Risk ranking
Why we do not just give a list
Section titled “Why we do not just give a list”Because an unranked list of faults is useless. With eighty points you cannot decide where to start, and in the end you either do everything — unnecessarily — or nothing.
The three categories
Section titled “The three categories”1. Structural risk
Section titled “1. Structural risk”What makes the structure non-compliant. These have to be dealt with.
Typically: a missing or wrongly taken action, an unhandled stability mode, a missing hold-down, a broken load path. Load path continuity · Hold-down anchorage.
2. What makes it more expensive
Section titled “2. What makes it more expensive”The structure complies, but from unnecessarily much material. That is not risk but cost — and you decide whether fixing it pays. Material optimisation.
3. Cosmetic
Section titled “3. Cosmetic”What affects neither safety nor cost meaningfully: inconsistent marking, a missing reference, matters of form.
We write these down too, but at the end of the list.
What we write for every item
Section titled “What we write for every item”- what the finding is,
- what follows if you do nothing about it,
- and what we suggest instead.
Without the third, a finding is just a complaint.
Where we find most faults
Section titled “Where we find most faults”Not in sizing the members — the software does that. But in:
- the connections, Self-drilling screw connections,
- how the restraint conditions were taken, Restraint,
- the continuity of the load path,
- and contradictions between the disciplines’ drawings.
What the ranking gives you
Section titled “What the ranking gives you”You can decide how far to go. Some people fix only the first category, and that is a perfectly rational decision — as long as they know what they are leaving.
The point
Section titled “The point”A list of faults does not help you decide. The ranking does — which is why it is the real content of the service, not the number of faults.