COST EFFECTIVENESS FOR SELECTED CONSTRUCTION

TECHNOLOGIES FOR HOUSING USING BIM TECHNOLOGIES

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING

NED UNIVERSITY OF ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY

KARACHI, PAKISTAN
 COST EFFECTIVENESS FOR SELECTED CONSTRUCTION
TECHNOLOGIES FOR HOUSING USING BIM TECHNOLOGIES

BATCH 2016-2017
By

NAME SEAT NO
1. RAO MOIZ ABDULLAH CE - 193
2. SHAHROZ AHMED CE - 197
3. SHAHZAIB HOUSSAIN CE - 198
4. SYED EBADUR RAHMAN CE - 212
5. TALHA RIAZ KHAN CE - 222
6. SYED AHMED HASSAN CE - 225

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING

NED UNIVERSITY OF ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY

KARACHI, PAKISTAN
CERTIFICATE
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page
TITLE PAGE I
CERTIFICATE II
TABLE OF CONTENTS III
LIST OF TABLES IV
LIST OF FIGURES V
NOTATIONS VI
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT VII
ABSTRACT VIII
DEDICATION IX

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 General 1
1.2 Objective
1.3 Scope
1.4 Methodology

CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW 2

2.1 GENERAL
 CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION

1.1 GENERAL

The current stage of construction is characterized by the problem of need to reduce the cost of buildings
and structures by reducing the complexity of their construction, material cost saving as well as time.
Today, there are many examples of effective use of such structures, both in new construction and in the
process of reconstruction to promote sustainability and reduce the environmental pollution. To make the
process of construction easy and affordable, the construction industry is going ahead by using different
construction technologies like Pre-cast, hollow structural steel.

Economic factors play an important role for the choice of a suitable building system. This has most notably
an effect on housing if large numbers of houses are built. Construction with precast concrete elements offers
a great number of advantages in this case. Moreover, you only need a short construction time when building
in precast compared to other building methods. In comparison to the in-situ building method, you are up to
five times faster. A short construction time means lower costs incurred by the building owner for financing
and site facilities. The industrialized construction with precast concrete requires less monitoring and
coordination on site. The precast elements are only assembled on site and the interior work is executed.
Therefore, fewer companies are on site and less coordination between these companies is necessary. Since
the 1980s, man-hours per square meter have been reduced by more than two thirds as automation has
constantly increased since that time. This means that only one third of the workers is needed to produce the
same amount of precast concrete elements and labor costs can be reduced significantly.

Savings in reinforcement and concrete are possible due to the accurate production of precast concrete
elements and the utilization of slim building elements. These material savings decrease the production costs
of precast concrete elements. The master computer controls and monitors the production facility. Therefore,
material like concrete, construction steel, etc. can be used in a resource-saving way and optimally employed.
The concrete compound is adjusted accurately and mixed in the batching plant of the factory. Precast
concrete buildings do not need any maintenance for a period of at least 50 years because the material is
sturdy and durable. This reduces maintenance costs significantly. The concrete panel construction consists
of load-bearing walls and floors and substitutes frame and skeleton structures. No additional bracing system
is necessary and construction costs decrease.
1.2 OBJECTIVE

The main objective of project is to provide comprehensive cost comparison between

conventional RC structural system and Pre-cast technology.

1.3 SCOPE

The scope of the project is limited to 5-story residential building and the task is to develop
the relationship between cost and time in graphical and equation form, 3D model and to carry out
scheduling using BIM software.

1.4 METHODOLGY

STRUCTURAL PART

• To design G and G+5 building using:

1| Reinforced Concrete Frames.

2| Pre-cast Technology

BUILDING IMFORMATION MODELLING (BIM)

• To compare the cost and time required for above mentioned

construction technologies using BIM software.

• To visualize the final model of our project in Virtual Reality Lab.

 CHAPTER 2
LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 GENERAL

The focus of the research paper is based on the direct structural cost comparison of RC structures and Pre-
stressed concrete structures (column-beam-slab system). The material quantities have to be calculated.
Both construction techniques would be compared on the basis of live loads and grid sizes and the relative
cost-effective technique would be identified.

