NICMAR

IMPACT OF PRECAST TECHNOLOGY IN

CONSTRUCTION WASTE MANAGEMENT

A Thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the

Academic requirements for the
POST GRADUATE PROGRAMME IN ADVANCED
CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT (PGP ACM)

By

ATHUL P R (AH20007)
SHREYA BUWA (AH20020)
GURUDIXITH P M (AH20037)
GOURI.M (AH20054)
HABIB REHMAN K H (AH20064)

PGP ACM 34th Batch

(2020 - 2022)

NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF CONSTRUCTION

MANAGEMENT AND RESEARCH

HYDERABAD

i NICMAR PGP ACM 34TH BATCH 20-22

 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

We express our sincere thanks to Prof Ravindranadh Chowdary K, - NICMAR, Hyderabad for his
constructive support, constant encouragement, and guidance in the right direction without which
this thesis would not have attained the present form.

ATHUL P R (AH20007)
SHREYA BUWA (AH20020)
GURUDIXITH P M (AH20037)
GOURI.M (AH20054)
HABIB REHMAN K H (AH20064)

ii NICMAR PGP ACM 34TH BATCH 20-22

 DECLARATION

We declare that the Interim report titled “IMPACT OF PRECAST TECHNOLOGY IN

CONSTRUCTION WASTE MANAGEMENT” is bonafide work carried out by us, under the
guidance of Prof. Ravindranadh Chowdary K. Further we declare that this has not previously
formed the basis of award of any degree, diploma, associateship or other similar degrees or
diplomas, and has not been submitted anywhere else.

Date: 21.10.21

ATHUL P R (AH20007)

SHREYA BUWA (AH20020)

GURUDIXITH P M (AH20037)

GOURI.M (AH20054)

HABIB REHMAN K H (AH20064)

iii NICMAR PGP ACM 34TH BATCH 20-22

PROJECT APPROVAL LETTER

iv NICMAR PGP ACM 34TH BATCH 20-22

 CERTIFICATE

This is to certify that the Interim Project Report on “IMPACT OF PRECAST TECHNOLOGY IN
CONSTRUCTION WASTE MANAGEMENT ” is bonafide work of Athul P R(AH20007), Shreya
Buwa (AH20020), Guru Dixith (AH20037), Gouri M (AH20054), Habib Rehman K H
(AH20064) in partial fulfillment of the academic requirements for the award of Post Graduate
Program in Advanced Construction Management (PGP ACM). This work is carried out by
them, under my guidance and supervision.

Date: 21.10.21 PROF.K. RAVINDRANDH CHOWDARY K

Dr. R. SATHISHKUMAR
Head - ACM

iv NICMAR PGP ACM 34TH BATCH 20-22

 ABSTRACT

Construction is the second largest contributor to our country GDP after agriculture since the
19th century. Conventional construction is one of the oldest methods of construction. It is one
of the most convenient methods to use which is 5-15% cheaper than other modern methods of
construction. Conventional method takes a longer time for delivery and is very costly to make
repairs and it is harder to do the quality check of the project. Most of the buildings in India are
still built using conventional methods involving in-situ concrete, timber formworks which
requires high manpower and consumes a lot time in completion. With the current scenario of
rising population, conventional method is no longer a suitable method, as conventional method
is a time-consuming method. Modern methods of construction have come into practice to
overcome this problem.
Precast construction is one of the most familiar methods of construction. The main advantage
of precast technology in construction is quality, speed, cost effective. Precast can help in time
saving of up to 60-64%, when compared to other similar construction projects that are using
conventional construction method. With the use of precast technology in construction better
quality output and less time-consuming process can be achieved. Precast is also eco-friendly
as most of its components are casted in factory-controlled environment.
Even though precast construction is widely used all over the country, for better durability and
output, the cost overrun in construction seems to be increasing rapidly. The main reason for
cost overrun in projects is the production of waste in construction sites. It is a common problem
faced all over the country. Lot of money and resources are spent on materials for better quality
but at the end most of materials are ended up being wasted. To overcome this problem a proper
waste management plan is required. Study will be done on waste generated in precast versus
conventional construction in terms of wastage of materials. The factors that are responsible for
wastage will be identified. A comparative analysis will be done for both the method of
construction and suggestions will be given for reduction of wastage and to increase the
productivity.

