Forensic Engineering

Volume 165 Issue FE1

Building facade failures
Beasley

ice | proceedings

Proceedings of the Institution Civil Engineers

Forensic Engineering 165 February 2012 Issue FE1
Pages 1319 http://dx.doi.org/10.1680/feng.2012.165.1.13
Paper 1100020
Received 07/06/2011
Accepted 08/09/2011
Keywords: brickwork & masonry/buildings, structures &
design/failures

ICE Publishing: All rights reserved

Building facade failures

Kimball J. Beasley BEng, MBA, PE, FASCE
Senior Principal, Wiss, Janney, Elstner Associates, Princeton, NJ, USA

Building facades serve mainly to protect occupants and contents from the elements. Failure of the building envelope (i.e.
walls, roof and windows) to function as intended usually has a significant impact on the serviceability of the building.
Roofs and windows periodically fail and are replaced; however, the building facade is expected to endure the forces of
nature for the service life of the building. The increasing complexity of modern buildings, combined with decreasing
tolerance for undesirable performance of building systems, has resulted in an ever increasing frequency of building
facade failures. This paper addresses common serviceability and performance problems associated with various types of
building facades. Methods and tools useful for investigation of facade failures are discussed. The paper is not intended
to be a comprehensive guide for the forensic investigator, but is offered as an aid to help recognise symptoms and
evaluate conditions that underlie common building facade failures. The types of building facades and investigation
methods discussed in this paper are primarily based on the authors experience within the USA.

1.

Introduction

Collapse of building walls usually makes the evening news.

Less dramatic facade failures such as water leaks are less
newsworthy but far more common. Such serviceability failures
are also collectively far more costly than wall collapses.
Physical evidence of building facade failures may often include
cracking, bulging and deterioration of the building walls. These
conditions may result from a wide variety of forces acting on or
within the building walls, or from interactions between the
facade and other building elements. A clear understanding of
the characteristics and vulnerabilities of the facade system is
needed to understand why it failed to perform as intended.

2.

Types of facades

Early buildings often employed massive masonry walls that

carried structural loads to the foundation as well as enclosing
the building. Within the last 150 years, the development of the
skeleton frame structural system has resulted in exterior wall
facades being physically and functionally separated from the
main buildings structural system.
Contemporary cladding systems, such as thin brick, metal, tile
or stone veneers, are much lighter and thinner than traditional
wall systems. These facades must be designed and connected to
the back-up wall or building structure in a manner to support
their own weight and to resist any imposed forces with an
adequate factor of safety. Facade support systems may
incorporate flexible connections that secure the facade to the
structure without inadvertently imposing undesirable restraints
against natural building or facade movements.
Water leakage and condensation management systems vary
depending on the wall and cladding system. Mass masonry

walls are intended to absorb water before it reaches the interior

and allow it to evaporate over time. Contemporary walls may
deflect rainwater at the wall surface (surface barrier) or utilise
an internal cavity and flashing system that provides two lines
of defence against water infiltration. The contemporary rain
screen wall system allows water through open joints in the
facade where it is directed to the exterior by a membrane
within the wall.

3.

Forces of nature

Building facades must resist a variety of externally and

internally imposed forces. External forces include lateral loads
from wind or earthquakes and vertical loads from the facades
own weight. Internally imposed forces may result from
expanding elements in the wall (e.g. ice formation or corrosion
scale) or by restrained planar movements between the facade
and the walls substrate or the buildings structural frame (e.g.
thermal expansion or concrete shrinkage).
External loads are usually well understood and the response of
the facade to these forces is predictable. Wind, gravity and
even earthquake loads can be quantified and analysed. The
facade system should be designed to accommodate such forces.
However, internal wall forces are more complex and may vary
substantially from structure to structure and even within the
same structure depending on the materials and component
configurations. Internal wall and facade forces include
restrained thermal expansion and contraction of the facade,
or accumulated moisture expansion of fired-clay facade
materials such as brick or tile following installation.
Structural building movements can also impose unexpected
forces on the wall or facades. Deflection of a relatively flexible
steel building frame or creep shrinkage of the buildings
13