2.2 DIRECT STRUCTURAL COST COMPARISON OF RC STRUCTURES AND

PRE-STRESSED CONCRETE STRUCTURES (COLUMN-BEAM-SLAB
SYSTEM)

Reinforced concrete buildings are most conventional type of construction which is executing all over the
world due to low cost construction and low maintenance cost. But now a days, various RC structural
systems (e.g. precast system, prestressed have been developed to enhance the properties of compressive
strength of concrete and tensile strength of steel as well.
With the availability of these RC construction techniques, finding a suitable structural system becomes
pressing issue in construction industry for builders to reduce the duration of project, secure the work and
increase profit margin.

Although both conventional and prestressed concrete techniques have various cons and pros, but our
ultimate target is cost effectiveness in these techniques. The problem is the effective selection of different
techniques because in some cases conventional RC technique is efficient to adopt while in some cases
Precast technique is more feasible.

As we know that cost effectiveness is directly depended upon nature and specification of the project, so we
have to initiate with trial-designed building and compare it with real projects. Trial design approach is used
to calculate material quantities. Some trial design includes reinforced vs prestressed flat slab, precast vs
semi-precast structure.

For direct structural cost comparison, number of buildings were modeled (both for conventional RC and
Precast structures). Buildings were 4-storey high having dimensions of 24m by 24m. Clear distance between
each floor is 4.5 m. The grid sizes include 4.8m by 4.8m, 6m by 6m and 8m by 8m, while live loads ranges
from 3KN/m2, 7.5KN/m2 to 15KN/m2
Dinesh Kumar et al.,( April 2015) conducted a research so as to study the present situation of the precast
construction industry in India.

• In his study two main factors are considered which are cost and time.
• A residential building is taken for comparing and it includes the preparation of plan, data collection
from precast industry, estimation of quantities, and determination of project duration.
• The prefab construction for individual double story residential building cost is 13% more than the
conventional construction.
• This is main drawback for prefab construction which is not economical to construct in this case.
• At the same time the prefab construction is easy to work and reduces the project duration is
reduced by 63 days when compared to the conventional.
• At this stage conventional construction is economical and comfortable when compared to the
prefabrication construction.

Siva Priya et al.,(May 2016) carried out this research as the construction industry replacing its method of
implementing conventional methodology by various new innovations in the process of construction and
selection of materials.

• This method of construction can increase productivity and quality of work using better construction
machinery, equipment, materials, and extensive pre-project planning.
• In this research thesis the precast construction and conventional method is compared, and it is found
that the cost overall cost required for constructing the building using precast concrete method is
reduced by 20% when compared to conventional method.

Akash Lanke et al., (June 2016) carried out a thesis to analyse the design, cost and time of precast and
RCC buildings.

• Apart from these factors’ various other minor factors such as speed of construction, quality control,
environmental conditions, labour resources, durability, connection, size, shape etc are also
considered for the analysis.
• The cost and duration are compared as major factors.
• One building as a case study and Design the same building as a precast building and Traditional Cast
in-situ building.
• It is remarkably seen that the cost of precast building is significantly reduces & duration of
construction is also much lesser than traditional method.
• From all this study we can be conclude that the precast concrete system is economical than
conventional cast in place method but still there are some conditions which we must take care of
while using precast, those are quantity of construction, Distance of site from manufacturing unit,
Type of building etc.
 For the purpose of comparison and analysis of conventional technique and precast technique a case study
is chosen. Real time project that is located near Ambattur Dunlop is taken. The building is residential
building comprising of stilt plus nineteen floors and each floor has eight flats.

COST: TIME:

• Cost estimation and scheduling is done for
the same building for both precast
construction and conventional construction.
• The cost of the entire project including
labour charges, cost of material in
conventional construction is found to be Rs.
24,79,83,764.
• Whereas in precast construction the total cost
for this project is Rs. 25,17,01,966 which
includes the cost of casting, transporting and
fixing the elements.
• It was found that the cost of precast
construction for this project was found to be
higher than the conventional construction by
Rs. 37,18,202.
• It is found that the cost of precast method of
construction is only 1.4% higher than that of
the conventional method.
• The total duration of the entire project is
calculated for both precast construction and
conventional construction separately from
constructing the substructure to the final
finishing.
• The total duration required for the
construction using conventional method of
construction is 705 days whereas the total
duration in precast construction is only 598
days.
• After comparison of both the schedule it is
found that the precast construction can be
completed 15% earlier than the conventional
construction.