Keywords: Precast, Waste, profitability.

v
 OBJECTIVES

The Indian construction industry has been focusing on conventional cast in-situ methods for
the past few decades. In recent years, taking into consideration the necessity of time and cost
constraint in the construction field different new technologies were developed to meet the rising
demand and precast technology was one the most widely used method adopted replacing the
conventional one. The major advantage of the precast construction is an overall reduction in
the time of completion by 20-25% and cost of a project by 15-30%. In spite of the various
benefits of precast technology there are some challenges faced by it which includes the
selection of prefabrication yard, transportation of the casted structures.
From various literatures in the literature study, it was found that there was a gap in the research
domain comparing waste generated in precast construction versus conventional construction
methods for flyover projects. Most of the literatures concentrated on the questionnaire survey
which can be very ambiguous. Thus, in this paper productivity and wastage of rebar is mainly
studied by comparing quantities between the two types of construction by identifying a
component in the flyover project which can be done by both the methods and then comparing
it with the wastage and productivity values obtained from both methods. This gives a much
more vivid idea on the decision making in using precast over conventional type of construction.

vi
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Chapter No. Title Page No.

Abstract v

Table of Contents vi

1 Introduction 1

1.1 Research Need 2

1.2 Research Aim 2

1.3 Research Objective 3

2 Literature review 4

2.1 Literature Gap 9

3 Methodology 10

4 Data Collection and Analysis 12

4.1 Data Analysis 12

4.1.1 Bar bending schedule calculations 13

4.1.2 Productivity Calculations 15

5 Results and discussions 18

6 Conclusion 20

7 References 21

Appendix 22

vii
 LIST OF FIGURES

Figure No. Caption Page No.

1 Steps in Methodology 11

4.1 Bar bending schedule for CIS Pier cap 14

4.2 Bar bending schedule for Precast Pier cap 14

4.3 Waste Calculation 15

viii
 LIST OF TABLES

Table no. Caption Page no.

4.1 Course of action for Waste analysis 12

4.2 Time study for Productivity calculation for CIS pier cap 15

4.3 Time study for Productivity calculation for precast pier cap 16

5.1 Summarized results for CIS pier cap 18

5.2 Summarized results for precast pier cap 19

ix
 CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION

Construction industry which is the second largest industry after agriculture contributes to 11% to
the GDP of India. It is broadly classified into three segments infrastructure, real estate and
industrial. The current practice in construction industry is the cast in situ (CIS) reinforced concrete
structures. The other construction methodology is using structural steel. One of the real
disadvantages of CIS concrete is the high amount of labor it requires. Builders must first construct
forms for the structure they plan to cast and then install the forms and mix the concrete, pouring
the concrete & waiting time to remove the forms, all takes time that extends the length of a
construction job and results in more hourly pay for work crews, dependency on workmanship,
environment, and other factors. Even advanced techniques like aluminum forms takes 12-14 days
slab cycle time. The current structural system uses a rigid frame with infill masonry walls. This
system is very inefficient to resist lateral loadings like earthquakes and it has a lot of redundancy
in nature. This justifies the use of precast technology in the construction industry.

In precast technology, majority of the structural members are standardized and produced in yards
away from the site and transported to the location for assembly. The members are produced by
casting concrete in a reusable mold which is then cured in a controlled environment, transported
to the site and lifted into place. These components are manufactured based on mass production in
order to build a large number of projects within a short time at a lower cost. The precast concrete
industry is largely dominated by Government initiated projects for infrastructural development.
The efficiency, durability, ease, cost effectiveness, and sustainable properties of these products
have made it possible to complete the construction in lesser time. Precast concrete products are
energy efficient as compared to its counter parts and the wide range of designs and structural
options that these products provide is also making it a favorable choice for its consumers.