Forensic Engineering
Volume 165 Issue FE1

Building facade failures

Beasley

structural concrete frame can compress or pinch the facade at

rigid connections or support points. Such internal wall forces
are often overlooked or misunderstood during design and
construction, leading to facades that are susceptible to failure.
Failure can also occur from gradual loss of strength or erosion
of materials used to support the facade. Figure 1 shows a
building wall that collapsed from gradual erosion and
displacement of a load-bearing wall.

subjected to cyclic freezing and thawing temperatures, certain

absorptive materials (e.g. concrete, mortar, fired-clay masonry)
can deteriorate over time. Furthermore, pockets of water
trapped in the wall can freeze, expand and crack or displace the
adjacent masonry by a phenomenon known as ice lensing.
Water trapped in the wall can deteriorate back-up sheathing
materials and can reduce the effectiveness of fibre insulation.
Figure 2 illustrates spalling of a concrete surface from
expansive corrosion of embedded reinforcing steel.

Water can be a formidable force of nature. While many

exterior wall systems are designed to manage some water entry,
excessive water penetration through the facade can cause a
variety of problems. Aside from the obvious difficulties
associated with water leakage to the interior, excessive water
penetration and retention in the wall can lead to corrosion of
embedded ferrous metal, which both reduces the strength of
the metal element and produces corrosion scale that, if
confined, can result in spalls, displacements or cracks in the
surrounding masonry. When saturated with water and

4.

Facade failures

A building facade must perform a wide range of functions. It is

required to control light entry and keep out rain, cold, heat and
noise. It also must resist deterioration, cracking, detachment
and various other mechanisms of distress. Facades also define
a buildings architectural character, so they must retain their
aesthetic qualities for the life of the building. Any facade that
cannot perform all of these functions satisfactorily has failed.
Failure is often a misunderstood term in the context of
building walls. Collapse of a wall is an obvious failure.
However, a facade that appears to be intact but would not be

Figure 1. Building collapse from erosion and displacement of a

load-bearing wall

14

Figure 2. Concrete spalling from corroding reinforcing steel

Forensic Engineering
Volume 165 Issue FE1

Building facade failures

Beasley

able to sustain normal wind loads because of missing or

corroded anchors behind the surface has also failed. In fact,
such latent facade failures can be more insidious because they
are difficult to detect and may cause facades to detach and
collapse without warning. Poor performance of building
facades from water leaks or unsightly cracks is far more
common than failures that result in a catastrophic collapse that
claims life and damages property.

permeable water-resistive barriers behind the facade may result

in wrong-side vapour barriers that lead to condensation within
the wall or inhibit vapour transmission and facade drying.

Facades are subjected to a wide variety of forces and exposures

that may lead to failure. Corrosion or deterioration of cladding
or connection materials undermines the ability of the facade to
resist normal loads. External forces of a magnitude or
orientation not anticipated in design can damage the facade
or its support system. Defects introduced during construction
or prefabrication of a wall system may also affect the facades
ability to perform as designed.

5.

(a)
Since most contemporary facades are considered nonstructural building elements, the initial responsibility for design
of a facade support system may be shared between a design
architect and a structural engineer. Often, a project designer
and project engineer will provide conceptual drawings for the
facade support but rely on the contractors shop drawings to
detail or refine the connections and supporting elements, which
must accommodate wind and seismic loads as well as structural
deflections. The facade attachment design responsibility may
reside with the fabricators engineer who is engaged by the
contractor. This fragmenting of responsibility and the resulting
potential lack of coordination are also frequent indirect
contributors to facade failures.
Failure of a building facade to control water leaks is one of the
most common building facade failures. With traditional
masonry walls, water leakage to the interior is minimised
because the solid masonry mass will absorb water and
gradually expel it as vapour. With cavity wall systems, water
that penetrates the facade must be conveyed to internal
through-wall flashings and weep holes via wall cavities.
Blocked or bridged wall cavities, breached or poorly configured flashings and clogged or incorrectly positioned weep holes
may individually or collectively result in water leakage to the
interior. Certain types of construction or architectural features
create walls that are more vulnerable to water leakage. Walls
that are positioned directly above occupied spaces (i.e. rising
walls) tend to result in immediate water leaks if the throughwall flashings fail. Increased water exposure from poorly
sloped window sills or from roofs or scuppers that pitch water
onto wall surfaces create a greater potential for water leakage.
Surface-sealed facades lack redundancy to protect against
leakage. The primary water barrier in some rain screen wall
systems is buried beneath the facade and cannot be easily
accessed for maintenance or repair. Inappropriate, low vapour

