge is obvious one"	2	6	5	6	"Vibration, Live loading"	"lack of meta data (sensor type, measurement chain, averaging time, etc) , loss of information in processing to provide a single client-friendly result.
Poor/inconsistent labelling of graphs (esp. of frequency domain data)"	evaluating actual performance to specific events and statistically over a long period to compare with n-year design responses.	Redacted	Redacted	Redacted	Redacted
10/2/2015 14:26:10	Academia	Europe	Professor	2	"1. They instil the presumption that structural engineering is only about standard stuff.
2. They don't consider over-design as being (nearly) as bad as under-design."	Probably the Millennium Bridge.	2	6	4	6	Live loading	Too much data.	"In every way. Anecdotally, a recent new building in London had sensors placed in its piles, and it turned out that the pile cap bore the entire foundation load, rather than any of the piles. This is fundamental stuff for our profession."	Redacted	Redacted	Redacted	Redacted
10/2/2015 15:04:50	Academia	Europe	Lecturer	5	"Don't cover ""special cases""
Underlying reasons behind them not clear"	"Cardiff Millennium Stadium
Walkie Talkie"	5	6	1	2	Vibration	Getting permission to collect data	"Use of OTHERS' sensing data can save material=cost during design.
Use of their own data can save energy use and refurb costs"	Redacted	Redacted	Redacted	Redacted
10/5/2015 13:18:32	Academia	Europe	Post-doc	4			2	4	1	4	"Vibration, Live loading, Durability"			Redacted	Redacted	Redacted	Redacted
10/5/2015 17:27:38	Academia	Europe	Reader	3	"- not always conservative
- deterministic approach (low or no attention on the uncertainty of the coefficients used in the calculations)"	"- phenomena of aeroelastic instability (galloping of slender elements or vortex-induced vibrations)
- comfort in pedestrian bridges"	2	6	6	7	"Fatigue, Vibration, Live loading"	"- comparison between theoretical and full-scale or in-scale measurements
- try to provide conservative but realistic estimates of the structural behavior (as well as information for the customer)"	"at the moment 'cost' (it can avoid costly modifications to structures already built)
'Energy use' and 'Energy harvesting' may represent interesting developments"	Redacted	Redacted	Redacted	Redacted
10/5/2015 19:21:24	Academia	North America	Post-doc	3	Complexity of current constructed systems and their interactions with others makes it impossible to design for acceptable performance based on code. Code on the other hand makes most engineers commodities. This is a vicious cycle - Code knowledge is insufficient but code's presence does not encourage knowledge.	"Nearly most of the new bridges in the USA.
Fail durability and serviceability expectations."	3	6	7	5	"Vibration, Durability, Cracking"	we have even less experience as a profession in interpreting data from real life than designing based on code!	A smart client would support the idea. Assuming the idea and the likelihood of proper implementation can be articulated properly.	Redacted	Redacted	Redacted	Redacted
10/6/2015 0:44:15	Academia	Oceania	Lecturer	2	Overly conservative and encourages engineers to blindly follow rules rather than the laws of physics. Encourages a dumbing down of the profession and a lack of efficiency in our structures.	"Millenium Bridge, London - vibration
Pont de Solferino, Paris - vibration
Multiple flat slab structures which have cracked due to long term creep"	1	6	2	2	"Vibration, Cracking"	Reinventing the wheel to avoid overly expensive systems.	Verification of compliance with design provisions.	Redacted	Redacted	Redacted	Redacted
10/6/2015 12:00:09	Academia	Europe	Professor	4	"Based on empiricism; source of design rules often unclear;
not adapted to progress in science and computational resources"	"wind loads on extraordinary structures;
fatigue analysis on complex details"	2	6	2	2	Vibration	proper excitation; size of the building	"more accurate evaluation of real performance; 
information for future designs"	Redacted	Redacted	Redacted	Redacted
10/6/2015 14:29:31	Academia	Europe	Post-doc	5	"Codes are unwieldy and over specific to use for concept and validation calculations.
Codes are not easy to use for non standard problems such as evaluation of existing structures or design of structures other than buildings."	No specific examples - but floors in academic buildings do seem to have an unpleasant level of dynamic response when large groups are moving about.	2	6	2	5	None		Most useful to clients in areas where the measurement can inform future operational decisions for that building. Few clients build sufficiently regularly that the data is useful to inform their own future projects.	Redacted	Redacted	Redacted	Redacted
10/6/2015 14:53:33	Academia	North America	Post-doc	5	"Big gap between science and the code. Also, economical interests are sometimes more important than research results and academia products."	"Maximum live load specified by codes: For example, the value of 450kg/m2 (times 1.6 for safety factor) is smaller than I have obtained.
