A Study on the External Stone Cladding System in Production and Installation Stages: The Case of Hong Kong
Abstract
:1. Introduction
- To identify the current status of the external stone cladding system in the two stages.
- To analyze the major factors at the stages affecting the performance of the stone cladding system.
- To suggest recommendations to alleviate the quality control of the system in the two stages.
2. Background
2.1. Development of Application of External Stone Cladding System in Hong Kong
2.2. Issues of External Stone Cladding System in Production and Installation Stages Revealed by Case Studies
2.2.1. Substandard Stone Materials
2.2.2. Surface Defects and Misalignment
2.2.3. Cracking and Damage during Transportation
3. Methodology
- = sample mean, and
- = th order statistic.
- = sample size for sample 1, and
- = sum of the ranks in sample 1.
4. Results
4.1. Statutory Control and Monitoring Mechanism of the External Stone Cladding System in Hong Kong
4.2. Factors to Ensure the Quality in the Production Stage of the External Stone Cladding System in Hong Kong
4.3. Factors to Ensure the Quality in the Installation Stage of the External Stone Cladding System in Hong Kong
5. Discussion and Conclusions
- Pre-testing of stone materials and anchorage system should be performed to ensure the required standards specified in the contract and legislation in the production stage.
- Quality assurance should be executed in the supply chain and production process so that its end products can consistently meet the specified quality and performance standards.
- Regular inspections and audits in the production stage are highly recommended. Besides, having technically competent persons of the consultant team and contractors is suggested to perform this task and record the findings in logbooks.
- Continuous quality supervision should be conducted on-site, and a comprehensive checklist should be devised for control and monitoring on quality of works during the installation stage.
Author Contributions
Funding
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Hall, K. Natural building stone composed of light-transmissive minerals: Impacts on thermal gradients, weathering and microbial colonization. A preliminary study, tentative interpretations, and future directions. Environ. Earth Sci. 2011, 62, 289–297. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yu, J.Y.H.; Chan, S.L. Practice and Testing of Stone Cladding in Hong Kong; Department of Civil and Structural Engineering, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University: Hong Kong, China, 2006. [Google Scholar]
- Lewis, M.D. Modern Stone Cladding: Design and Installation of Exterior Dimension Stone Systems; ASTM: West Conshohocken, PA, USA, 1995. [Google Scholar]
- Solinski, J.P. Thin Stone Veneer/Study and Remediation. In Dimension Stone Cladding: Design, Construction, Evaluation and Repair; ASTM International: West Conshohocken, PA, USA, 2000. [Google Scholar]
- Neto, N.; Brito, J.D. Validation of an inspection and diagnosis system for anomalies in natural stone cladding. Constr. Build. Mater. 2012, 30, 224–236. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Camposinhos, R.S. Undercut anchorage in dimension stone cladding. Proc. Inst. Civ. Eng. Constr. Mater. 2013, 166, 158–174. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cohen, J.M. Cladding design: Whose responsibility? J. Perf. Constr. Fac. ASCE 1991, 5, 208–218. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Faddy, M.J.; Wilson, R.J.; Winer, G.M. The Determination of the Design Strength of Granite Used as External Cladding for Buildings. In Case Studies in Reliability and Maintenance; John Wiley & Son, Inc.: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2003; pp. 111–134. [Google Scholar]