Investigating facade failures

Determining why a facade failure occurred requires knowledge

of the facade system and its connection and support elements,
the underlying structural system and the environment and
forces acting on the facade. Information on the conditions
surrounding the failure is gained from documents and research
that describe design requirements, maintenance/repair history
and loads at the time of failure. This information helps to
establish the background circumstances leading to the failure.
The type and scope of investigation performed depends on the
nature, severity and consequences of the facade failure. Facade
failure investigations often involve the fundamental steps of

(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)

5.1

gathering basic information on the circumstances surrounding the failure

conducting initial visual assessments of conditions at the
site
collecting data on site through observations, measurements and testing
analysing data and developing failure hypotheses
reporting facts, methods, findings and opinions of the
failure cause(s).

Data collection

Acquiring information relevant to a facade failure usually

requires a review of existing published materials and observation of conditions at the failure site.
5.1.1 Document review
Review of available relevant drawings, specifications, prior
reports, photographs, media coverage, etc. can usually provide
background information on the design of the facade system
and conditions or exposure at the time of the failure. Since asbuilt construction often deviates significantly from the design
documents, confirmation by direct observation is necessary.
5.1.2 Aerial and birds-eye satellite images
Recent advancements in mapping websites such as Bing maps
or Google street view can provide valuable tools for
investigating facade failures. Detailed photographic images
that may have been taken from a few months to several years
ago can show the conditions of building facades and
surrounding buildings prior to a failure or collapse.
5.1.3 Visual inspection and condition surveys
Inspection methods can range from cursory visual and
binocular surveys to detailed examination, probe openings
and testing or monitoring. Inspection may help to identify and
document the severity or nature of existing facade distress in
15

Forensic Engineering
Volume 165 Issue FE1

Building facade failures

Beasley

order to assess possible causes of the failure. Facade cracking,

bulging, delamination or leaking usually occurs with patterns
or features that can offer clues to their causes. Periodic
inspection can also serve to determine the rate of deterioration.
A visual condition survey of building facades usually involves
documenting conditions by annotating observations on building elevation drawings and high-resolution photographs.

Section 5.2). Contractor assistance is required for close-up wall

access and for making and patching probe openings. Various
measurements (dimensions of typical wall panels, masonry
units, joint widths, displacements, crack widths, etc.) need to
be taken in detailed inspections. Such measurements also help
to confirm whether the original construction documents
accurately represent as-built conditions.

The condition survey objectives often include determining the

location and nature of distress, identifying patterns of
deterioration, establishing potential scope and locations for
repair work, and developing baseline conditions for comparison with subsequent inspections. Binoculars or telephoto
equipment are useful to facilitate observation of facade
conditions on tall buildings. The condition survey drawings
offer a valuable method of identifying the nature and location
of facade damage and visualising the overall patterns of
distress and force paths. Conditions identified during a survey
will usually help to determine the need for and type of
additional studies and field or laboratory tests.

5.2

5.1.4 Detailed inspection

Close-up visual examination of collapsed and damaged facades
and adjacent areas is essential to gain knowledge of as-built
construction. Safe access for such close-up examination may be
from roof setbacks, balconies, swing or pipe scaffolding,
bucket truck, personnel lift or rappelling. Examination of
subsurface wall elements, facade connections and adjacent
construction requires exploratory probe openings or inspections via borescope or micro-miniature camera device (see