The various factors that are considered in the study are type and size of project, location of site, project,
design, risk factors, planning and design time, construction time, workmanship, availability of labors and
equipment, project completion at estimated cost and time, safety requirement, communication, quality
control and assurance, aesthetic appearance etc.

Another study was made to analyze the cost comparison between cast-in-place and precast concrete of some
13 public buildings in Ghana. The study focused on suspended slabs and columns. The construction industry
in Ghana is not familiar with the use of other precast elements like beams, walls, foundations, and so forth,
with the exception of precast columns and pre-stressed beams; it is very challenging to get other precast
elements. All the selected projects had a concrete mix proportion of 1: 2: 4 ratios for both cast-in-place and
precast concrete. All columns had 6 numbers of 16 mm diameter bars at a height of 3 metres, a column
width of 450 mm (the concrete mix proportion is based on weight, use of 4 pounds of coarse aggregate and 2
pounds of sand for every pound of cement). Precast concrete columns were reinforced with 6 numbers of
16 mm diameter bars 10 mm; stirrups at 200 mm centres. The analysis for the selected projects was for
ground floor columns and first floor suspended slabs. The projects were from 2005 to 2016. Table 2 shows
the summary of cost and percentage changes for both cast-in-place and precast suspended concrete floor
slabs.
Table 2 revealed that, depending on the project size, design considerations, and other related factors, all the
projects indicated reduction in cost for the precast concrete suspended slab as compared to the cast-in-place
concrete. The highest percent reduction was 35.14% (construction of new assembly hall for Effiduase
Secondary/Commercial School) and the lowest was the construction of auditorium block for St. Monica’s
College of Education with a percentage reduction of 13.5%. The study revealed an average percentage
reduction of 23.22%. The study analyzed the cost comparison between the precast and the cast-in-place
concrete using elemental cost analysis of slabs for the 13 selected projects.
Table 3 revealed that precast concrete columns were on average 21.4% cheaper than cast-in-place columns.
The highest reduction was 24.5% and the lowest was 18.33%. In Ghana, precast columns are sold in hollow
forms. The main cost variations between cast-in-place and precast columns were the reduction in labor,
formwork, and reduction in volume of concrete.
The major variations for cost comparison between cast-in-place and precast occur in the cost of formwork,
reinforcement, cost of workmanship, and concrete in slabs and columns. Table 4 shows the processes of
constructing cast-in-place floor slabs which require formwork for the soffit of slab, formwork for beams,
laying reinforcement in slabs, pouring, vibrating concrete, and tampering concrete in place, and all these
activities also require workforce and level of precision. But the use of precast will require transporting and
assembling of prestressed beams and hollow blocks which requires accuracy. The precast prestressed beams
and hollow blocks are self-supported and do not need much formwork as in the case of cast-in-place
concrete except for some skeletal props to support the floor when spreading the concrete topping. The
reinforcement in precast floor is small as compared to cast-in-place concrete, where reinforcement is
required for beams and the slab; hence, the cost is small as compared to cast-in-place floor slab. Precast
beams and hollow blocks arrangement serves as the horizontal plate.

