Structural Quantity Analysis of Tall Buildings

Han-Wook Cho1, Song-Geun Roh1, Young-Min Byun1, Kyong-Soo Yom2

1
Associate Director, HanmiParsons Co., Ltd.
2
President, Harmony Engineering Co.

Abstract
Structural construction costs of tall buildings recently built or under construction in Korea were investigated in
terms of unit material quantities and their costs. The comparative study for three composite and three reinforced
concrete projects of similar heights and design environments produced some statistical result within certain range
for unit structural quantity and cost, displaying relative economical advantage of reinforced concrete structures
compared to composite construction. The itemized investigation of structural construction cost gives a general
view for overall construction cost composition as well as the significance of selected structural members and their
materials in the cost of constructing high rise buildings. The cost of formwork considerably increased, especially
in reinforced concrete construction, implying that special regard should be paid to the selection of the formwork
system in the economical construction of tall concrete buildings.

Keywords: tall buildings, structural quantity, cost

1. Introduction engineers in the design may provide great potential

With the development of construction technologies
for high-rise buildings during the 20th century, tall
buildings, starting with only 10 story steel building at
the end of the 19th century, have continually been built
with increasing height, mostly in the United States of
America up to the seventies. In the 80s many
countries in Asia started to construct tall buildings, for
which concrete appeared to be widely used as one of
the main structural materials. In Korea, tall building
construction started with a 60 story steel office
building in 1985, followed by many 40 to 70 story
composite/reinforced concrete buildings mostly from
the end of 90s. Currently, the construction of a 130
story building is being reviewed near the Seoul World
Cup Stadium.
The construction of these tall buildings requires a
great deal of effort due to their large scales,
demanding normally hundreds of millions of dollars
and several years from its planning to building
completion. In the process of design and construction
of tall buildings, value engineering and construction
management are very important in order to maximize
the efficiencies. Frequently, the choice of structural
system, as one of main considerations for
cost-effective structural design, may considerably
affect the overall concept of the design of tall
buildings. Early participation of competitive structural
Contact Author: Han-Wook Cho, A. Director, Ph.D., P.E.
HanmiParsons Co. Ltd., 9th floor, City Air Tower Building,
159-9, Samsung-dong, Kangnam-gu, Seoul, Korea 135-090
Tel: 82-2-3429-6400, Fax: 82-2-3429-6363
e-mail: hwcho@hanmiparsons.com
savings in structural quantities with better
constructability, as well as more harmonious
cooperation with other related disciplines. Structural
systems of high-rise buildings, for which the choice is
in fact decided based on many constructional
considerations, have been studied by many structural
engineers and researchers, such as Schueller (1976),
Smith and Coull (1991), and Taranath (1988, 1998),
who often addressed the efficiency of structural
systems in terms of unit structural material quantities.
Although unit structural quantity on the basis of
gross floor area, giving a good physical intuition for
structural construction cost, is normally used in
practice, the value cannot reflect the overall
complexities of tall building construction. When many
different structural materials are used together, the
cost for each material and its variation with time
should be taken into account in the estimation of
structural systems, while the construction speed
depending upon the used materials is another major
issue to be studied. Although this unit structural
quantity must be a valuable indicator, it would be
better to execute its cost review together for the
comparison of structural system efficiencies.
For the high-rise residential buildings recently
completed or under construction in Korea, it is
worthwhile to investigate in detail the used material
quantities and their costs. Three composite projects in
Seoul were compared since they have similar heights of
approximately 60 stories with similar design
environments. Also, three reinforced concrete structures
of around 50 stories were chosen for comparison. Two
buildings in Seoul consist of the same structural

662G G G CTBUH 2004 October 10~13, Seoul, Korea

systems and the other building of a different system is in Busan on the southeastern coast of Korea

Table 1. Tall buildings in Korea

Construction Completion
Project Name Story Height Use Structural System
Period Year