Precast technology is more recommended than the conventional methodology as it potentially

increases the safety in worksite, uses better construction machinery, equipment, materials which
increases the productivity and quality of construction, provides much more stability and strength
when compared with conventional types, requires few human resources to manage which reduces

1
NICMAR PGP ACM 34TH BATCH 2020-2022
the pay required and also trade related delays, is highly sustainable method of construction since
it has lower wastage and high potential to recycle waste, allows wide range of optimization which
helps the architects to come up with unique designs in every project.

As the construction industry continues to grow, the amount of waste generated by the industry
also increases which in turn results in unexpected rise in cost of construction. Construction waste
management is an aspect of sustainable development and by managing the construction processes
to reduce, reuse, recycle and effectively dispose of wastes has a serious bearing on the final cost,
quality, time, and impact of the project on the environment. This study aims to understand the
waste management that can be done in precast technology.

1.1 Research Need:

By following a proper waste management plan, right amount of resources can be allocated to
complete the project thereby saving the cost. There is a continuous increase in the waste generation
as part of growing economic development which becomes a burden to landfills. Dumping wastes
without proper management may give rise to environmental issues and therefore proper waste
management must be ensured in the site. This study helps in reducing the overall budget of the
project due to the optimization of material procurement and reduction in negative environmental
impacts due to waste. The resource efficiency can also be improved in the projects which add to
the sustainable construction. By keeping waste management as a company policy enhances the
public image as an environment friendly company. Productivity can be improved by avoiding
delays caused by reordering and repurchasing of materials that have been wasted once. By
selecting material of good quality and durability, significant amount of waste generation caused
by replacement of poor-quality material during the life cycle of facilities can be avoided.

1.2 Research Aim: -

The aim of the study is to focus on productivity and waste generated in reinforcement activity of
Pier cap in precast construction when compared with conventional construction. The study also
aims in proposing the ways to minimize the generation of waste by understanding the sources of
waste.

2
NICMAR PGP ACM 34TH BATCH 2020-2022
1.3 Research Objectives: -
 The purpose of this study is to compare the waste generated and productivity in the
construction of pier caps using the conventional and pre-cast methods.
 BBS generation for pier cap in order to calculate percentage wastage.
 Identifying time taken for each task in the construction activity for productivity calculation
 Comparing the Productivity values as well as wastage in terms of quantity of waste
generated for different diameter of bar used for construction of pier cap in both methods
of construction.

3
NICMAR PGP ACM 34TH BATCH 2020-2022
 CHAPTER 2
LITERATURE REVIEW

All over the world there is a basic need for low-cost housing and better infrastructure. Since the
beginning of era, conventional methods are used in construction industry. With time these methods
proved to be disadvantageous. It cased environmental problems, increased construction period,
was labour intensive, also the quality control of finish could not be assured effectively. To
overcome all these disadvantages, many research works began, and precast concrete construction
was introduced.

Jaillon and Poon (2007) promoted precast concrete construction in mid-1980s in Indonesia,
to meet the need for supply of good quality low-cost housing units. It was implemented in 2004
and its demand increased in 2007 with the increase in demand for low-cost housing. Their early
research works began with Precast Concrete Wall Panel in 2003, Beam Column Joint in 2006 and
cast on site concrete wall with hollow concrete slab plus topping in 2007. The application of
precast construction began with low-rise/cost residential building in 2007. After this 20-storey
low-cost apartment were planned. Along with construction residential building several major
industrial buildings were also construction using precast concrete construction like plant of PT
Astra Honda motor, Toyota Astra Motor warehouse, extension of Pakoakuina factory building and
Jakarta green filed project Phillip Morris. The author also recommended connection system,
namely, dry, and wet connections. The research concluded that precast proved to be cost efficient
gave better quality work increase construction speed and was eco-friendly.

