All Weather Fashions Ltd (10451) 52, Shahid Tajuddin Ahmed Sarani, Mohakhali, Dhaka 1213, Bangladesh

(+23.774852N, 90.398619E)

03.MARCH.2014

Client Summary Report

Observations & Actions Written By Anthony Liu – 04.03.14

Reviewed By Thai Tang Anh – 04.03.14

Approved By Geoff Minto – 07.03.14

Revision : Issue 01

Date: 07.03.2014

RED

Executive Summary

On 03.03.2014 Mr Anthony Liu (lead) and Mr Thai Tang Anh carried out a visual structural survey of the All Weather Fashions Ltd factory at the address and co-ordinates given on the cover page of this report. We met with M. A. Karim (Director and Chairman). We were further accompanied by Mr Mahmoodur Rhamen from Kaymonto and Partners We were provided with copies of Architectural and Engineering Design drawings and these appeared to be permit drawings. We were informed that the buildings dated from 2000. These drawings generally matched the actual site conditions. The factory building is used for garment manufacturing on all floors of the building We inspected the whole building, which was made accessible to us in all parts, only to look for conditions concerning imminent danger to people, and identified potential issues which do not pose imminent danger to the stability of the building, but which should be fully checked by the building engineer and the appropriate remedial steps taken, We have major concern with the structure and the loading. We require immediate checking of building stability by the qualified building engineer. We do have some important and urgent concerns that need to be addressed immediately, which gave rise to our recommendation for an immediate Detailed Engineering Assessment (see Item 1 action below). The principal reasons for our concerns are: 1. Overall building loading on the columns is exceeded when using the design code minimum live

load assignment 2. Overloading of certain areas of the factory floor, particularly in storage areas

Executive Summary (continued)

At this point we do have reason to recommend a partial or complete suspension of operations in the facility due to these concerns (subject to immediate responses to the required actions noted at the end of this report). Further actions with associated priorities and timeframes are given at the end of this report. Please note that these actions should be completed as soon as possible and certainly within the timeframe noted. We have reviewed the property from an outline seismic perspective and would consider that the building along with many others in the Dhaka region to have a significant risk in a major Seismic event. We have some concerns with the stability system in day to day loading conditions and require this be addressed in a Detailed Engineering Assessment. We have carried out some on-site testing and preliminary analysis to support the findings of this report. Our Limitations and Assumptions are also noted at the end of this report. This short report has 4 sections namely: 1. Executive Summary (this section) 2. Short Graphical Section showing key issues observed 3. Priority Action List 4. Limitations and Assumptions

Building Extents

Factory located behind fuel filling

station

Building Extents (Front Elevation)

9-storey reinforced concrete building

Longitudinal

column grid

spacing of 5.8m

Maximum

transverse

column grid

spacing of

4.57m

Building Extents

Adjacent 6-storey building with

internal connection to main building

Adjacent building

is claimed to be

rented.

Building Permission Layout Building 1: Main Factory

Building Extents

Building Extents

------- Movement Joint

Longitudinal Section and Elevation

(basement floor drawing only)

Longitudinal Cross-Section

(not showing structure above)

Building Extents

Cross Section of Building (basement floor drawing only)

Transvere Cross-Section

(not showing structure above)

Building Extents

R.C Beam and column

frame with a 2-way solid

slab

Stability provided by

movement frame action

and brick in-fill walls

Slab Thickness 152 mm

Column Size 305x457mm (typ.)