Korea Life Steel Box Column &

60/B3 249 m Office 63.3 months 1985
Insurance 63 Girder + Brace

Korea World Steel Box Column &

55/B2 228 m Office 39 months 1988
Trade Center Girder + Brace

Techno-Mart Steel Column & Girder

39/B5 189 m Multiple 41 months 1998
21 + Brace

LG Kangnam Brace + Moment

38/B6 166.9 m Office 58 months 1999
Tower Resisting Steel Frame

Brace + Moment
ASEM Tower 41/B4 174.3 m Office 43 months 2000
Resisting Steel Frame
Brace + Moment
Star Tower
45/B8 202.7 m Office Resisting Steel Frame 74.5 months 2001
( I-Tower)
+ Outrigger truss
Composite Column +
59, 66, 59, 233.9 m
Tower Palace 1 Residential Steel Beam + Core 36 months 2002
44/B5 (66 story)
Wall + Outrigger Truss
Composite Column + 39 months
Tower Palace 2 55/B6 196.2 m Residential Steel beam + Core Wall (excluding 2002
+ Outrigger Truss excavation)
Composite Column +
Tower Palace 3 69/B6 261.2 m Residential Steel Beam + Core 36 months 2004
Wall + Belt Wall
Composite Column +
Mok-dong 69, 63, 54
256 m Residential Steel Beam + Outrigger 44 months 2003
Hyperion /B6
Truss
Samsung-dong 148.4 m
46, 39, 46 /B3 Residential Flat Plate + Core Wall 33 months 2004
I-Park (46 story)

Peripheral Wide Beam 2004. 12.

Galleria Palace 46/B5 149.5 m Residential 40 months
+ Core Wall (expected)

The # Centum 157.4 m Bearing Wall + 2005. 11

53, … /B1. Residential 42 months
Park (53 story) Outrigger + Belt Wall (expected)

58, 35, 50, 184.1 m 2006. 10

The # Star City Residential Flat plate + Core Wall 40.3 months
45/B3 (58 story) (expected)

2. Tall buildings in Korea whereas most residential complex buildings of 55

Over the last two decades, there has continuously
been a trend of construction of high-rise buildings in
Korea. After the steel construction of the Korea
Insurance Building of 60 stories and the Korea World
Trade Center Building of 55 stories in 1985 and 1988,
respectively, many reinforced concrete apartments of
mostly 30-stories followed in the 80s. In the late 90s
many tall buildings started to be constructed again and
more than thirty buildings of a height of 150 meters or
more have been built. It is noted that residential
complex buildings occupy more than half of them.
Most of the tallest buildings in Korea are shown in
Table 1, which shows the overall trend of high-rise
buildings. All office buildings are comprised of steel,
stories or more are composite structures. Reinforced
concrete residential buildings of approximately 150
meters in height are now becoming popular, and are
leading the current trend of tall building construction
in Korea. Table 1 also shows that there is a transition
from steel structures to composite/reinforced concrete
structures in tall building construction, and in general
it took three to three and half years to build these tall
buildings. Like most super-tall composite/concrete
buildings recently built in eastern Asia, the wide use
of concrete has been increased in high-rise
construction because of the remarkable development
in concrete construction, mainly due to the acquisition
of high strength concrete and various efficient

CTBUH 2004 October 10~13, Seoul, Korea 663

construction methods.
Due to the enormous scale and variety of activities
in high-rise building construction, it is not easy to
obtain and systematically analyze the data of
construction cost, which even the contractor might not
classify at ease without an organized plan. This study
investigates structural quantities and their direct
construction costs in detail for six tall composite/
reinforced concrete buildings in the range of 46 to 69
stories in Korea, based on Kim (2002), Yom (2003),
and other available structural quantity data.

Table 2. Structural material quantities of tall composite buildings

Material Structural Member B (66F) E (55F) G (69F) Remarks

Foundation 6,080 2,510 8,494

Core Wall 18,396 16,979 16,902
Belt Wall - - 4492
Concrete
3 Column 4,550 3,783 8,220
(Unit: m )
Slab 15,332 21,966 21,619
Total 44,358 45,238 59,688
*
Unit Vol. (m3/ m2) 0.37 0.35 0.37 E#B=G
Foundation 892 259 1,130
Core Wall 3,690 2,195 4,247
Belt Wall - - 1,937
Reinforcement
Column 637 704 1,614
(Unit: ton)
Slab 1,375 1,271 2,200
Total 6,594 4,429 11,129
*
Unit Wgt. (kgf/ m2) 54.9 34.1 69.2 E<B<G
+
Foundation - - 280
Column 3,653 3,745 3,167
+
Structural Beam/Girder 4,368 7,448 5,451 : steel false
Steel Core Wall 253 - 394 work in the mat
(Unit: ton) Outrigger 956 734 -
Total 9,230 11,927 9,292
*
Unit Wgt. (kgf/ m2) 76.8 91.8 57.7 E>B>G
* Unit structural quantities on the basis of gross floor area (GFA: B 120,210 m2, E 129,870 m2, G 160,929 m2)