In Indian cities, urbanization has resulted in a scarcity of homes and land. As a result of
these factors, India's building sector is focusing on innovative technology and construction
methods rather than traditional ways. Precast constructions are one of the new construction
methods which are being adopted in large scales. Mogadala and Rajasekaran (2018) Prefabrication
in India began with the emergence of the “Hindustan Housing Factory” which was developed by
pandit Jawaharlal Nehru. There are several barriers to prefabrication constructions, there is a
taxation of 18% for construction activities outside the site which increases the overall cost and

4
NICMAR PGP ACM 34TH BATCH 2020-2022
transportation of such huge structures is a huge problem since there are many limitations in
carrying these structures through Indian roads. There is no nationwide accepted standardization
for shapes and sizes of elements, their transportation, handling, and erection processes. The most
challenging part in precast construction is in deciding whether the casting should be taking place
in the site or at factories. According to the studies on cost analysis for large scale works onsite
prefabrication preferable if the cost is the main criteria. In the case of time comparison factory-
based prefabrication takes less total construction time compared to onsite prefabrication because
there is no need to prepare yard for factory-based prefabrication.

Precast construction is one of the most practiced construction methods all over the country.
Precast construction is widely used for larger construction projects than conventional construction
method. Karthigai and Neamitha (2018) gave a comparative study on precast and conventional
construction. The objective of the paper was to find the construction method situatable for
completion of project in shorter duration and to determine the type of construction that would
reduce the construction cost. Authors found that precast construction was cost effective and time
saving.it was also mentioned that time and cost were the most affected factors if any delay
occurred in the construction. Based on the risk analysis done and schedule analysis it was found
that injuries occurred more in precast site than conventional construction site and precast
construction would complete faster than conventional construction method.

Nanyam et al (2017) focused on identifying the challenges faced by the precast technology
in various categories. The aim of this paper was to present a cost model for precast technology in
comparison with conventional construction and to discuss the challenges faced by precast
technology at construction sites and to provide solutions for challenges faced by precast
technology. cost analysis model was designed for precast. A time cost comparison study was done
precast and conventional construction. The findings were the challenges faced by precast were
manpower, transportation issues, lack of expertise, complex design issue. The time saving in
precast came out to be 20-25% and the cost incurred after adopting precast was found out to be
15-30% higher than other conventional construction methods. The solution to this problem was to
suggest that the government or major companies have to the invest more in precast manufacturing
and construction so that precast elements can be fully utilized.

5
NICMAR PGP ACM 34TH BATCH 2020-2022
Precast has more advantages in construction industry. Cost and time are one of the important
factors in construction. With precast construction time can be saved. Mire and Singh (2017)
discussed the advantages and disadvantages of precast construction. The aim of this paper was to
study the precast technology and discuss the advantages of precast over conventional construction.
It was also mentioned that based on different load bearing the precast system has been divided
into different categories. Basic design concepts for precast were discussed. The findings were that
cost of construction is higher than conventional construction and the quality life of a building is
more in case of precast than other methods of construction and very less labour are required in
precast. quality can control and maintained in precast than conventional construction. The
construction speed increased rapidly resulting in better quality and eco-friendly in case of precast
construction.

Even though PPC has proven to be beneficial in terms of faster construction, low
maintenance, quality and precision, quality of living conditions and be a feasible solution to meet
the huge housing demand in India, there are various drawbacks in PPC which is to be managed.
These literature reviews depict the works various researchers who practically analysed different
sites to understand the root causes of the drawbacks and determined ways to overcome them. Many
Indian contractors consider that PPC construction is costlier than cast in-situ construction and
hence, do not adopt PPC construction methods. (Sherfudeen, et al., 2015) observed that India’s
construction industry employs a work force of nearly 32 million and contributes 8% to the nation’s
Gross Domestic Product (GDP) (Source: Construction Industry Development Council (CIDC)).
And only 2% of the total market value of concrete construction is shared by Precast/Prefabricated
Concrete (PPC) construction. The reasons behind it were mentioned to be the higher capital costs,
lack of sufficient guidelines and standardization for PPC design/construction, lack of
architects/engineers with sufficient experience in PPC design, lack of sufficient skilled manpower,
and poor PPC detailing and construction practices. They suggested that if the root causes for poor
productivity were identified and addressed then precast construction would be more cost effective.
The major factors that influenced productivity of precast construction in India are inefficient work
methodologies, use of inferior quality of materials, change in client’s requirements leading to
frequent revision in drawings, improper movement of machines, tools, etc., and absence of
standardised site layout leading to work area congestion. These problems can be solved by using