Grid 5.800m x 4.570m

------- Movement Joint

Typical Floorplan (1st to 8th floor)

with structural grid

Building Extents

------- Movement Joint

Movement Joint inside building

------- Movement Joint

Identified Priority 1 Concerns

AVERAGE INTERNAL COLUMN STRESS (*)

(*) Instructions: Only overwrite red valuesFactory name

CASE I CASE II

No. Floors

supported INCL

ROOF

10 max. 20 (including roof)

Selfweight Finishes

Apparent

Live Load

Code Live

Load

Basement (Y/N) yes

Construction date Loading on roof 5.1kPa 1.5kPa 0.2kPa 0.2kPa

Loading on 8th 5.1kPa 1.0kPa 2.0kPa 3.0kPa

Column size 0.30 x 0.46 m Loading on 7th 5.1kPa 1.0kPa 2.0kPa 3.0kPa

Grid (LxT) 5.80 x 4.57 m Loading on 6th 5.1kPa 1.0kPa 2.0kPa 3.0kPa

Beam L 0.25 x 0.53 m Loading on 5th 5.1kPa 1.0kPa 2.0kPa 3.0kPa

Beam T 0.25 x 0.53 m Loading on 4th 5.1kPa 1.0kPa 2.0kPa 3.0kPa

Slab thickness m Loading on 3rd 5.1kPa 1.0kPa 2.0kPa 3.0kPa

Floor-ceiling height m Loading on 2nd 5.1kPa 1.0kPa 2.0kPa 3.0kPa

Loading on 1st 5.1kPa 1.0kPa 2.0kPa 3.0kPa

Hyperstatic effect 10% Loading on GF 5.1kPa 2.5kPa 2.0kPa 3.0kPa

Basement 5.10 1.0kPa 2.0kPa 3.0kPa

Concentated load 5.0 kN 5.10 1.0kPa 2.0kPa 3.0kPa

on column 5.10 1.0kPa 2.0kPa 3.0kPa

Column agregate Brick 5.10 1.0kPa 2.0kPa 3.0kPa

Rebar % 4.30 % 5.10 1.0kPa 2.0kPa 3.0kPa

5.10 1.0kPa 2.0kPa 3.0kPa

Limits (MPa) X Y 5.10 1.0kPa 2.0kPa 3.0kPa

9.4 11.9 5.10 1.0kPa 2.0kPa 3.0kPa

5.10 1.0kPa 2.0kPa 3.0kPa

Apparent w orking stress 17.0 MPa 5.10 1.0kPa 2.0kPa 3.0kPa

Case II w orking stress 18.9 MPa

kN

Concrete stress is greater than Z MPa (FOS less than 1.25). RED (See guidance)

2.895

Total unfactored

column load (kN)2373

All Weather Fashions

52 Shahid Tajuddin Ahmed Sarani

Mohakhali, Dhaka 1213

before 2005

0.152

Z

14.4

Based on the load rundown analysis following

the agreed minimum design live load

assignment, the columns seem significantly

insufficient in carrying the dead and live loads

from the 9 storey building, giving a firm RED

warning. The building was constructed in year

2000, with brick aggregate, with total of 9

storeys (including roof) and 1 full basement

floor.

1st Priority 1 Concern

Column Load Exceeds

Allowable Limit by Code

AVERAGE INTERNAL COLUMN STRESS (*)

(*) Instructions: Only overwrite red valuesFactory name

CASE I CASE II

No. Floors

supported INCL

ROOF

10 max. 20 (including roof)

