Version 1
: Received: 20 March 2024 / Approved: 21 March 2024 / Online: 21 March 2024 (11:28:20 CET)
How to cite:
Berg Oppedal, L.; Kvande, T. Lessons Learned from Different Types of Building Defect Information Sources. Preprints2024, 2024031266. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202403.1266.v1
Berg Oppedal, L.; Kvande, T. Lessons Learned from Different Types of Building Defect Information Sources. Preprints 2024, 2024031266. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202403.1266.v1
Berg Oppedal, L.; Kvande, T. Lessons Learned from Different Types of Building Defect Information Sources. Preprints2024, 2024031266. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202403.1266.v1
APA Style
Berg Oppedal, L., & Kvande, T. (2024). Lessons Learned from Different Types of Building Defect Information Sources. Preprints. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202403.1266.v1
Chicago/Turabian Style
Berg Oppedal, L. and Tore Kvande. 2024 "Lessons Learned from Different Types of Building Defect Information Sources" Preprints. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202403.1266.v1
Abstract
Building defects are very prevalent and contribute significantly to a building's economic value. There are numerous information sources on building defects that have a lot potential for learning more about building defects. This study aimed to identify the information sources used in previous building defect studies and to identify the motivation for carrying out such studies. To fulfil this aim a scoping study was carried out. The information sources identified included insurance companies, private databases, questionnaire surveys, lawsuits, building surveys, client complaint forms, and maintenance reports. This study found that insurance company and client complaint forms include the largest collection of real building defect cases, but such databases may lack detailed descriptions of the causes of the defects. The main purposes of building defects studies identified here included design challenges, identification of defects, building maintenance management, quality management, systematization in data collection, providing an overview of typical defects, and classifying defects. Identification was found to be the most common purpose, indicating that the industry wants to learn more. This study identified research gaps in the climate perspective in relation to building defects. Most of the studies focused on the economical perspective, and none focused on the carbon footprint perspective.
Copyright:
This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