- Doehne, E.; Price, C.A. Stone Conservation. An Overview of Current Research; The Getty Conservation Institute: Los Angeles, CA, USA, 2010. [Google Scholar]
- Silva, A.; Dias, J.; Gaspar, P.; Brito, J. Service life prediction models for exterior stone cladding. Build. Res. Inf. 2011, 39, 637–653. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Haase, M.; Amato, A. A study of the effectiveness of different control strategies in double skin facades in warm and humid climates. J. Build. Perform. Simul. 2009, 2, 179–187. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rui, D.D.S.C. Stone Cladding Engineering; Springer: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Chiu, R.L.H. Social equity in housing in the Hong Kong special administrative region: A social sustainability perspective. Sustain. Dev. 2002, 10, 155–162. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Anderson, T.W.; Darling, D.A. Asymptotic Theory of Certain Goodness of Fit Criteria Based on Stochastic Processes. Ann. Math. Stat. 1952, 23, 193–212. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kolmogorov, A. Über die analytischen Methoden in der Wahrscheinlichkeitsrechnung. Math. Ann. 1931, 104, 415–458. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shapiro, S.S.; Wilk, M.B. An analysis of variance test for normality (complete samples). Biometrika 1965, 52, 591–611. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Razali, N.M.; Wah, Y.B. Power comparisons of Shapiro–Wilk. Kolmogorov–Smirnov 2011, Lilliefors and Anderson–Darling tests. J. Stat. Modell. Anal. 2011, 2, 21–33. [Google Scholar]
- Mann, H.B.; Whitney, D.R. On a test of whether one of two random variables is stochastically larger than the other. Ann. Math. Stat. 1947, 18, 50–60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Naoum, S.G.; Mustapha, F.H. Influences of the client designer and procurement method on project performance. In Proceedings of the CIB W92 Symposium “East Meets West”, Hong Kong, China, 4–7 December 1994; pp. 221–228. [Google Scholar]
- Chan, P.C.; Tam, C.M. Factors affecting the quality of building projects in Hong Kong. Int. J. Qual. Reliab. Manag. 2000, 17, 423–442. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Naggatz, S.G.; Gerns, E.A. Full-scale flexural strength testing for stone cladding design. In Dimension Stone Cladding: Design, Construction, Evaluation, and Repair; Hoigard, K.R., Scheffler, M.J., Eds.; American Society for Testing and Materials: West Conshohocken, PA, USA, 2007; pp. 3–10. [Google Scholar]
- Walker, D.H.T. An Investigation into Factors That Determine Building Construction Time Performance. Ph.D. Thesis, Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology, Melbourne, Australia, 1994. [Google Scholar]
Type or Project | Location | Type of Work | Stone Material | Applied Façade Area | Failures | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Project 1 | Commercial | Wan Chai | Alteration & Addition | Granite | 16/F to 24/F | Falls caused by spalls and cracks |
