Multi-level car parks around the world including in Australia could
face serious risk of structural failure and collapse due to the
increasing weight of electric vehicles (EVs) on aging infrastructure,
according to experts.

With some public and private car parks having been built decades
ago when cars were smaller and significantly lighter in weight, there
is a growing concern that as more and more EVs hit the road, the
added weight of these vehicles will cause serious issues.

Multi-level car parks could face serious risk of structural failure.

The average EV weighs significantly more than traditional petrol or
diesel cars, largely due to their battery systems. As an example the
top-spec Tesla Model X has a kerb weight of 2,467kg, which means
its Gross Vehicle Weight Rating (GVWR) of 3,069kg would far exceed
most expectations of weight requirements in the past.

Other models that may eventually find their way to Australia such as
the GMC Hummer EV weigh over 4,000kg, which makes its GVWR an
incredible 4,800kg. The battery pack alone weighs over 1,300kg,
about the weight of a small car equipped with an internal-
combustion engine.

The RAM 1500 REV we saw in New York last week (confirmed for
Australia) has a gigantic 229kWh battery and is expected to have a
kerb weight of over 4,000kg, which would make its GVWR even
higher than the Hummer.

               :(

"Decades ago", cars weighed more than they do now. Why would car parks risk collapse, if EVs weigh as much as the cars from the 1980s. Car parks should be able to theoretically withstand the weight of numerous tanks getting parked in them. If not, then the car parks were not up to standard in the first place.

UnSubRocky wrote on Apr 22^nd, 2023 at 2:45am:

"Decades ago", cars weighed more than they do now. Why would car parks risk collapse, if EVs weigh as much as the cars from the 1980s. Car parks should be able to theoretically withstand the weight of numerous tanks getting parked in them. If not, then the car parks were not up to standard in the first place.

From the link -
An engineer disagrees with you:


Quote:

Speaking to The Telegram in the UK, Chris Whapples, a structural engineer, car park consultant, and author of the new guidelines for the British government, said, “I don’t want to be too alarmist, but there definitely is the potential for some of the early car parks in poor condition to collapse.”

UnSubRocky wrote on Apr 22^nd, 2023 at 2:45am:

"Decades ago", cars weighed more than they do now...

Not so.

A 1985 Holden Commodore weighed 1,220 kg.
A 1985 Ford Falcon weighed 1,333 kg.
A 1985 Toyota Corona weighed 1,100 kg.

A 2022 Kia Sportage weighs 1,231 kg.
A 2022 Hyundai i30 weighs  1,447 kg.
A 2022 Tesla Model Y weighs 1,909 kg.

"the potential for some of the early car parks in poor condition to collapse".

Well f'n duh!

So what are the comparison engineering specs? For what weight were they built? Is that over or under specs for a car park of EV's?

AusGeoff wrote on Apr 22^nd, 2023 at 7:47am:

UnSubRocky wrote on Apr 22nd, 2023 at 2:45am: "Decades ago", cars weighed more than they do now... Not so. A 1985 Holden Commodore weighed 1,220 kg. A 1985 Ford Falcon weighed 1,333 kg. A 1985 Toyota Corona weighed 1,100 kg. A 2022 Kia Sportage weighs 1,231 kg. A 2022 Hyundai i30 weighs  1,447 kg. A 2022 Tesla Model Y weighs 1,909 kg.

I drive a car similar to the Hyundai i30, for my work purposes. They do not weigh that much. Perhaps the car I drive is a little older than what is shown, or maybe a different type of Hyundai. But they are not heavy.

UnSubRocky wrote on Apr 22^nd, 2023 at 2:57pm:

AusGeoff wrote on Apr 22nd, 2023 at 7:47am: UnSubRocky wrote on Apr 22nd, 2023 at 2:45am: "Decades ago", cars weighed more than they do now... Not so. A 1985 Holden Commodore weighed 1,220 kg. A 1985 Ford Falcon weighed 1,333 kg. A 1985 Toyota Corona weighed 1,100 kg. A 2022 Kia Sportage weighs 1,231 kg. A 2022 Hyundai i30 weighs  1,447 kg. A 2022 Tesla Model Y weighs 1,909 kg. I drive a car similar to the Hyundai i30, for my work purposes. They do not weigh that much. Perhaps the car I drive is a little older than what is shown, or maybe a different type of Hyundai. But they are not heavy.