3. Structural quantity analysis of tall
composite buildings
Three towers of B, E and G, which are 66, 55 and
69 story composite structures, respectively, on the
neighboring sites, were chosen for the study of
structural quantities. With another 69 story
Hyperion Project, these are the tallest luxury
residential complex apartments in Korea, designed
with similar structural systems. For B, E and G of
the plan configuration of a rectangle, a dumbbell
and a triangle, respectively, a structural system of
concrete core wall, composite columns, steel beams
and metal deck was used in common. However,
steel outriggers for B and E and concrete belt wall
for G were used in mechanical rooms as different
lateral force resisting system structures. All the
foundations of three buildings are a mat system on
soils of similar bearing capacity, with the exception
of E, adopting single spread footings only for
columns other than its cores.
Table 2 gives total structural quantities of
concrete, reinforcement and steel, which are
itemized for each structural member. All structural
quantities of different strengths of materials,
especially for concrete, were added up to figure out
a sum total. For a comparison of unit material
quantities of three buildings, total material
quantities are divided by the gross floor areas of
their respective buildings. In this study, the gross
floor area is defined as the sum of the floor areas for
all the floors including basements, for which the
areas were obtained by projecting the plan of the 1st
floor to the foundation level. This gross floor area
appears to be a little greater than the official gross
floor area. It is noted that concrete unit volumes of
three buildings are almost the same at 0.37 m3/m2
on the basis of gross floor area within 5 %
difference range. On the other hand, G used most
reinforcement with the smallest structural steel,
while E utilized the largest structural steel with the
smallest reinforcement. The main reasons are, firstly,
that steel outriggers were used in B and E instead of
concrete belt wall in G, and secondly, that E has
longer spans of 9.3 and 10.2 meters than those of
the other buildings, so that relatively heavy
members of steel beam were utilized in the situation
of limited ceiling height. Thus, the summed unit
amounts of reinforcement and steel for three towers
do not give big differences.

664G G G CTBUH 2004 October 10~13, Seoul, Korea

 Table 3. Unit direct construction costs for tall composite building structures
Unit Cost per Material Unit Cost for Structural Members Unit Cost
Project
Material *Won/m2 % Str. Mem. *Won/m2 % Comparison
Concrete 28,497 15.7 Core + Link 56,223 30.9
Reinf. 32,748 18.0 Column 37,023 20.4
Str. Steel 73,533 40.4 Beam/Girder 39,078 21.5
B(66F) Deck 15,102 8.3 Outrigger 7,953 4.4 104.6
Precast 4,093 2.3 Slab 32,985 18.1
Formwork 27,866 15.3 Foundation 8,557 4.7
Total 181,839 100 Total 181,839 100
Concrete 28,189 15.9. Core + Link 41,958 23.7
Reinf. 20,361 11.5 Column 34,997 19.3
Str. Steel 88,953 50.3 Beam/Girder 57,351 32.4
E(55F) Deck 14,667 8.3 Outrigger 5,653 3.2 101.8
Formwork 24,740 14.0 Slab 34,048 19.2
Foundation 2,905 1.6
Total 176,911 100 Total 176,911 100
Concrete 34,674 19.9 Core + Link 48,995 28.2
Reinf. 41,284 23.7 Column 36,476 21.0
Str. Steel 53,785 30.9 Beam/Girder 33,871 19.5
G(69F) Deck 11,759 6.8 Belt Wall 13,973 8.0 100.0
Formwork 32,360 18.6 Slab 31,941 18.4
Foundation 8,605 4.9
Total 173,862 100 Total 173,862 100
* $1 # 1,200 Won

In order to compare the construction costs of three
buildings, the structural quantities of Table 2 are
transferred to direct construction costs for building
structures based on the price as of June, 2004. Formwork
cost and different costs for different concrete strengths
are also taken into account in the process. Table 3 shows
that the tallest building, G, has the smallest cost of
173,862 won/m2, while B and E have 181,839 and
176,911 won/m2, respectively, giving differences of 4.6
and 1.8 %. The tallest G costs even less than the fourteen
story smaller E. The G utilized relatively more quantities
of concrete and reinforcement with smaller structural
steel amount, which appears to be the reason for the cost
saving. This fact shows the importance of selected
structural materials for the economical construction of
tall buildings.

