Restoration of Albert Dock
Date published

N/A

Price

Standard: £10 + VAT
Members/Subscribers: Free

Back to Previous

Restoration of Albert Dock

Tag
Author
Date published
N/A
Price

Standard: £10 + VAT
Members/Subscribers: Free

The Structural Engineer
Citation

The Structural Engineer, Volume 64, Issue 10, 1986

Date published

N/A

Citation

The Structural Engineer, Volume 64, Issue 10, 1986

Price

Standard: £10 + VAT
Members/Subscribers: Free

This paper describes the structural works which have been carried out during the phase I refurbishment of the Albert Dock Buildings (Blocks A, B, E) and the Dock Traffic Office in Liverpool. Mention is also made of the proposals and initial design work connected with the refurbishment of the southern end of Block C with which the authors’ practice is currently involved. The paper describes the refurbishment of the structure to the Albert Dock warehouses and the Dock Traffic Office in separate sections. Treatments to the foundations and roofs are described, together with a description of the method used to repair the brickwork. The structural works involved with fitting out the buildings to the architect’s and developer’s requirements are also covered. This paper is intended to be read in conjunction with the asocinled paper by Parkinson & Curtin Albert Dock-structural survey, appraisal, and rehabilitation’ which describes the initial survey work and building structure of the Albert Dock buildings.

J.A. Tallis, R.D. Taylor and T.J. Dishman

Additional information

Format:
PDF
Publisher:
The Institution of Structural Engineers

Tags

Issue 10

Related Resources & Events

The Structural Engineer
<h4>Verulam</h4>

Verulam

Settlement and liability Mr J. A. Tanner wrote to us in July regarding liability when an engineer is consulted about remedial measures for settlement within a row of terrace houses, which may be owned individually or by one owner. His questions have brought letters from several readers. Mr E. J. Skilton of Enfield, Middlesex, writes: I believe there is no ‘correct’ solution but engineers in such situations should act with a combination of sound judgment and technical skill guided by both social and moral awareness. Verulam

Price – £10
The Structural Engineer
<h4>The New Concrete Code - is it all it's Cracked up to be?</h4>

The New Concrete Code - is it all it's Cracked up to be?

The purpose of the article was to stimulate a serious technical examination of BS8llO’s contents, and it is a pity that the normally unflappable Dr. Beeby has chosen to adopt a ‘debating’ style for his contribution. (His comments on the Campaign for Practical Codes of Practice require correction, although the article does not directly concern that Campaign-CPCP is not a campaign against the use of BS8110 [as he claims] but a campaign for the right of engineers to choose CP114 as an alternative if they prefer.) What follows is a response to the technical comments Dr. Beeby makes (numbered as in the original article). Mr. Beal

Price – £10
The Structural Engineer
<h4>Lloyd's Redevelopment</h4>

Lloyd's Redevelopment

This paper describes the design of the new headquarters for Lloyd’s; the insurance market in the City of London. P.R. Rice and J.A. Thornton

Price – £10