Selfweight Finishes

Apparent

Live Load

Code Live

Load

Basement (Y/N) yes

Construction date Loading on roof 5.1kPa 1.5kPa 0.2kPa 0.2kPa

Loading on 8th 5.1kPa 1.0kPa 1.0kPa 3.0kPa

Column size 0.30 x 0.46 m Loading on 7th 5.1kPa 1.0kPa 1.0kPa 3.0kPa

Grid (LxT) 5.79 x 4.57 m Loading on 6th 5.1kPa 1.0kPa 1.0kPa 3.0kPa

Beam L 0.25 x 0.53 m Loading on 5th 5.1kPa 1.0kPa 1.0kPa 3.0kPa

Beam T 0.25 x 0.53 m Loading on 4th 5.1kPa 1.0kPa 1.0kPa 3.0kPa

Slab thickness m Loading on 3rd 5.1kPa 1.0kPa 1.0kPa 3.0kPa

Floor-ceiling height m Loading on 2nd 5.1kPa 1.0kPa 1.0kPa 3.0kPa

Loading on 1st 5.1kPa 1.0kPa 1.0kPa 3.0kPa

Hyperstatic effect 10% Loading on GF 5.1kPa 2.5kPa 1.0kPa 3.0kPa

Basement 5.10 1.0kPa 2.0kPa 3.0kPa

Concentated load 5.0 kN 5.10 1.0kPa 2.0kPa 3.0kPa

on column 5.10 1.0kPa 2.0kPa 3.0kPa

Column agregate Brick 5.10 1.0kPa 2.0kPa 3.0kPa

Rebar % 4.30 % 5.10 1.0kPa 2.0kPa 3.0kPa

5.10 1.0kPa 2.0kPa 3.0kPa

Limits (MPa) X Y 5.10 1.0kPa 2.0kPa 3.0kPa

9.4 11.9 5.10 1.0kPa 2.0kPa 3.0kPa

5.10 1.0kPa 2.0kPa 3.0kPa

Apparent w orking stress 15.1 MPa 5.10 1.0kPa 2.0kPa 3.0kPa

Case II w orking stress 18.9 MPa

kN

Concrete stress is greater than Z MPa (FOS less than 1.25). RED (See guidance)

Z

14.4

Total unfactored

column load (kN)2108

All Weather Fashions

52 Shahid Tajuddin Ahmed Sarani

Mohakhali, Dhaka 1213

before 2005

0.152

2.896

Due to the RED warning, the live loads have

been further reduced to a minimum of 1.0kPa.

Although actual live loads may be less than

1.0kPa, it is unsafe to assume any design

loading less than 1.0kPa. Following this, the

result remains RED.

Given that this building has been approved for

construction up to 13 floors, the structure in its

current state already appears to be insufficient

for its given purpose.

1st Priority 1 Concern

Column Load Remains

Unsatisfactory When Assuming

Actual Applied Loads

Each roll of fabric is

estimated to be

approximately 35kg.

As they are stacked

10 rolls high, and

arranged 6 rolls per

layer, the weight of

each layer is approx

210kg, resulting in a

total weight of

2,100kg (20.6kN) per

stack.

Based on a plan area

of 1.4mx1.4m per

stack, the equivalent

live load per stack is

estimated to be:

20.6kN/(1.4x1.4)m2 =

10.5kPa.

The allowable live

load is max. 3.0kPa

2nd Priority 1 Concern

Excessive Storage Height of

Fabric storage area on Level 3

Each roll of fabric is

estimated to be

approximately 30kg.

As they are stacked

7 rolls high, and

arranged 7 rolls per

layer, the weight of

each layer is approx

210kg, resulting in a

total weight of

1,470kg (14.4kN) per

stack.

Based on a plan area

of 1.4mx1.4m per

stack, the equivalent

live load per stack is

estimated to be:

14.4kN/(1.4x1.4)m2 =

7.4kPa.

The allowable live

load is max. 3.0kPa

3rd Priority 1 Concern

Excessive Storage Height of

Fabric storage area on Level 6

Identified Priority 3 Concerns

1st Priority 3 Concern

In the main circulation stairwell, the existing vent shaft had been

cancelled, and modification to the staircase had taken place by filling

in the half-landing slab to the perimeter of the building. However, the

construction quality is very poor, and spalling of the slab has

occurred, including rusting of the rebars, and also the deep cracking

of the column at 8/F and 7/F half landing.

It is planned to construct brick wall to enclose the entire staircase.

Along the original slab edge.

Main Staircase structural

modifications exhibit major defects

2nd Priority 3 Concern

In particular on the 8/F ceiling (the roof slab), there are many areas

where water seepage or prolonged soaking of the slab has caused

water damage either by rebar corrosion, leading to spalling or

loosening of plaster. Other areas, such as the ceiling below the toilets

at the very rear of the building on each floor also exhibits water

damage (6/F). On some floors, walls also have water damage (4/F).