Figure 3. Reticule gauge used to measure relative movement

16

Investigation tools

A wide variety of simple, traditional or advanced new

equipment is available to the investigator. The tools and
equipment required to investigate facade failures vary with the
type of failure being investigated. However, certain simple
tools are common to most investigations; these include highresolution digital cameras, tape measures, binoculars, flashlights, mirrors, sounding hammers, etc. Tools that are more
sophisticated, more accurate or dedicated to a specific purpose
may also be used. These may include three-dimensional (3D)
laser scanning, infrared thermography, strain relief testing, etc.
5.2.1 Measurements
Simple measuring devices include tape measures, calipers,
levels and optical crack comparators. Measurements of movement over time can be made using devices such as reticule
gauges, scratch gauges or electronic displacement transducers.
Figure 3 shows a common movement gauge device. A variety
of devices is also available for temperature and moisture
measurements. More sophisticated devices or systems may be
used to measure precise relative positions of visible building
facade areas relative to a reference point. Newer technologies

Forensic Engineering
Volume 165 Issue FE1

Building facade failures

Beasley

include global positioning, electronic distance measuring

systems and laser scanning.
5.2.2 Photographic equipment
A high-quality digital camera with an adequate optical zoom
feature is an essential investigation tool; a video camera may be
useful if conditions at the site are changing rapidly. A
professional photography service may be needed for aerial
views or specialised high-quality photography.
5.2.3 Laser scanning
3D laser scanning technology involves scanning the building
facade surface from several vantage points with infrared and/or
laser light. The precise position of discrete points on the facade
surface is determined by combining the scans to produce a grid
of measurements. The resulting high-resolution surface map
is useful for identifying displacements, outlining facade
features or establishing a baseline drawing for future surveys
or comparative measurements.
5.2.4 Infrared thermography
Under certain conditions, infrared thermography can be used
to detect discontinuities or connection failures behind a
building facade. Slight variations in the facade surface
temperature measured via an infrared thermography camera
may signify a decrease or increase in thermal conductivity of
the wall. This variance can result from conductivity interruptions from delamination or dislocated facade attachments, or
from increased conductivity from wet insulation that can cause
thermal short circuits.
5.2.5 Borescope or micro camera
A borescope or a micro-miniature camera can be used to view
conditions behind a facade surface. A borescopes smalldiameter (6 or 8 mm) metal tube or camera head is inserted
through a small hole or joint. The device usually includes a
light source and digital image capture feature.
5.2.6 Metal detection
The location and size of embedded steel reinforcement and steel
support or anchor elements beneath a wall surface may need to
be known to fully evaluate the facade system. A conventional
metal detector can detect the presence of metal and a
pachometer can be used to measure the location, orientation,
size or depth of underlying metal reinforcement or anchors.
5.2.7 Strain relief
Strain relief testing can be used to measure compressive stresses
locked into a masonry facade. Such testing involves adhering
carbon-filament strain gauges to the wall surface (see Figure 4)
and then releasing the in situ stress by saw cutting around the
instrumented area of the facade. The strain value is measured
before and after saw cutting and the in situ residual facade

Figure 4. Carbon filament strain gauge adhered to a facade

surface

stress is computed by multiplying the modulus of elasticity of

the facade material by the measured strain change. This
technique is particularly useful to determine the potential for
cracking or compression buckling failure of a masonry facade.

5.3

Field testing

Testing representative building facade elements in place can

provide an effective means of evaluating the physical characteristics and conditions of building facades.
5.3.1 Load testing
The behaviour of facade or wall elements under controlled load
application often helps to establish their strength, deflection
characteristics or mode of failure. Point or uniform loads can
be applied with hydraulic or pneumatic systems. Strains and
deflections can be measured electronically and computerised
data acquisition systems can collect, store and display load,
stress and deflection data rapidly during a test.
17

Forensic Engineering
Volume 165 Issue FE1

Building facade failures

Beasley

5.3.2 Models and mock-ups

Construction and testing of models of the subject wall or
facade system and repair mock-ups can help investigators
understand the behaviour of complex building facade systems
and evaluate the efficacy of repairs. Service loads can be
duplicated while monitoring displacements and strains under
controlled conditions. Loads can be increased to test the mode
of failure. Forces may be focused on connections or facade
components of concern. As an investigative tool, duplicating
an actual failure with a mock-up of the as-built elements can
also provide compelling verification of a failure hypothesis.

microscopic defects, visible indicators of deterioration, evidence of unsound or reactive aggregate or other deleterious
components. Petrographic examination is also used to estimate
the watercement ratio, percentage of entrained air or
characteristics of the air void system in concrete. In general,
petrography indicates the overall quality and soundness of
stone, brick, concrete or mortar materials. Petrographic studies
are often used in combination with chemical testing to obtain
additional information about construction materials.