I dunno exactly what vehicle you're driving, but I checked the  Hyundai
Australia 2023 web site for the masses of the i30...

2.0 GDi = 1,382 kg

1.6 CRDi = 1,445 kg

1.6 T-GDi = 1,436 kg

These are all heavier than the old 1980s Commodores and Falcons.

YMMV.

This topic is very important because it raises a major public health and safety issue.

Nevertheless, I fully expect the risks which have been identified to be completely ignored by multi storey car park owners/managers UNTIL some terrible accident occurs and innocent lives are needlessly lost. Such is my faith in people these days. 🥺😩

Lisa Jones wrote on Apr 22^nd, 2023 at 9:17pm:

This topic is very important because it raises a major public health and safety issue. Nevertheless, I fully expect the risks which have been identified to be completely ignored by multi storey car park owners/managers UNTIL some terrible accident occurs and innocent lives are needlessly lost. Such is my faith in people these days. 🥺😩

There would be a large safety margin in the designs for load bearing weight.

I would say that large cracks would be noticed long before the structure fell down.

Bobby. wrote on Apr 22^nd, 2023 at 9:33pm:

Lisa Jones wrote on Apr 22nd, 2023 at 9:17pm: This topic is very important because it raises a major public health and safety issue. Nevertheless, I fully expect the risks which have been identified to be completely ignored by multi storey car park owners/managers UNTIL some terrible accident occurs and innocent lives are needlessly lost. Such is my faith in people these days. 🥺😩 There would be a large safety margin in the designs for load bearing weight. I would say that large cracks would be noticed long before the structure fell down.

I certainly hope so Bobby.

I’m going to send this article off to our neighbour who is an experienced structural engineer (he works both privately as well as for a govt agency).

I’ll let you know what he says.

Lisa Jones wrote on Apr 22^nd, 2023 at 9:17pm:

This topic is very important because it raises a major public health and safety issue. Nevertheless, I fully expect the risks which have been identified to be completely ignored by multi storey car park owners/managers UNTIL some terrible accident occurs and innocent lives are needlessly lost. Such is my faith in people these days. 🥺😩

I think this topic was started in response to that news of the car park that collapsed somewhere in the world. NYC car park collapse.

Lisa Jones wrote on Apr 22^nd, 2023 at 10:01pm:

Bobby. wrote on Apr 22nd, 2023 at 9:33pm: Lisa Jones wrote on Apr 22nd, 2023 at 9:17pm: This topic is very important because it raises a major public health and safety issue. Nevertheless, I fully expect the risks which have been identified to be completely ignored by multi storey car park owners/managers UNTIL some terrible accident occurs and innocent lives are needlessly lost. Such is my faith in people these days. 🥺😩 There would be a large safety margin in the designs for load bearing weight. I would say that large cracks would be noticed long before the structure fell down. I certainly hope so Bobby. I’m going to send this article off to our neighbour who is an experienced structural engineer (he works both privately as well as for a govt agency). I’ll let you know what he says.

Good - let's hear what he says?

Bobby. wrote on Apr 22^nd, 2023 at 10:18pm:

Lisa Jones wrote on Apr 22nd, 2023 at 10:01pm: Bobby. wrote on Apr 22nd, 2023 at 9:33pm: Lisa Jones wrote on Apr 22nd, 2023 at 9:17pm: This topic is very important because it raises a major public health and safety issue. Nevertheless, I fully expect the risks which have been identified to be completely ignored by multi storey car park owners/managers UNTIL some terrible accident occurs and innocent lives are needlessly lost. Such is my faith in people these days. 🥺😩 There would be a large safety margin in the designs for load bearing weight. I would say that large cracks would be noticed long before the structure fell down. I certainly hope so Bobby. I’m going to send this article off to our neighbour who is an experienced structural engineer (he works both privately as well as for a govt agency). I’ll let you know what he says. Good - let's hear what he says?

I’ve texted him the link to the article and I’ve asked him a few questions. He should know (as he’s signed off on a number of large scale civil engineering construction projects here in Sydney and yes he constantly complains about his exorbitant professional indemnity insurance premiums).

