Dutch standard for condition assessment of buildings

Structural Survey

Volumn 27, Issue 1, 2009, Pages 23-35

  Straub, Ad ^a  

^a DELFT UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Buildings; Condition monitoring; Maintenance; Standardization; Surface defects; The Netherlands

Indexed keywords

CONDITION ASSESSMENTS; DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH; HOUSING ASSOCIATION; LITERATURE REVIEWS; LONG-TERM MAINTENANCES; MAINTENANCE PLANNING; NETHERLANDS; SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION;

AGGREGATES; BENCHMARKING; BUILDINGS; CONDITION MONITORING; MAINTENANCE; PLANNING; RESEARCH; STANDARDIZATION; SURFACE DEFECTS; TOOLS;

BUILDING CODES;

EID: 70049089856     PISSN: 0263080X     EISSN: 17586844     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1108/02630800910941665     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Abbott, G.R., McDuling, J.J., Parsons, S. and Schoeman, J.C. (2007), Building condition assessment: a performance evaluation tool towards sustainable asset management, Proceedings of the CIB World Building Congress 2007, Cape Town, CIB, Rotterdam, pp. 649-62.
2. Caccavelli, D. and Genre, J.L. (2000), Diagnosis of the degradation state of building and cost evaluation of induced refurbishment works, Energy and Buildings, Vol. 31 No. 2, pp. 159-65.
3. CEN (2001), EN 13306 Maintenance Terminology, CEN, Brussels.
4. Chapman, K.P. (1999), Dissatisfaction with stock condition surveys in social housing, Structural Survey, Vol. 17 No. 4, pp. 211-5.
5. Damen Consultants et al. (1996), Brite Euram Project 4213 Condition Assessment and Maintenance Strategies for Building and Building Components, Damen Consultants, Rotterdam.
6. Damen, T., Quah, L.K. and van Egmond, H.C.M. (1998), Improving the art and science of condition-based maintenance systems, in Quah, L.K. (Ed.), Proceedings of the CIB W070 Symposium, The Way Ahead into the Millennium, Singapore, McGraw-Hill, Singapore, pp. 141-8.
7. Department of the Environment (1991), English House Condition Survey, HMSO, London.
8. Hermans, M.H. (1995), Deterioration Characteristics of Building Components: A Data Collection Model to Support Performance Management, TU Eindhoven, Eindhoven.
9. Hollis, M. and Bright, K. (1999), Surveying the surveyors, Structural Survey, Vol. 17 No. 2, pp. 65-73.
10. Horner, R.M.W., El-Haram, M.A. and Munns, A.K. (1997), Building maintenance strategy: a new management approach, Journal of Quality in Maintenance, Vol. 3 No. 4, pp. 273-80.
11. Jaggs, M. and Palmer, J. (2000), Energy performance indoor environmental quality retrofit - a European diagnosis and decision making method for building refurbishment, Energy and Buildings, Vol. 31 No. 2, pp. 97-101.
12. Jones, K. and Sharp, M. (2007), A new performance-based process model for built asset maintenance, Facilities, Vol. 25 Nos 13/14, pp. 525-35.
13. Kempton, J., Alani, A. and Chapman, K. (2002), Surveyor variability in educational stock surveys - a lens model study, Facilities Vol.20 Nos 5/6, pp. 190-7.
14. Kempton, J., Nichol, S., Anumba, C. and Dickens, J. (2001), Surveyor variability in large-scale house condition surveys, Structural Survey, Vol. 19 No. 4, pp. 156-62.
15. Loy, H.M. and Coleman, P. (2006), A 21st century approach to the condition surveying of building services systems, Journal of Building Appraisal, Vol. 2 No. 2, pp. 161-70.
16. NEN (2006), NEN 2767 Conditiemeting van bouw- en installatiedelen - Deel 1: Methodiek (Condition Assessment of Building and Installation Components - Part 1: Methodology), NEN, Delft (in Dutch).
17. NEN (2008), NEN 2767 Conditiemeting van bouw- en installatiedelen - Deel 2: Gebrekenlijsten (Condition Assessment of Building and Installation Components - Part 2: List of Faults), NEN, Delft (in Dutch).
18. NEN (2009), NEN 2767 Conditiemeting van bouw- en installatiedelen - Deel 3: Conditieaggregatie (Condition Assessment of Building and Installation Components - Part 3: Aggregation of Condition Scores), NEN, Delft (in Dutch).
19. Pitt, T.J. (1997), Data requirements for the prioritization of predictive building maintenance, Facilities, Vol. 15 Nos 3/4, pp. 97-104.
20. Shen, Q. and Spedding, A. (1998), Priority setting in maintenance - practical issues in using the multi-attribute approach, Building Research & Information, Vol. 26 No. 3, pp. 169-80.
21. Straub, A. (2001), Technisch beheer door woningcorporaties in de 21e eeuw. Professioneel, klantgericht en duurzaam (Technical Management by Housing Associations in the 21st Century), Delft University Press, Delft (in Dutch).
22. Straub, A. (2002), Strategic Technical management of housing stock: lessons from Dutch housing associations, Building Research & Information, Vol. 30 No. 5, pp. 372-81.
23. Straub, A. (2003), Using a condition-dependent approach to maintenance to control costs and performances, Journal of Facilities Management, Vol. 1 No. 4, pp. 380-95.
24. Straub, A. and Vijverberg, G. (2004), New strategies for housing quality improvement by Dutch landlords, Open House International, Vol. 29 No. 3, pp. 38-45.
25. Vijverberg, G. (2004), Strategic housing stock policy and maintenance management practise in Dutch social housing, in Then, D.S.S., Jones, K. and Hinks, J. (Eds), Proceedings of the CIB W070 Symposium, Human Elements in Facilities Management - Understanding the Needs for Our Customers, Hong Kong, CIB, Rotterdam, pp. 337-46.