COST EFFECTIVENESS FOR SELECTED

CONSTRUCTION TECHNOLOGIES FOR HOUSING

USING BIM TECHNOLOGIES

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING

NED UNIVERSITY OF ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY

KARACHI, PAKISTAN

i
 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

i
 CERTIFICATE

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

PROJECT SUPERVISORS

_________________________________ _______________________________
Prof. Dr. Rizwan Ul Haque Farooqui Dr. Aslam Faqeer Muhammad
(Internal Supervisor) (Co-Supervisor)
Department of Civil Engineering Department of Civil Engineering
NED University of Engineering & NED University of Engineering &
Technology, Karachi. Technology, Karachi.

ii
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page
TITLE PAGE i
CERTIFICATE ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT iv
ABSTRACT v
DEDICATION vi

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
2.2 DIRECT STRUCTURAL COST COMPARISON OF RC STRUCTURES AND
PRE-STRESSED CONCRETE STRUCTURES (COLUMN-BEAM-SLAB
SYSTEM)

CHAPTER 3: DESIGNING OF REINFORCED

CONCRETE STRUCTURE

3.1 INTRODUCION
3.2 FOOTPRINTS OF PROPOSED STRUCTURE
3.3 ETABS 2016 (v16.2.1) MODEL
3.3.1 Beam Section Properties
3.3.2 Slab Section Properties
iii
 3.3.3 Column Section Properties
3.3.4 Design Considerations – Beam
3.3.5 Design Considerations – Slab
3.3.6 Design Considerations – Column
3.3.7 Load Pattern
3.3.8 Load Combinations
3.3.9 Seismic Loading
3.3.10 Story Drift
3.3.11 Deflection check (Beam & Slab)

3.4 MODELING OF REINFORCED CONCRETE STRUCTURE –

AUTODESK REVIT 2020
3.4.1 Autodesk Revit 3d Structural Model
3.4.2 Structural 3d Model (With Reinforcement Shown)

3.5 EXPORTING REVIT STRUCTURAL MODEL TO NAVISWORK 2020

3.6 PRIMAVERA P6 – SCHEDULING

3.6 PROJECT TIMELINE

iv
 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

v
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.

vi
1.4 METHODOLGY

STRUCTURAL PART
• Modeling of G and G+5 building using ETABS 2016
software
• Analysis of Reinforced Concrete Model using ETABS
2016 and SAFE 2016
• Designing and Detailing of ETABS’ model
• Modeling and Designing of Pre -cast Reinforced Concrete
Model

BUILDING IMFORMATION MODELLING (BIM)

• 3D Modeling of Structural Concrete Building using
Autodesk Revit 2020 software
• Reinforcement placing in Autodesk Revit model

PRIMAVERA P6 PROFESSIONAL 19
• Primavera schedule

AUTODESK NAVISWORK S 2020

• Quantity Takeoff

vii
 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.
viii
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.

ix
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 • The total duration of the entire

done for the same building for both project is calculated for both
precast construction and precast construction and
conventional construction. conventional construction
• The cost of the entire project separately from constructing the
including labour charges, cost of substructure to the final finishing.
material in conventional • The total duration required for the
construction is found to be Rs. construction using conventional
24,79,83,764. method of construction is 705 days
whereas the total duration in
precast construction is only 598
days.

x
 • Whereas in precast construction the • After comparison of both the
total cost for this project is Rs. schedule it is found that the precast
25,17,01,966 which includes the construction can be completed
cost of casting, transporting and 15% earlier than the conventional
fixing the elements. construction.
• 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 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

xi
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.

xii
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
xiii
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
xiv
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.

• 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
xv
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 4 shows the quantities of concrete works by structural member and Table 6 presents
unit prices and quantities of concrete for major structural members for CIP and

xvi
xvii
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 Year.

xviii
REFERENCES:
[1] Akash lanke and Dr. D. Venkateshwarlu (2016), ‘Design, cost and time analysis of
precast and RCC buildings’ – International Research Journal of
Engineering and technology, vol.3, No.6, pp. 343-350.

[2] Dinesh kumar and Kathirvel P (2015)., ‘Comparative study on prefabricated

construction with cast in situ construction of residential building’ – International
Journal of Innovative Science Engineering and Technology, vol.2, No.4, pp.527-532.

[3] Ninjal parekh and Bhupendra M Marvadi ‘Comparative study of various

construction techniques’ – Journal of Information, knowledge and research in civil
engineering, vol.3, No.2, pp.226-230.