6
NICMAR PGP ACM 34TH BATCH 2020-2022
lean principles. Application of lean concepts to a typical production line can result in a reduction
in labour waste of 6.5 to 9%, reduction in equipment waste of 12% and reduction in material waste
of 10%. In their study two tools of lean construction were used to identify the productivity issues:
- Work Sampling and Foreman Delay Survey (FDS). According to the work sampling tool, three
categories of activities were identified namely (i) VA (Value Adding’ activities- example: -
concreting, erection of precast elements etc.) (ii) NVAR: ‘Non-Value Adding but Required
activities (e.g., supportive work items like transportation of elements, safety precautions,
receiving/giving instructions, etc.,) (iii) NVA: ‘Non-Value Adding’ activities (e.g., non-
productive work items like repair, waiting, etc.,). The second tool FDS helped in identifying the
root cause of delays in construction project by collecting data from foreman on various reasons
for delays on site activities. Author then suggested that less handling/shifting of precast elements
must be ensured by proper planning of the site layout. 12 delays were listed out and several reasons
for low productivity was found in precast construction which resulted in higher cost. The major
reason for low productivity is the lack of skilled labour that causes poor workmanship in PPC
construction sites.

Another drawback that was identified was wastage at sites. This paper identifies and
examines various studies that were undergone in precast construction technology and its impact
in reduction of waste generation. Sasidharani and Jayanthi (2015) construction waste is mainly
caused during site management, procurement stage, material handling and operational attributes.
It was identified that waste generation is mostly due to frequent design changes; changing designs
when works have already progressed and the uncoordinated activities between main contractors
and subcontractors and even amongst different crews. A questionnaire was conducted through a
convenience sampling technique for construction professional in selected building firms. Also,
personal interviews were conducted with construction professionals. Identify the cause and
minimisation measures of material waste in construction industries by literature survey. The
Author suggested that Procurement needs to be done by knowledgeable personnel and must be in
compliance with project specifications and in right quantities.

Suhaini et at (2019) indicated that by giving proper training to the workers and maintaining
the machines and equipment in proper conditions can reduce the amount of waste generation in
the construction industry. In this study, three precast concrete plants in Malaysia were selected.
7
NICMAR PGP ACM 34TH BATCH 2020-2022
The study was conducted through field observation, interviews, and document analysis. From the
study, it was understood that concrete waste is the highest construction waste generated in the
precast concrete plants, followed by steel and wood waste. The reason for these wastages was also
the same to some extent. The causes of construction waste were generated because of workers’
lack of awareness and poor performance of machines.

Shankari et al (2017) identified the sources and factors that contributed to waste generation during
construction activities. Based on the factors identified, questionnaire was prepared, and survey
was conducted to find the top factors that contribute to material that are minimum wasted from
various construction industries. The findings revealed that, the focus should be on the waste
management plan and specifications. According to the Authors findings it was also important for
the site manager to focus on material minimization strategies to improve the profitability and
decreases the cost.

In Precast industry, waste can be minimised by analysing the Precast construction process
influencing labour requirements. By optimising labour effort in construction site, the risk of low
construction productivity can be eliminated. Desai and Patil (2019) aimed at determining the
factors affecting labour productivity in precast flyover construction project and providing
solutions to improve productivity. The study included collection of data by asking to respondents
in the form of questionnaire survey and interview. It was based on three assumptions: - (a)
performance of labour is directly proportional to work and inversely proportional to time. (b) Use
of equipment is directly proportional to work and inversely proportional to time. (c) Location of
material is directly proportional to work and inversely proportional to time. The data was collected
based on two studies namely Work study and Time study. The collected data was presented in the
form of charts and analysis was done based on the data presented in charts. In conclusion the
Authors proved that by analysing performance of labour, using right equipment, and choosing
correct location for materials can not only reduce cost of construction by also have a good impact
on the productivity.