5.3.3 Water penetration testing

Accurately identifying, tracking and quantifying water leakage
into and through an exterior building wall requires a careful and
systematic testing approach. Several standards provide controlled
water penetration testing methods for diagnostic tools or proof
testing to assess a facades compliance with project specifications,
standards or codes. Among the standards commonly used for
diagnostic water leak testing and assessment of water penetration
resistance of wall and fenestration system joints, gaskets and
sealant detailing are AAMA 501.2 (AAMA, 2003) and ASTM
E1105 (ASTM, 2000). AAMA 501.2 is intended for testing newly
installed operable windows and doors. AAMA 511-08 is used for
systematically investigating and recreating known water leakage
in a fenestration system (AAMA, 2008).

5.4

Laboratory testing

Many laboratory tests are available to determine the properties

of facade materials, the nature of deterioration and the
effectiveness of remedial measures. The majority of the US
standards cited in the following have similar or equivalent
European standards such as those developed and maintained
by the European Committee for Standardisation (CEN), the
British Standards Institution (BSI) and the German Institute
for Standardisation (DIN).
5.4.1 Physical testing
Physical properties of facade materials can be approximated by
load testing specimens representative of the subject wall in a
controlled laboratory environment. These tests are generally
used to establish strength and mechanical characteristics of the
wall or facade materials. Compression or flexural testing can
be performed on a statistically representative number of
masonry, concrete or other samples removed from the building
or supplied by a manufacturer to establish the potential
strength range of the material.
5.4.2 Petrographic microscopy
Petrography involves a standardised microscopic examination
of stone, concrete, brick or mortar based on the methods
outlined in ASTM C856 (ASTM, 2004a). The objectives of a
petrographic examination are to gain information about the
composition of the materials and to identify the presence of
18

5.4.3 Chloride content

The chloride ion content in concrete or mortar provides
quantitative evidence of the potential for corrosion of
embedded steel elements. Measurement of the chloride profile
(variation in chloride concentration with distance from the
surface) can help to establish if the chloride source is external
(e.g. salt spray) or internal (e.g. accelerating admixture). The
chloride content is determined by methods described in ASTM
C1218 (ASTM, 2008) and ASTM C1152 (ASTM, 2004b).
5.4.4 Freezethaw testing
The durability of masonry and concrete materials, specifically
resistance to cyclic freezing and thawing, is measured by
alternately exposing critically saturated samples to temperatures above and below freezing. The onset of freezethaw
distress is measured by weighing samples periodically during a
test to assess weight loss from fragmentation. A dynamic
modulus test measures variations in the samples resonant
frequency as an early detection of internal sample degradation.
Procedures for freezethaw testing of prepared concrete prisms
are provided in ASTM C666 (ASTM, 2003), while ASTM C67
(ASTM, 2007a) provides guidelines for freezethaw testing of
brick samples. The ratio of cold water absorption to boiling
water absorption (or saturation coefficient) is also an indicator
of the potential freezethaw durability of brick. The saturation
coefficient essentially quantifies the free pore space that is
available to accommodate ice formation in a water-saturated
brick body. The method of measuring the saturation coefficient
is described in ASTM C67 and the criteria for evaluating brick
performance are described in ASTM C216 (ASTM, 2007b).
5.4.5 WUFI analysis
WUFI (Warme und Feuchtetransport Instationar) analysis
involves the use of a computer software program to assess
multi-layered building enclosure systems (Kuenzel et al., 2001).
This analytical method, which models 1D heat and moisture
transport, is gaining popularity for optimising building
envelope design and as a diagnostic tool for comparing actual
and predicted performance of an enclosure system.

6.