Project 2 | Residential | To Kwa Wan | New Building | Granite | Podium | Spalls and cracks |
Item | Factors | Design Team | Construction Team | Mann–Whitney U Test | |||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Descriptive Statistics | Shapiro–Wilk Test | Descriptive Statistics | Shapiro–Wilk Test | ||||||||||||
N | Mean | SD | SK | W | Sig. | N | Mean | SD | SK | W | Sig. | U | Sig. | ||
1 | Strongly Disagree, Disagree, neutral, Agree or Strongly Agree | 33 | 3.67 | 0.692 | 0.557 | 0.772 | 0.000 | 17 | 2.53 | 0.800 | 0.308 | 0.862 | 0.016 | 89.0 | 0.000 |
Item | Factors | Design Team | Construction Team | Mann–Whitney U Test | |||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Descriptive Statistics | Shapiro–Wilk Test | Descriptive Statistics | Shapiro–Wilk Test | ||||||||||||
N | Mean | SD | SK | W | Sig. | N | Mean | SD | SK | W | Sig. | U | Sig. | ||
1 | QA provided by the stone supplier | 33 | 3.18 | 0.769 | 0.109 | 0.852 | 0.000 | 17 | 3.41 | 0.618 | 1.275 | 0.678 | 0.000 | 321.5 | 0.352 |
2 | QA scheme executed by the manufacturer | 33 | 3.97 | 0.684 | −0.586 | 0.792 | 0.000 | 17 | 3.94 | 0.827 | 0.117 | 0.806 | 0.002 | 270.0 | 0.812 |
3 | Pre-testing of stone materials & system | 33 | 4.00 | 0.750 | −0.473 | 0.832 | 0.000 | 17 | 3.76 | 0.664 | 0.291 | 0.792 | 0.002 | 226.0 | 0.218 |
4 | Production drawings and cutting list | 33 | 2.91 | 0.723 | 0.668 | 0.804 | 0.000 | 17 | 3.06 | 0.659 | −0.057 | 0.798 | 0.002 | 318.5 | 0.380 |
5 | Mock-up construction and review | 33 | 3.12 | 0.696 | −0.168 | 0.803 | 0.000 | 17 | 2.59 | 0.870 | 1.629 | 0.710 | 0.000 | 163.5 | 0.010 |
6 | Evaluation of stone materials by experts | 33 | 2.15 | 0.795 | 0.905 | 0.777 | 0.000 | 17 | 2.12 | 0.781 | −0.219 | 0.812 | 0.003 | 286.5 | 0.891 |
7 | Supervision by TCP | 33 | 4.12 | 0.600 | −0.038 | 0.761 | 0.000 | 17 | 3.94 | 0.659 | 0.057 | 0.798 | 0.002 | 240.0 | 0.337 |
8 | Supervision by Specialist | 33 | 2.91 | 0.522 | −0.139 | 0.697 | 0.000 | 17 | 2.82 | 0.636 | 0.143 | 0.785 | 0.001 | 258.0 | 0.575 |
9 | Supervision by Expert | 33 | 2.21 | 0.650 | 1.949 | 0.540 | 0.000 | 17 | 2.29 | 0.686 | 0.861 | 0.779 | 0.001 | 307.5 | 0.460 |
Item | Factors | Design Team | Construction Team | Mann–Whitney U Test | |||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Descriptive Statistics | Shapiro–Wilk Test | Descriptive Statistics | Shapiro–Wilk Test | ||||||||||||
N | Mean | SD | SK | W | Sig. | N | Mean | SD | SK | W | Sig. | U | Sig. | ||
1 | Material & technical specifications | 33 | 4.09 | 0.631 | −0.066 | 0.780 | 0.000 | 17 | 3.53 | 0.514 | −0.310 | 0.642 | 0.000 | 155.0 | 0.004 |
2 | QA provided by the supplier/manufacturer/subcontractor | 33 | 3.82 | 0.635 | −0.618 | 0.768 | 0.000 | 17 | 3.71 | 0.588 | 0.109 | 0.750 | 0.000 | 248.5 | 0.440 |
3 | Shop drawings | 33 | 3.52 | 0.566 | −0.614 | 0.703 | 0.000 | 17 | 3.76 | 0.562 | −0.083 | 0.733 | 0.000 | 337.0 | 0.182 |
4 | Structural calculation | 33 | 3.12 | 0.740 | 0.293 | 0.840 | 0.000 | 17 | 3.12 | 0.485 | 0.399 | 0.659 | 0.000 | 282.0 | 0.972 |
5 | Use of suitable type and kind of stone | 33 | 3.76 | 0.435 | −1.260 | 0.534 | 0.000 | 17 | 3.82 | 0.636 | 0.143 | 0.785 | 0.001 | 291.0 | 0.788 |
6 | Selection of raw stone materials | 33 | 3.61 | 0.864 | −0.349 | 0.862 | 0.000 | 17 | 3.82 | 0.728 | 0.290 | 0.809 | 0.003 | 312.0 | 0.487 |