Crikey I thought he may have been asleep. I was hoping to hear from him tomorrow morning.

Ok let me see if I can take a screenshot of what he’s texting me. If not then I’ll have to copy and paste his stuff over here. Will that be ok Bobby?

Lisa Jones wrote on Apr 22^nd, 2023 at 11:06pm:

Crikey I thought he may have been asleep. I was hoping to hear from him tomorrow morning. Ok let me see if I can take a screenshot of what he’s texting me. If not then I’ll have to copy and paste his stuff over here. Will that be ok Bobby?

Wouldn't it be easier to copy and paste the text?

Bobby. wrote on Apr 22^nd, 2023 at 11:09pm:

Lisa Jones wrote on Apr 22nd, 2023 at 11:06pm: Crikey I thought he may have been asleep. I was hoping to hear from him tomorrow morning. Ok let me see if I can take a screenshot of what he’s texting me. If not then I’ll have to copy and paste his stuff over here. Will that be ok Bobby? Wouldn't it be easier to copy and paste the text?

Conversation still going .....

Sorry...the conversation is still continuing/taking a few turns. I’ll explain why later.

But essentially he’s identified a few issues (I hammered him on a few things with the article). We’ve now covered these issues in enough detail to generate a letter outlining our concerns to our newly elected NSW Premier Chris Minns. That letter will essentially explain the mistakes made in the article and will highlight the health and safety concerns for NSW residents esp Sydney (given it’s so heavily populated).

And oh great he’s just asked me to draft THAT letter for him to then check over and sign off. 😐

Lisa Jones wrote on Apr 22^nd, 2023 at 11:18pm:

Bobby. wrote on Apr 22nd, 2023 at 11:09pm: Lisa Jones wrote on Apr 22nd, 2023 at 11:06pm: Crikey I thought he may have been asleep. I was hoping to hear from him tomorrow morning. Ok let me see if I can take a screenshot of what he’s texting me. If not then I’ll have to copy and paste his stuff over here. Will that be ok Bobby? Wouldn't it be easier to copy and paste the text? Conversation still going .....

I know he'll agree with my assessment.

What is needed are proper yearly inspections for cracks.

Bobby. wrote on Apr 22^nd, 2023 at 11:34pm:

Lisa Jones wrote on Apr 22nd, 2023 at 11:18pm: Bobby. wrote on Apr 22nd, 2023 at 11:09pm: Lisa Jones wrote on Apr 22nd, 2023 at 11:06pm: Crikey I thought he may have been asleep. I was hoping to hear from him tomorrow morning. Ok let me see if I can take a screenshot of what he’s texting me. If not then I’ll have to copy and paste his stuff over here. Will that be ok Bobby? Wouldn't it be easier to copy and paste the text? Conversation still going ..... I know he'll agree with my assessment. What is needed are proper yearly inspections for cracks.

Sorry Bobby he just indicated yes BUT no ..it won’t be enough.

Why? We both realised as we were chatting that there is no 1 governing body to regulate AND monitor the procedure ie there’s no co ordinated approach to cover different multi level car parks (they differ in age and size AND only some are owned by Council ... many are privately owned).

Look all I was hoping to hear was this : it’s safe for mums and kids to go shopping, park our SUV’s and come back to said parked SUV with kids plus shopping and then come home safely. I’m not asking for too much...yeah?

Well apparently he reckons I am. Why? Because this happened a few days ago (I had no idea about it until he texted me the link)

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/rcna80454

Note : This is just 1 of the many mistakes made by the writer of the article. He’s also made other mistakes (I won’t list them all because the bottom line is this : despite ANY mistake made by the author ... valid public health and safety issue has been raised. And that safety issue is what needs to be addressed.

---

Thanks Lisa,
had it been regularly inspected for cracks?

Lisa Jones wrote on Apr 22^nd, 2023 at 11:34pm:

Sorry...the conversation is still continuing/taking a few turns. I’ll explain why later. But essentially he’s identified a few issues (I hammered him on a few things with the article). We’ve now covered these issues in enough detail to generate a letter outlining our concerns to our newly elected NSW Premier Chris Minns. That letter will essentially explain the mistakes made in the article and will highlight the health and safety concerns for NSW residents esp Sydney (given it’s so heavily populated).