Organisation and communication of

findings

Most building facade failure investigations require conveying the

findings to the interested parties in a written report. Depending

Forensic Engineering
Volume 165 Issue FE1

Building facade failures

Beasley

on the goal of the investigation, the report may take a variety of

forms. However, most investigation reports follow a logical
sequence flowing from acquired information, to factual finding,
to analysis and opinions, and then to recommendations. The
report may start with an introduction and background section.
Observations and factual information gained during the investigation are provided next, followed by analysis and discussion,
which involves assessment and interpretation of verifiable facts.
Finally, opinions and conclusions express the investigators
determination of the cause of the failure based on the referenced
background material and information presented in the report.
Reports also often include recommendations for remediation.

windows, skylights, doors, and curtain walls by uniform or

cyclic static air pressure difference. ASTM, West
Conshohocken, PA, USA.
ASTM (2003) ASTM C666/C666M-03: Standard test method
for resistance of concrete to rapid freezing and thawing.
ASTM, West Conshohocken, PA, USA.
ASTM (2004a) ASTM C856-04: Standard practice for
petrographic examination of hardened concrete. ASTM,
West Conshohocken, PA, USA.
ASTM (2004b) ASTM C1152-04: Standard test method for
acid-soluble chloride in mortar and concrete. ASTM, West
Conshohocken, PA, USA.
ASTM (2007a) ASTM C67-07a: Standard test methods for
sampling and testing brick and structural clay tile. ASTM,
West Conshohocken, PA, USA.
ASTM (2007b) ASTM C216-07a: Standard specification for
facing brick (solid masonry units made from clay or shale).
ASTM, West Conshohocken, PA, USA.
ASTM (2008) ASTM C1218/C1218M-08: Standard test method
for water-soluble chloride in mortar and concrete. ASTM,
West Conshohocken, PA, USA.
Kuenzel HM, Karagiozis AN and Holm AH (2001) A
hygrothermal design tool for architects and engineers. In
Moisture Analysis and Condensation Control in Building
Envelopes (Trechsel HR (ed.)). ASTM, West
Conshohocken, PA, USA.

If a preliminary determination and early report are needed

before an investigation is complete, all assumptions and
limitations due to incomplete data that formed the basis of
the report should be described. However, if further investigations and evaluation of additional data later lead to opinions
that differ substantially from the preliminary report, discrepancies must be explained in a subsequent report.
Litigation support cases often require verbal communication of
the investigation findings prior to issuance of a written report.
Depending on the clients needs, graphic presentations or the
development of physical models and court exhibits may also be
required.

7.

Conclusions

The scope and method of facade failure investigation,

diagnosis and remediation will vary depending on the nature
of the failure. The key objective is to collect sufficient reliable
data to determine the underlying cause(s) of the failure. The
tools and methods used for the investigation should be selected
to provide the most useful and accurate information in order to
understand the forces and conditions leading to the failure.
Facade failures can result from a wide variety of circumstances.
However, they occur most often through careless construction
practices or in facade designs that employ overly complex
features, especially where materials, connections and details
lack redundant facade support mechanisms, fail to accommodate movement or lack effective wall drainage systems.
REFERENCES

AAMA (American Architectural Manufacturers Association) (2003)

AAMA 501.2-03: Quality assurance of diagnostic water

leakage field check of installed storefronts, curtain walls, and
sloped glazing systems. AAMA, Schaumburg, IL, USA.
AAMA (2008) AAMA 511-08: Voluntary guidelines for forensic
water penetration testing of fenestration products. AAMA,
Schaumburg, IL, USA.
ASTM (2000) ASTM E1105-00: Standard test methods for field
determination of water penetration of installed exterior

WHAT DO YOU THINK?

To discuss this paper, please email up to 500 words to the

editor at journals@ice.org.uk. Your contribution will be
forwarded to the author(s) for a reply and, if considered
appropriate by the editorial panel, will be published as
discussion in a future issue of the journal.
Proceedings journals rely entirely on contributions sent in
by civil engineering professionals, academics and students. Papers should be 20005000 words long (briefing
papers should be 10002000 words long), with adequate
illustrations and references. You can submit your paper
online via www.icevirtuallibrary.com/content/journals,
where you will also find detailed author guidelines.
19