The second and maybe more important. The ductility factor applied for seismic design (R in some codes) to ""convert"" from elastic to inelastic should be smaller. This is easy to see if you compare this factor in japan, united states, new zealand or another countries in seismic areas. All of them used different values."	6	6	4	3	"Vibration, Live loading"	Noise. Hard to find reliable information in specific parts of the structure. 	material and energy use. REDACTED	Redacted	Redacted	Redacted	Redacted
10/6/2015 15:07:05	Academia	Europe	Lecturer	2	They are too rigid. There are too many rules.		4	7	6	5	"Vibration, Live loading, Cracking"	It is always exciting to see how the structure really behaves. It gives me a great satisfaction if my prediction about the structure response is correct and it is allways challenge to find out why there are difference between the prediction and real behaviour if something like that occurs.	Mostly cost and material use.	Redacted	Redacted	Redacted	Redacted
10/6/2015 16:05:00	Academia	North America	Reader	6			1	5	5	6	I don't design buildings			Redacted	Redacted	Redacted	Redacted
10/6/2015 16:33:44	Academia	Africa	Professor	5	By and large codes deliver functional structures.  However there is lack of sufficient feedback loop of information on structural performance from as built structures.  Much of the information used in design is informed by data collected in labs on scaled models.	"Vibration performance of staircase and post tensioned floors,
Fatigue performance of steel and concrete bridges."	1	7	7	7	"Vibration, Live loading"	none	material use	Redacted	Redacted	Redacted	Redacted
10/6/2015 17:29:44	Academia	North America	Professor	4	The values for seismic design may be below of what really is necessary. 	Recently we have no failures. 	1	7	4	1	Vibration	Correct location of sensor in the structure.	Measurement can provide an insight of building performance	Redacted	Redacted	Redacted	Redacted
10/7/2015 6:51:30	Academia	Africa	Professor	2	I come from a mechanical background so my views are biased. I just find it limiting to restrict oneself to a code based approach if we have much better technology and the ability to optimise available.	As indicated I work primarily in mechanical environment and do not have first have much experience of civil structures. In REDACTED we had a REDACTED failures of a coal silo. This could have been avoided if the system was properly equipped with appropriate monitoring systems.   	3	7	6	5	"Fatigue, Vibration, Durability, Cracking, Temperature"	"We, mechanical engineers, do not usually have the required statistics, big data background. I need to have my students trained by my electronics colleagues."	I think the approach should be a life cycle approach of all of the above being factored into the objective function.	Redacted	Redacted	Redacted	Redacted
10/7/2015 8:03:14	Academia	Europe	Professor	5	"- too involved
- not clearly written"		5	6	4	2	None	noise	performances	Redacted	Redacted	Redacted	Redacted
10/7/2015 8:51:53	Academia	Europe	Professor	3	Too complex	No	1	7	1	2	None	Cost	No	Redacted	Redacted	Redacted	Redacted
10/7/2015 9:57:49	Academia	Africa	Professor	3	- Some rules are not flexible and does not allow to treat specific cases		4	7	2	2	Vibration	Uncertainties in material properties	cost	Redacted	Redacted	Redacted	Redacted
10/7/2015 11:15:27	Academia	Europe	Other	6			5	2	1	1	None		"Data is very helpful to understand how structures and buildings perform but who should pay for this and who benefits?
A client is not usually prepared to invest in an experiment - they want to know that the structure/building will perform as intended, and they are often  more comfortable with a conservative design than exposing themselves to risk. In such cases proven, code-based designs give confidence to all parties. Big data could, over time, assist code writers to re-evaluate whether the design guidance is overly conservative and, in time, revise guidance. 
Data collected from a constructed facility is unlikely to be helpful to that structure (or its designer or owner) unless (a) it can be actively controlled (b) a similar project is to be built. 
A great deal of effort has been expended on Post Occupancy Evaluation of buildings' environmental performance but it is difficult to (a) get the data as clients/designers do not want people to know how poorly their buildings perform (b) use the information on subsequent projects as many designs are bespoke. 

In terms of conservatism in design (in particular inefficient use of materials) a major barrier is not a lack of know-how or inefficient design but rather the pursuit of least cost. Designers will standardise on component sizes (slab thicknesses, column sizes, beam depths etc) to ease supply chains and construction operations. The pursuit of material efficiency is unlikely to result in minimum project cost. eg. unpropped basement construction is not material efficient but the improvements to construction programme may well make it the preferred choice."	Redacted	Redacted	Redacted	Redacted
10/7/2015 15:50:20	Academia	Europe	Reader	4	"Dynamic is poorly considered in some codes in my country.
Experimental testing is poorly addressed!"		4	7	4	6	"Fatigue, Vibration, Live loading"			Redacted	Redacted	Redacted	Redacted
10/7/2015 16:20:53	Academia	Asia	Reader	6			6	6	6	6	Vibration	"Too much data.
Variability of data and environmental effects.
How to extract most useful information for structural assessment from data."	"Decision for future design of typical structure.
To assure assumptions in design.
To optimize design.
To understand real behaviour of structures and prevent the unnecessary cost."	Redacted	Redacted	Redacted	Redacted
10/7/2015 20:50:43	Academia	Europe	Post-doc	5			4	6	3	4	Durability			Redacted	Redacted	Redacted	Redacted
10/8/2015 8:29:43	Academia	Europe	Professor	4	"- They do not cover situations encountered in real life
- They are too conservative, mainly when used to assess existing structures"		5	4	2	6	"Vibration, Live loading, Cracking"			Redacted	Redacted	Redacted	Redacted
10/8/2015 15:02:33	Academia	Europe	Lecturer	6			3	5	1	2	Cracking	Exact details and positioning of sensors required. This should also be mapped against loading and placing the data into context.	cost	Redacted	Redacted	Redacted	Redacted
10/12/2015 10:54:55	Academia	Europe	Lecturer	4	Suitable reliable procedures to assess footbridge serviceability to human-induced vibrations should be provided.	Several footbridges have shown excessive sensitivity to human induced vibrations.	4	6	2	2	Vibration			Redacted	Redacted	Redacted	Redacted
10/13/2015 22:27:56	Academia	Europe	Senior Lecturer	5	bit confusing 		6	4	1	3	"Vibration, Live loading"	not always simple. needs experience and knowledge.	energy	Redacted	Redacted	Redacted	Redacted
10/19/2015 15:30:24	Academia	Europe	Lecturer	6			4	5	5	4	"Vibration, Live loading, Cracking"			Redacted	Redacted	Redacted	Redacted