ͣ͢͡
΄ΖΒΣΤ͑΅ΠΨΖΣ ΈΠΣΝΕ͑΅ΣΒΕΖ͑ʹΖΟΥΖΣ

ͶΞΡΚΣΖ͑΄ΥΒΥΖ͑ͳΦΚΝΕΚΟΘ
͢͡͡
ͻΠΙΟ͑͹ΒΟΔΠΔΜ͑ͳΦΚΝΕΚΟΘ
ͿΠ͑͟ΠΗ͑΄ΥΠΣΚΖΤ

ͩ͡
͸ ͳ
ͧ͡ Ͷ

ͥ͡

ͣ͡

͡
͡ ͦ͡ ͢͡͡ ͦ͢͡ ͣ͡͡ ͣͦ͡ ͤ͡͡
΄ΥΣΦΔΥΦΣΒΝ͑΄ΥΖΖΝ͑΂ΦΒΟΥΚΥΚΖΤ͙͑ΜΘΗ͠Ξ͚ͣ

Fig. 1. Unit structural steel quantities4)

Formwork costs occupy 14 to 18.6 % among total beams and slab, occupy 29.6, 51.6 and 37.9 % for B,
structural expenses; horizontal structural members, E and G, respectively. The high value of E occurs due

CTBUH 2004 October 10~13, Seoul, Korea 665

to the existence of heavy steel beams required because optimum structural construction cost of tall buildings
of the long spans of beams and low ceiling height, may not be obtained at ease because there are a
which should be significant issues to be considered in variety of design/construction parameters,
the beginning of design of tall buildings. Since E has environments and restrictions in the process. Figure 1
spread footings for columns, and mats for cores in shows comparative unit structural steel quantities of
combination, the foundation for E only costs tall buildings of various stories, including those of B,
approximately 1/3 the expenses of B and G with mat E and G. As the number of building stories increases,
systems unit structural steel quantity tends to increase, though,
In order to compare their cost efficiencies with steel with widely scattered results. The structural
structures, the cost estimates were transferred to constructions of B and G seem to be economical.
equivalent structural steel quantities of 117.1, 120.0, For reference, cost variation with floor levels for G
105.2 kgf/m2 for B, E, G projects, respectively, project is shown in Figure 2. It is seen that the costs of
ignoring the costs of slab, foundation and formwork. slab and beam do not vary much with heights, while
Compared to 200 and 150 kgf/m2 of the Empire State those of columns and core wall steadily increase as the
Building and the Sears Towers, respectively, floor goes down. Belt walls demand considerable cost
comprised of steel frames, these structural quantities increase at the relevant stories, which amounts to 8 %
are much smaller, implying relative advantage of of total construction cost as in Table 3. A similar
composite structures over steel structures. In fact, an overall trend is also seen for the other projects.

; ΚΝΝ͑͟ΈΠΟ
ͣͦ͢͝͡

͢͝͡͡͡

ʹΠΝΦΞΟ
΄ΥΖΖΝ͑ͳΖΒΞ
͑͑΄ΥΣ ΦΔΥΦΣ ΒΝ͑ʹΠΤΥ

ͨͦ͡ ʹΠΣΖ͑ΈΒΝΝ͑͑͜ͽΚΟΜ͑ͳΖΒΞ
΄ΝΒΓ
ͳΖΝΥ͑ΈΒΝΝ

ͦ͡͡

ͣͦ͡

͡
ͳͣ
ͳͥ
ͳͧ
ͧͪ
ͧͨ
ͧͦ
ͧͤ
ͧ͢
ͦͪ
ͦͨ
ͦͦ
ͦͤ
ͦ͢
ͥͪ
ͥͨ
ͥͦ
ͥͤ
ͥ͢
ͤͪ
ͤͨ
ͤͦ
ͤͤ
ͤ͢
ͣͪ
ͣͨ
ͣͦ
ͣͤ
ͣ͢
ͪ͢
ͨ͢
ͦ͢
ͤ͢
͢͢
ͪ
ͨ
ͦ
ͤ
͢
΁͹ͣ
΃ΠΠΗ