7 | Use of appropriate anchorage system | 33 | 3.76 | 0.614 | −0.684 | 0.753 | 0.000 | 17 | 3.76 | 0.664 | 0.291 | 0.792 | 0.002 | 274.0 | 0.877 |
8 | Monitoring & inspection during production | 33 | 4.03 | 0.637 | −0.023 | 0.784 | 0.000 | 17 | 4.29 | 0.686 | −0.456 | 0.789 | 0.001 | 340.5 | 0.169 |
9 | Factory pre-lay and numbering | 33 | 2.48 | 0.619 | 0.061 | 0.785 | 0.000 | 17 | 2.71 | 0.59 | 0.109 | 0.75 | 0.000 | 331.5 | 0.240 |
10 | Protection for delivery of stone panels | 33 | 3.12 | 0.650 | −0.118 | 0.788 | 0.000 | 17 | 3.88 | 0.78 | 0.219 | 0.812 | 0.003 | 418.5 | 0.002 |
11 | On-site mock-up | 33 | 2.91 | 0.522 | −0.139 | 0.697 | 0.000 | 17 | 2.76 | 0.75 | 1.433 | 0.709 | 0.000 | 231.0 | 0.216 |
12 | Skilled installer | 33 | 4.00 | 0.500 | 0.000 | 0.675 | 0.000 | 17 | 4.18 | 0.73 | −0.290 | 0.809 | 0.003 | 324.0 | 0.288 |
13 | Specific tools for anchorage slot formation | 33 | 3.27 | 0.626 | 0.551 | 0.771 | 0.000 | 17 | 3.41 | 0.51 | 0.394 | 0.632 | 0.000 | 317.5 | 0.375 |
14 | Qualified site supervision by TCPs | 33 | 4.06 | 0.496 | 0.153 | 0.67 | 0.000 | 17 | 3.88 | 0.49 | −0.399 | 0.659 | 0.000 | 236.5 | 0.228 |
15 | Open-up inspection of completed stone cladding | 33 | 2.15 | 0.755 | 0.200 | 0.848 | 0.000 | 17 | 2.00 | 0.79 | 0.000 | 0.817 | 0.003 | 254.0 | 0.558 |
16 | Use of appropriate water repellant | 33 | 2.97 | 0.810 | −0.696 | 0.827 | 0.000 | 17 | 2.94 | 0.56 | −0.051 | 0.732 | 0.000 | 263.5 | 0.692 |
17 | Periodic site inspection by Expert | 33 | 2.15 | 0.795 | 0.905 | 0.777 | 0.000 | 17 | 2.24 | 0.83 | 0.243 | 0.877 | 0.029 | 303.0 | 0.605 |
Item | Necessary Checking |
---|---|
Substrate | As-built alignment, size, strength, quality, defects |
Waterproofing on substrate | Workmanship, coverage, thickness |
Drill-in anchors | Type and model, amount, layout, delivery records, material certificates, pull-out test reports |
Anchorage brackets | Type, size, thickness, amount, layout, delivery records, mill certificates, strength test reports |
Stone cladding panels | Type, dimensions, thickness, color, surface finish, water-repellent, anchorage slots/holes, alignment, defects, flexural strength reports, aging test reports |
Adhesive grout | Type, location, delivery records, adequacy, workmanship, storage |
Sealant | Type, width, thickness, location, delivery records, workmanship, storage |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Yiu, C.F.; Kim, Y.-J.; Jeong, W.; Chi, H.-L.; Kim, M.-K. A Study on the External Stone Cladding System in Production and Installation Stages: The Case of Hong Kong. Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 8207. https://doi.org/10.3390/app10228207
Yiu CF, Kim Y-J, Jeong W, Chi H-L, Kim M-K. A Study on the External Stone Cladding System in Production and Installation Stages: The Case of Hong Kong. Applied Sciences. 2020; 10(22):8207. https://doi.org/10.3390/app10228207
Chicago/Turabian StyleYiu, Chun Fai, Yoo-Jun Kim, WoonSeong Jeong, Hung-Lin Chi, and Min-Koo Kim. 2020. "A Study on the External Stone Cladding System in Production and Installation Stages: The Case of Hong Kong" Applied Sciences 10, no. 22: 8207. https://doi.org/10.3390/app10228207
APA StyleYiu, C. F., Kim, Y.-J., Jeong, W., Chi, H.-L., & Kim, M.-K. (2020). A Study on the External Stone Cladding System in Production and Installation Stages: The Case of Hong Kong. Applied Sciences, 10(22), 8207. https://doi.org/10.3390/app10228207