This should be repaired

Dampness and water ingress has caused

water damage at several locations

3rd Priority 3 Concern

Judging by the water ingress

at 8/F ceiling, it may be

assumed that no waterproof

membrane has been applied

at the roof level of the building.

This means that any cracks in

the surface finishes on the roof

will allow water to seep into

the concrete slab beneath the

finishes, and cause long-term

soaking of the slab, causing

the defects as observed on 8/F

ceiling.

Roof Floor does not appear to have any

waterproof membrane to protect lower floor

from water damage

Priority Actions

Problems Observed Summary

ITEM 1: (1st Priority 1) Preliminary load take-down calculations suggest that structure does not comply with the BNBC regulations with regard to required design loading, and that even using significantly reduced loading still results in a structure which is incapable of sustaining the applied loads. ITEM 2: (2nd and 3rd Priority 1) Storage height of fabric in storage rooms on 3/F and 6/F appear to be excessive ITEM 3: (1st Priority 3) Poor quality construction at entire main stairwell location has resulted in cracking of columns, spalling of concrete, and corrosion of rebars. ITEM 4: (2nd Priority 3) Several areas at 4/F, 6/F and 8/F have significant water damage at wall and ceiling and beam locations. ITEM 5: (3rd Priority 3) Roof appears not to have any waterproofing system applied.

Priority 1

(Immediate – Now)

• Suspend all activities in the building

• Discuss with owner on the possibility of

shutting down at least 4 (four) floors of the

building to reduce loading to within limits

Item 1 and actions Preliminary load take-down calculations suggest that structure does not comply with the BNBC

regulations with regard to required design loading and that even using significantly reduced loading

still results in a structure which is incapable of sustaining the applied loads.

Priority 2

(within 6 – weeks)

• Building engineer to carry out thorough load

checking of the entire structure, including

slabs, beams and columns based on BNBC

• Carry out intrusive testing of structure to

determine actual concrete and rebar strength

Priority 3

(within 6-months)

• Develop live load plans for each usable floor

and incorporate fail safe indication system

• Consider whether to demolish the unused

floors

Item 2 and actions

Storage height of fabric in storage rooms on 3/F and 6/F appear to be excessive

Priority 1

(Immediate – Now)

• Immediately reduce stacking height of fabric

rolls to ensure total load does not exceed

3.0kPa

Priority 2

(within 6 – weeks)

• Mark the maximum allowable height of fabric

stacking to ensure full compliance

Priority 3

(within 6-months)

• Not required

Item 3 and actions

Poor quality construction at entire main stairwell location has resulted in cracking of columns,

spalling of concrete, and corrosion of rebars.

Priority 1

(Immediate – Now)

• Carry out full building survey to identify all

areas of concrete damage, and mark on site

with coloured spray paint

Priority 2

(within 6 – weeks)

• Provide propping to the damaged concrete

areas (if slab and beam and column)

Priority 3

(within 6-months)

• Hack away the damaged concrete and

expose reinforcement to check for corrosion

• Carry out replacement of reinforcement and

proper regrouting of structural elements

Item 4 and actions

Several areas at 4/F, 6/F and 8/F have significant water damage at wall and ceiling and beam

locations.

Priority 1

(Immediate – Now)

• Not required if done as part of Item 3

Priority 2

(within 6 – weeks)

• Provide propping to the damaged concrete

areas (if slab and beam and column)

Priority 3

(within 6-months)

• Hack away the damaged concrete and

expose reinforcement to check for corrosion

• Carry out replacement of reinforcement and

proper regrouting of structural elements

Item 5 and actions

Roof appears not to have any waterproofing system applied.

Priority 1

(Immediate – Now)

• Not required

Priority 2

(within 6 – weeks)

• Not required

Priority 3

(within 6-months)

• Consider removing existing screed, applying

a new waterproofing membrane and

reapplying the screed

Detail Engineering Assessment

This Schedule develops a minimum level of information, Analysis and testing expected as part of a Detail Engineering Assessment. The

building(s) have been visually assessed and it is deemed necessary that a detailed engineering assessment be carried out by a competent

Engineering Team employed by the factory Owner.