ͷΝΠΠ Σ

Fig. 2. Structural cost variation with floor levels

4. Structural quantity analysis of tall the other buildings in Seoul. In order to raise the
reinforced concrete buildings lateral stiffness of the building, partition walls were
Three 46-, 50- and 53-story reinforced concrete also designed as reinforced concrete structures, thus,
buildings of I, S and C residential projects, relatively lower cost for partition walls will be
respectively, were selected for comparison. The I and expended for completion later, compared to normal
S projects are in Seoul, while C project is located in practices. The I adopted spread footings for columns
Busan. Only one representative building of similar and a mat exclusively for the core, while other
height was chosen among several buildings of each buildings used mat foundations.
project. The I project was completed in 2004, and the Table 4 gives total structural quantities of concrete
S and C projects are currently under construction. The and reinforcement, which are itemized for each
structural system of I and S buildings is flat plate with structural member. Again, total structural quantities of
core and exterior columns, while the structure of C is different strengths of concrete were added up for a
core and bearing wall with outriggers at both summed total. It is seen that unit structural quantities
mechanical floor and roof, and belt wall from the of concrete and reinforcement on the basis of gross
basement 1 to 3rd floor. The C was designed against floor area for I, S, C buildings are 0.49, 0.56, 0.59
high wind pressure, which is more than twice that of m3 /m2 and 72.6, 88.2, 94.3 kgf/m2, respectively.

666G G G CTBUH 2004 October 10~13, Seoul, Korea

 Table 4. Structural material quantities of tall reinforced concrete buildings

Material Structural Member I (46F/B3) S (50F/B3) C (53F/B1) Remarks

+
Foundation 855 6,269 3,422
Wall + Link 6,414 10,199 16,031
+
Column 4,009 8,791 1,799 : the cost
for steel
Concrete Slab 11,923 20,630 8,049
piles not
(Unit: m3) Beam - 517 1,746 included
Outrigger - 594
Total 23,201 46,406 31,641
*
Unit Vol. (m3/ m2) 0.49 0.56 0.59 I<S<C
Foundation 133 618 346
Wall + Link 693 1,517 2,227
Column 726 1,743 431
Reinforcement Slab 1,853 3,097 994
(Unit: ton) Beam. - 280 (steel lintel) 796
Outrigger - 220
Total 3,405 7,265 5,014
*
Unit Wgt. (kgf/ m2) 72.6 88.2 94.3 I<S<C
* Unit structural quantities on the basis of gross floor area (GFA: I 46,901 m2, S 82,384 m2, C 53,186 m2)

It is of interest to compare I and S with the same
structural system. Without structural quantities of
foundation, these buildings utilized almost the same
unit quantities of concrete and presented a 15 %
difference in the usage of reinforcement. For taller S
building, relatively more reinforcement was used for
vertical members. The discrepancy might occur due to
differential effectiveness of lateral/vertical load
resisting systems of the buildings.
The tallest C utilized the largest structural material
quantities, which are 5 to 7 % more than the unit
material quantities of S building. It is noted that, for C,
more concrete and reinforcement were used for vertical
members with less materials for slab, compared to I and
S. Unlike the other buildings, cumulative material
amounts of vertical members of C reaches more than
50 % of total unit material quantities.
Through the similar process as for the previous
composite structures, Table 5 shows the unit costs of
148,430, 157,618 and 171,455 won/m2, for I, S and C,
respectively. Although total unit cost increases with
height, the costs of I and S with the same structural
system in Seoul differs only by 6.2 %, while that of C
building with a different system in Busan gives a big
difference of 15.5 %.
Unit cost comparison per material shows the cost
composition of three buildings well. The total formwork
cost of C is 70,983 won/m2, which is much higher than
61,153 and 53,117 won/m2 of the other structures. Total
unit material cost without formwork occupies 58 to 66 %
of total construction cost, so that overall formwork cost
for reinforced concrete buildings ranges 34 to 42 % of
total structural cost. This result is in contrast with 14 to
19 % in the composite structures. A relatively large gap
between the structural material quantities of I and S in
Table 4 becomes reduced in the construction cost
comparison between the two buildings mostly due to
lower expense of formwork for the taller S. Although
there may be many issues to be considered in the
high-rise building construction, special respect should be
given to the selection of proper cost-effective formwork
system for reinforced concrete structures. Efficient
planning of formwork activity may significantly reduce
the construction cost of tall buildings.
The unit construction costs for structural materials are
rearranged into unit costs for structural members
including formwork cost in Table 5. Note that itemized
construction cost comparison for I and S yields almost
similar unit cost result for each structural member, while
C has a considerably different pattern of cost
composition. Wall cost of C, which was designed against
relatively strong wind in coastal area, is 89,671 won/m2,
approximately two times those of the other projects,
occupying 52.3 % of total structural cost, due to a large
cost increase for its structural and formwork quantities.
This steep cost increase for wall member of the taller C
seems to be the main reason why the difference of
construction cost between S and C becomes larger than
their material quantity gap of Table 4.
Overall construction costs for vertical members
occupy 52.8, 47.4 and 58.3 % for I, S and C,
respectively, which appear to be bigger than their
proportions of materials in Table 4. As noted from the
wall structure for C, vertical members of tall buildings
in general seem to require more construction cost than
other horizontal structural members. Therefore, a
structural design with smaller structural material
quantities for vertical members of tall buildings is
desirable for more economic structural construction.
Similar to the foundation result for the previous
composite structures, cost comparison for three
reinforced concrete structures shows considerable
economic advantage of the combined footings of I
over all mat systems of the other projects. Although