[4] Nuzul Azam Haron, Ir. Salihuddin Hassim, Mohd. Razali abd. Kadir and Mohd
saleh Jaafar (2005), ‘Building cost
comparison between conventional and formwork system’ – American Journal of
Applied Science 2(4), pp.819-823.

[5] Siva Priya and Senthamil Kumar. S (2016), ‘ Building cost comparison of precast
vs conventional construction’ – International Journal of Innovative Research in
science, Engineering and Technology, vol.5, No.5, pp.8037-8044

xix
 CHAPTER 3

DESIGNING OF REINFORCED
CONCRETE STRUCTURE - ETABS

3.1 INTRODUCTION
Designing of reinforced concrete structure includes 80 sq. yards residential G+5
model using ACI code 318-14 and ASCE 7-10. Starting with manual designing of
slab, beam, column as well as overhead water tank then using software like ETABS
and SAFE. This chapter underlines the complete designing, detailing and
scheduling of RC model to carry out cost-time analysis with Precast model which
is the 4 th chapter of FYP.

Type of Building Residential

Area (sq. yards) 80
Number of floors G+5

3.2 FOOTPRINTS OF DESIGNED RC MODEL

Figure 3.1 (a): Typical Floor Plan

21
Figure 3.1 (b): Ground Floor Plan

3.3 ETABS RC MODEL

BEAM - Compressive strength of concrete: f’c = 3000 psi

COLUMN - Compressive strength of concrete: f’c = 4000 psi
Yield strength of Steel: fy = 60000 psi

Figure 3.2: 3D Reinforced Concrete Model (ETABS 2016)

22
 3.3.1 Beam Section Properties

Typical

• Roof beam
• Landing beam
• Plinth beam
• Floor beam

Figure 3.3: Beam Section Properties

23
3.3.2 Column Section Properties

• Rectangle Column 8” x 18”

Figure 3.4 (a): Rectangular 8” x 18” Column Section Properties

• Rectangle Column 8” x 24”

Figure 3.4 (b): Rectangular 8” x 24” Column Section Properties

24
 • L - Column

Figure 3.4 (c): Rectangular 8” x 18” Column Section Properties

3.3.3 Design Considerations – BEAM | ACI 318-14

25
3.3.3 Design Considerations – BEAM | ACI 318-14

26
3.3.4 Design Considerations – SLAB | ACI 318-14

27
3.3.5 Design Considerations – COLUMN | ACI 318-14

28
3.3.5 Design Considerations – COLUMN | ACI 318-14

29
3.3.5 Load Pattern | ASCE 7-10

Figure 3.5 : Rectangular 8” x 18” Column Section Properties

3.3.6 Seismic Loading | ASCE 7-10

- All the required values for calculation of Seismic loading are taken
from the following tables.

30
3.3.6 Seismic Loading | ASCE 7-10

31
3.3.6 Seismic Data | UFC-3-301

32
ETABS - Seismic Loading | ASCE 7-10

• EQX1

• EQXPY

33
• EQXNY

• EQY

34
• EQYPX

• EQYNX

35
3.3.7 Load Combinations
• ACI 318-14

36
• ETABS - Load Combinations

37
38
3.3.8 Story Drift

• ASCE 7-10

39
• STORY RESPONSE | For Seismic Loading – EQX1

40
• STORY RESPONSE | For Seismic Loading – EQXNY

41
• STORY RESPONSE | For Seismic Loading – EQY

42
• STORY RESPONSE | For Seismic Loading – EQXPY

43
• STORY RESPONSE | For Seismic Loading – EQYNX

44
• STORY RESPONSE | For Seismic Loading – EQYPX

45
3.3.11 SAFE 2016 | Beam and Slab Deflection Check

• ACI 318-14 – Allowable deflection for beam and slab

Figure 3.5: Contours for long term deflection (-0.25 inch to 0.25 inch)

46
3.4 MODELING OF REINFORCED
CONCRETE STRUCTURE – AUTODESK REVIT 2020

3.4.1 AURODESK REVIT 3D STRUCTURAL MODEL

3.4.2 STRUCTURAL 3D MODEL (with reinforcement shown)

47
3.5 EXPORTING REVIT STRUCTURAL MODEL TO
NAVISWORK 2020

48
3.6 PRIMAVERA P6 – SCHEDULING

49
3.6 PROJECT TIMELINE

50