This request should be read in conjunction with the BUET developed Tripartite Guideline document for Assessment of Structural Integrity of

Existing RMG Factory Buildings in Bangladesh (Tripartite Document), the latest version of this document should be referenced. This

document also gives guidance on required competency of Engineering Team.

We expect that the following will be carried out:

1. Development of Full Engineering As-Built Drawings showing Structure, loading, elements, dimensions, levels, foundations and framing

on Plan, Section and Elevational drawings.

2. The Engineering team are to carry out supporting calculations with a model based design check to assess the safety and serviceability

of the building against loading as set out in BNBC-2006, Lower rate provisions can be applied in accordance with the Tripartite

Guidance following international engineering practice, justification for these lower rate provisions must be made.

3. A Geotechnical Report describing ground conditions and commenting on foundation systems used/proposed.

4. A report on Engineering tests carried out to justify materials strengths and reinforcement content in all key elements studied.

5. Detailed load plans shall be prepared for each level showing current ad potential future loading with all key equipment items shown

with associated loads.

6. The Engineering team will prepare an assessment report that covers the following:

• As-Built drawings including

• Plans at each level calling up and dimensioning all structural components

• Cross sectional drawings showing structural beams, slabs, floor to floor heights, roof build-ups and Basic design

information of the structure

• Highlight any variations between As-built compared to the design structure

• Result of testing for strength and materials

• Results of geotechnical assessment and testing/investigation

• Details of loading, inputs and results of computer modelling

• Commentary on adequate/inadequacy of elements of the structure

• Schedule of any required retrofitting required for safety or performance of Structure

Any proposals for Retrofitting to follow guidance developed in the Tripartite Document

Survey Limitations and Assumptions

This report is for the private and confidential use of Accord for whom it was prepared together with their professional advisors as

appropriate. It should not be reproduced in whole or in part or relied upon by third parties for any use without the express written permission

of WSP.

This report can be used in discussion with the supplier or factory owner as a means to rectify or address any observations made. The report

is not comprehensive and is limited to what could be observed during a visual inspection of the building.

This report is not intended to be treated as a generalised inspection and does not cover the deterioration of structural members through

dampness, fungal or insect attack, nor does it deal with problems and defects of non-structural nature. Other non structural aspects of the

building such as fire safety have not been assessed in this survey.

Except as otherwise noted, drains and other services were not viewed or tested during our inspection and are therefore similarly excluded

from this report. We have not inspected any parts of the structure which are covered, unexposed or inaccessible and we are therefore

unable to report that any such part of the property is free from defect.

External inspection of the façade walls has generally been carried out from ground level only by visual sighting. No opening up works were

carried out (except as noted) and we rely on the Architects and Engineers drawings provided to use for our views on concealed parts of the

structure and in particular foundations. Strengths of materials and components are untested and we recommend that the factory owners

Building Engineer carries out insitu testing over and above those suggested to satisfy themselves with the material strengths and component

details.

Recommendations, where given, are for the purpose of providing indicative advice only, are not exhaustive, relate solely to identifying key

and obvious structural defects as identified in this presentation, and do not take the form of or constitute a specification for works. We take

no responsibility for the works as constructed. This report does not interfere with the factory owners Building Engineers responsibility for the

structural performance of this building. The Building Engineer remains fully responsible for the structural adequacy of the building.

This report does not comment in detail on the future seismic performance of the building and only highlights the fact that the building may

experience significant damage or collapse in a seismic event along with many others in the Dhaka region.

The observations in this report are based on the Engineering Judgement of the lead surveyor/engineer at the time of the survey. We assume

in making these observations that no covering up of faults defects, filling or plastering over cracking or significant repair work has been

carried out by the building owner. Any future alterations or additional work by the building owner will void this report.