CTBUH 2004 October 10~13, Seoul, Korea 667

the foundation system of a tall building is decided
primarily based on the soil condition of the site, due
effort should be made for its best solution.
By subtracting the costs of foundation and formwork,
these cost estimates are transferred to equivalent
structural steel quantities of 87.9, 96.7, 95.6 kgf/m2 for
I, S, C, respectively, which are much less than those of
the above composite structures. Since the values still
include the construction cost for slabs, other quantities
should be subtracted from these values for the
comparison with other steel structural frames. This fact
implies that, in terms of equivalent structural steel
quantity, a great reduction of construction material may
be accomplished in the reinforced concrete buildings
compared to other composite/steel construction.
From Tables 3 and 5, it is noted that total direct
costs of reinforced concrete buildings are less than
those of composite structures by about 10 to 15 %,
with the exception of C. In fact, this economical
benefit from reinforced concrete structures may be
variant depending upon the effectiveness of a selected
structural system, for which special attention should
be paid in the structural design of tall buildings by
structural engineers. However, the cost advantage of
reinforced concrete structures does not always mean
that they are normally superior to composite/steel
structures in the construction of tall buildings, because
composite/steel structures in general have more merits
in speeding up the construction pace, which is another
major key point in high-rise construction.

Table 5. Unit direct construction costs for tall composite building structures
Unit Cost per Material Unit Cost for Structural Members Unit Cost
Project
Material *Won/m2 % Str. Mem. *Won/m2 % Comparison
Concrete 42,154 28.4 Wall + Link 48,685 32.8
Reinforcement 45,123 30.4 Column 29,686 20.0
I(46F) Formwork 61,153 41.2 Slab 67,172 45.3 100
Foundation 2,887 1.9
Total 148,430 100 Total 148,430 100
Concrete 45,236 28.7 Wall + Link 43,818 27.8
Reinforcement 55,797 35.4 Column 30,893 19.6
Str. Steel 3,468 2.2 Slab 63,835 40.5
S(50F) 106.2
Formwork 53,117 33.7 Beam 7,408 4.7
Foundation 11,664 7.4
Total 157,618 100 Total 157,618 100
Concrete 44,235 25.8 Wall 89,671 52.3
Reinforcement 56,237 32.8 Column 10,288 6.0
Formwork 70,983 41.4 Slab 41,835 24.4
C(53F) Beam 16,631 9.7 115.5
Outrigger 4,286 2.5
Foundation 8,744 5.1
Total 171,455 100 Total 171,455 100
* $1 # 1,200 Won

5. Conclusion consideration, especially for the construction of

Direct construction costs for structural construction
of tall buildings in Korea were reviewed in terms of
structural material quantities and their unit costs on
the basis of gross floor area. The unit construction
costs of composite structures of approximately 60
stories are 174 to 182 thousand won/m2 (US$ 145-152
/m2), while those of reinforced concrete structures of
50 stories are 148 to 158 thousand won/m2
(US$ 123-132 /m2), within 7% of difference for all the
studied buildings of similar heights and structural
systems in Seoul, with the exception of a building in a
different design environment. The review explicitly
shows the importance of material selection for
structural members as well as cost efficiency of
composite/ reinforced concrete structures compared to
steel construction. Formwork should be one of the
most important cost parameters to be taken into
reinforced concrete building structures.
References
1) Kim, J.H. (2002) Current Status and Future of Domestic
Super Tall Building Technology. Proceedings of the KSTB
International Symposium, April 17, 99-115.
2) Schueller, W. (1976) High Rise Building Structures.
3) Smith, B.S. and Coull, A. (1991) Tall Building Structures:
Analysis and Design. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
4) SWMB (1998) Structural Steel Weight vs. Number of
Stories.
5) Taranath, B.S. (1988) Structural Analysis and Design of
Tall Buildings. McGraw–Hill.
6) Taranath, B.S. (1998) Steel, Concrete, and Composite
Design of Tall Buildings. McGraw–Hill.
7) Yom, K.-S. (2003) Structural Technical Data for Tower
Palace.

668G G G CTBUH 2004 October 10~13, Seoul, Korea