The concrete in the cast-in-place floor slab is 150 mm thick while that in the precast is 50 mm used as
topping for the beam and blocks system to even out the surface. The volume of concrete used is one-third of
that used in cast-in-place. The number of workforce required for the processes in cast-in-place concrete is
more as compared to precast. Also precast columns serve as formwork; therefore formwork will not be
required. Table 4 shows the summary of cost break down of selected projects. The cost breakdown for both
cast-in-place and precast includes all labour components. Except project 10 (construction of the extension of
head office block for Minerals Commission, Accra, Ghana) where the floor slab was reinforced with
additional 10 mm diameter bars all others were not reinforced. Data were obtained from bills of quantities
and actual site visit measurement of respective projects. The precast concrete cost includes transportation
and assembling on site.
The study revealed that, on average, the precast concrete slabs were 23.22% cheaper than cast-in-place
concrete construction and precast columns were 21.4% cheaper than cast-in-place concrete construction,
especially for large scale production. The study also revealed that the Ghanaian construction industry have
not been using precast beams. Construction professionals prefer the use of precast concrete construction
mainly because of low life cycle cost, reduction of on-site waste, speed of construction, and quality of work
done. The study also revealed that there is high degree of agreement between Quantity Surveyors,
Architects, and Civil Engineers on the advantages of using precast concrete suspended slabs and columns.
The Kendall concordance identified reduction of on-site waste and speed of construction as the main
advantages of using precast concrete. Prestressed beams and block precast slabs can be embraced as ground
floor concrete slabs for new building constructions located in areas where the water table is high to avoid
hardcore filling which aids rising damp. The continuous study of elemental cost planning in Ghana will help
in the establishment of accurate initial project budget and the maintenance of that budget during the design
development and documentation phases.

RESEARCH METHOD
The precast industry is booming. Due to its many advantages, such as reduction of building time, product
selection, enhanced quality with certified performance levels, cost optimization and so on, it currently
represents 20% of concrete production worldwide. In the precast industry, the use of SCC is increasing and
it is expected to replace vibrated concrete in many applications because of its various advantages, including
the reduction of harmful effects of noise in urban environments, the possibility of pouring in congested
reinforced areas or Complex geometry, and a reduction in industrial process costs [4].
The study required detailed information of both precast and cast-in-situ concrete. The study has been
broadly undertaken as follows:

• Identify the project which has undergoes the cost and time comparison of precast and cast-in-situ concrete.

• Studied all available estimates and collected data about the project.

• Analyzed the data obtained and compared the estimated cost and time to understand the causes and
implication of less use in construction of precast concrete.

• Examined the cost and time required for both precast and cast-in-situ by estimating time and cost and by
applying the “Breakeven Analysis” and "Pay-back period” method to both the type of construction system.

• Listed out all the shortcomings.

• Identify the reasons how precast concrete is more essential for construction.
A) Breakeven Analysis Break-even point analysis is a measurement system that calculates the
margin of safety by comparing the amount of revenues or units that must be sold to cover fixed and
variable costs associated with making the sales. In other words, it’s a way to calculate when a project will
be profitable by equating its total revenues with its total expenses.

∑ TC Cost= ∑ DC × Qi +∑IC × Ti

TC_Cost (in Rs): Total concrete cost in Rs. for either CIP or PC.
DC (in Rs/Cu Meter): Direct costs of proportional erected concrete (i.e. dependent on the quantity of
erected CIP or PC concrete).
Qi (in Cu Meter): Quantity of concrete in cubic meter for either CIP or PC.

IC (in Rs/day): Indirect costs for concrete works that is proportional to the of concrete
erection.
Ti (in Days): Duration of Concrete Erection (including Manufacturing for PC Concrete)

To examine the formula for selecting either of the two structural systems of CIP or PC, relevant input data is
collected. The construction activity duration of project by PC system is 980 days and by CIP it is 1772 days
required to complete the project. Table 6 Presents unit prices and quantities of concrete for major structural
members for CIP and PC systems.
Breakeven formula is derived to preliminarily evaluating and selecting best alternative between two
competing construction methods offered by two different contractors for the structural members, those of
Cast-in-Place concrete vs. precast concrete. The criterion for selection is based on the most economical
solution. The quantities of works, i.e., concrete, are treated as independent variable. . The outcome of this
research is, transportation & shifting cost of precast members considerably affective on total cost of
construction which help to assist decision makers and engineers to compare both concrete construction
methods early in the construction planning phase of a project. By using Pay Back Period method we
conclude that the Cast-In-Place Concrete system takes more time for Pay back the Invested Cash as compare
to Precast Concrete System (i.e. Cast-In-place required 3.8 Years and Precast Concrete required 2.5 Years to
Pay Back The Invested Amount in to the Project.)

https://www.prilhofer.com/advantages-precast/profitability

https://www.nbmcw.com/tech-articles/precast-construction/32688-precast-technology-for-low-cost-housing-
schemes-in-india.html