What Factor of Safety (fos) do they use for car park design?

I thought they use FOS 4-5 or even higher for stuff like this keep in mind higher FOS means greater material cost more expensive to build

If the breaking load is 100 tons (engineers use kilo-mega giga Newtons)
FOS 5 = 20 tons max working load
FOS 4= 25 tons mwl
FOS 3= 33.3 tons mwl
FOS 2 = 50 ton mwl

Concrete is really good in compression no good in tension they put steel in concrete for tensile loads. The columns should be OK the slab where cars park has top side in compression with bottom of slab in tension so failures from heavier cars is more likely in slab than columns.

Since they should have FOS around 5 or higher i doubt doubling of cars weight will anything to worry about. If it was desinged with FOS 3 then double the weight of cars will reduce FOS below 2 which could be a problem. I have never done any engineering with concrete structures so not sure on what FOS they use.

Problems come with shonky people who don't follow the design or use substandard products. If the steel used is thinner it won't be as strong if it's thicker it costs more there has to be an idiot factor with some designs.

Concrete cancer is the steel rusting inside the concrete which is why you get rust stains on concrete this weakens structure by unknown amount.

His AS1170 is for wind loading which can be significant for tall buildings not sure how useful that is for 2-5 story car parks that are open walled. Strong winds can have loads up to 50 lbs square foot which are huge loads on tall buildings.

I doubt  many can afford expensive electric cars so i wouldn't be worried about car parks unless building is really old.

Bobby. wrote on Apr 23^rd, 2023 at 12:02am:

Thanks Lisa, had it been regularly inspected for cracks?

Bobby....he told me the REAL issue isn’t the regular inspection for cracks. It’s more complicated than that. Why? Well it involves identifying who has liability, duty of care etc. And these responsibilities identify/affect insurers and the huge premiums they charge because they may well end up being liable.

What needs to be articulated is :

Who is responsible in ensuring a thorough and regular inspection takes place (and not just for cracks).

Note : the word “thorough” isn’t clear enough. Neither is the word “regular”. These terms need to be clearer.

I guess I feel that multi storey car parks need to be considered and treated beyond existing current statutory safety provisions.

There needs to be specific legislation covering these sorts of structures especially in view of emerging and changing vehicle technology as well as the types of cars we’re now driving which is causing these structures to take on more and more stress.

Oh and I forgot to tell you this Bobby: he mentioned the SUVs which we women currently drive around all the time with kids and shopping etc in them. Well he’s supplied me with comparison graphs which prove THESE SUVs are getting heavier too and now many are even heavier than EV’s😔🥺😩

So in essence ... the writer of the article in the OP has made a few mistakes which need to be acknowledged and corrected. Even so the overall message in the article is still relevant.

I’d like to thank whoever raised this topic (I think it was AusGeoff) and for Bobby who has allowed me to post so freely in his sub forum tonight.

(I had better draft the letter required in point form based on our texts/notes and the article in the OP of this topic so I had better log off and do that). Night.

Baronvonrort wrote on Apr 23^rd, 2023 at 12:35am:

Lisa Jones wrote on Apr 22nd, 2023 at 11:34pm: Sorry...the conversation is still continuing/taking a few turns. I’ll explain why later. But essentially he’s identified a few issues (I hammered him on a few things with the article). We’ve now covered these issues in enough detail to generate a letter outlining our concerns to our newly elected NSW Premier Chris Minns. That letter will essentially explain the mistakes made in the article and will highlight the health and safety concerns for NSW residents esp Sydney (given it’s so heavily populated). What Factor of Safety (fos) do they use for car park design? I thought they use FOS 4-5 or even higher for stuff like this keep in mind higher FOS means greater material cost more expensive to build If the breaking load is 100 tons (engineers use kilo-mega giga Newtons) FOS 5 = 20 tons max working load FOS 4= 25 tons mwl FOS 3= 33.3 tons mwl FOS 2 = 50 ton mwl Concrete is really good in compression no good in tension they put steel in concrete for tensile loads. The columns should be OK the slab where cars park has top side in compression with bottom of slab in tension so failures from heavier cars is more likely in slab than columns. Since they should have FOS around 5 or higher i doubt doubling of cars weight will anything to worry about. If it was desinged with FOS 3 then double the weight of cars will reduce FOS below 2 which could be a problem. I have never done any engineering with concrete structures so not sure on what FOS they use. Problems come with shonky people who don't follow the design or use substandard products. If the steel used is thinner it won't be as strong if it's thicker it costs more there has to be an idiot factor with some designs. Concrete cancer is the steel rusting inside the concrete which is why you get rust stains on concrete this weakens structure by unknown amount. His AS1170 is for wind loading which can be significant for tall buildings not sure how useful that is for 2-5 story car parks that are open walled. Strong winds can have loads up to 50 lbs square foot which are huge loads on tall buildings. I doubt  many can afford expensive electric cars so i wouldn't be worried about car parks unless building is really old.

Oh hello Baron! Just caught your comment as I was logging off!

FOS?? I’ll have to ask him tomorrow morning about that.

Re heavy cars ....SUVs are getting heavier ...more heavier than EV’s. That’s another mistake in the article of the OP.

He also pointed out this mistake in the article of the OP. 👇

---

Lisa Jones wrote on Apr 23^rd, 2023 at 12:55am:

Baronvonrort wrote on Apr 23rd, 2023 at 12:35am: Lisa Jones wrote on Apr 22nd, 2023 at 11:34pm: Sorry...the conversation is still continuing/taking a few turns. I’ll explain why later. But essentially he’s identified a few issues (I hammered him on a few things with the article). We’ve now covered these issues in enough detail to generate a letter outlining our concerns to our newly elected NSW Premier Chris Minns. That letter will essentially explain the mistakes made in the article and will highlight the health and safety concerns for NSW residents esp Sydney (given it’s so heavily populated). What Factor of Safety (fos) do they use for car park design? I thought they use FOS 4-5 or even higher for stuff like this keep in mind higher FOS means greater material cost more expensive to build If the breaking load is 100 tons (engineers use kilo-mega giga Newtons) FOS 5 = 20 tons max working load FOS 4= 25 tons mwl FOS 3= 33.3 tons mwl FOS 2 = 50 ton mwl Concrete is really good in compression no good in tension they put steel in concrete for tensile loads. The columns should be OK the slab where cars park has top side in compression with bottom of slab in tension so failures from heavier cars is more likely in slab than columns. Since they should have FOS around 5 or higher i doubt doubling of cars weight will anything to worry about. If it was desinged with FOS 3 then double the weight of cars will reduce FOS below 2 which could be a problem. I have never done any engineering with concrete structures so not sure on what FOS they use. Problems come with shonky people who don't follow the design or use substandard products. If the steel used is thinner it won't be as strong if it's thicker it costs more there has to be an idiot factor with some designs. Concrete cancer is the steel rusting inside the concrete which is why you get rust stains on concrete this weakens structure by unknown amount. His AS1170 is for wind loading which can be significant for tall buildings not sure how useful that is for 2-5 story car parks that are open walled. Strong winds can have loads up to 50 lbs square foot which are huge loads on tall buildings. I doubt  many can afford expensive electric cars so i wouldn't be worried about car parks unless building is really old. Oh hello Baron! Just caught your comment as I was logging off! FOS?? I’ll have ask him tomorrow morning about that. Re heavy cars ....SUVs are getting heavier more heavier than EV’s. That’s another mistake in the article of the OP. He also pointed out this mistake in the article of the OP. 👇

If the Factor of Safety in design is over 5 it shouldn't be a problem with SUV and EVs.

I don't do engineering for static structures like buildings we don't use concrete for things that move. Once upon a time they made boats from Ferro Cement concrete cancer killed that idea. I don't have much experience or interest in concrete structures.

Journalists are the biggest pissheads i have ever met how many times have the fake news got anything right in the last 5 years?

Without being able to locate the original, 100-year-old structural
engineering calculations, it's next to impossible to determine what
sorts of  self-weight, live load, and imposed dead load figures they
used.

Check out this latest report:

Manhattan parking garage previously cited for exposed cracks before collapse.


Quote:

A focus of the investigation is the weight of the 50 vehicles parked on the roof and the age of the building, which was built in 1925.  The garage had dozens of violations dating back decades. Four of those violations are still open.