Literature study on productivity and waste minimisation in precast concrete structure indicates
that precast technology in construction has been able to reduce construction waste. The present
study has been focused on a project where precast construction methodology has been adopted
and the sources, factors and ways in which wastage can be minimised are analysed.
8
NICMAR PGP ACM 34TH BATCH 2020-2022
 CHAPTER 3
METHODOLOGY

The methodology of this study involves the quantification of wastes in the cast in situ and precast
construction project. The data obtained from project office is analyzed from which the amount of
waste generated in the construction process of Pier cap is found.

Precast construction technology is one of the fast-growing methods in the industry, it is well
known for better durability and less time consumption as compared to other methods of
construction. This technology is very much useful in constructing big projects in lesser duration
and for better output. It is most likely suitable for projects with high budgets as it requires immense
amount of money to complete the project. It is way more expensive than other domestic methods
of construction.

To identify the main factors which were responsible for maximum wastages of different materials
during activities, the literature reviews were studied and analyzed to understand the factors
responsible for cost overrun and material wastage during the project. A suitable site was selected
and drawings were obtained for the same. WBS was prepared based on the activities listed out of
the project. According to the activities listed, the study was carried out. Different components for
a flyover were studied to find a suitable component to study the advantage of precast with respect
to cast in-situ construction. For this pier cap was identified. Quantities for it were calculated for
both pre cast and cast in-situ to give a comparison on the material savings in precast construction.

As we know, most of the waste is generated at precast casting yard and plants during casting
process. Wastage of materials occur even while transportation of precast members to the
construction site. In case of cast in-situ, construction waste is generated in the form of excess
material usage and labor wastage. Wastage of materials can be caused by delayed inputs, lack of
skilled personal /labor, working out of sequence, redundant activities.

The activities involved in precast construction were studied and activities that involved major
material wastage was identified and listed out separately. These activities are majorly responsible
9
NICMAR PGP ACM 34TH BATCH 2020-2022
for the rise in the cost of the project. The precast elements of flyover are listed out based on the
wastage of materials produced during the activity. It was observed that Pier cap is comparatively
more complex and has dense reinforcement. Pier cap designs were closely studied and analyzed
for better understanding of how these elements contribute for wastage. BBS was prepared based
on the designs and each element was listed out to find the amount of wastage generated during
construction. This was done for both type of construction.

Calculation of
Selection Collection Selection waste
Preperation Rebar
of site of of focus generated
of BBS Optimization
Drawings of study and
productivity

Figure 1: Steps in Methodology

10
NICMAR PGP ACM 34TH BATCH 2020-2022
 CHAPTER 4
DATA COLLECTION

The data collection was done for the analysis of waste generation comparison between precast and
cast in-situ structures. For our study, we considered a Flyover Project site located in Mumbai and
the required data was collected from the project office. After studying the drawings, we chose pier
cap as our focus of study. The Bar Bending Schedule was prepared from the detailed reinforcement
drawings of the pier cap and the cut length was calculated for each bar.

4.1 DATA ANALYSIS

For the identification of wastage in reinforcement, the Bar Bending Schedule was prepared for
pier cap from which the cut length and total weight of bars required were calculated. The cut piece
for each type and size of bar was calculated. In order to calculate the wastage, it was necessary to
check whether the cut piece can be reused instead of using new sets of reinforcements.

Table 4.1: Course of action for wastage analysis

Objective
To identify the types of
construction waste produced
in Cast-in- situ type of
construction.
To identify the types of
construction waste produced
in Precast type of
construction
Research Tools Course of action
Obtained Drawings from site Collect information
office regarding common waste
generated and waste
management practices.
Working on BBS for Pier
Cap
Obtained Drawings from site Calculating waste generated
office from BBS

11
NICMAR PGP ACM 34TH BATCH 2020-2022
4.1.1 Bar Bending Schedule Calculation
The procedure for preparation of BBS was as follows: -
First the drawing was studied and the bars at different locations were identified and grouped based
on their shape and sizes. Next, the length of the bars was calculated using the following formula:-
L (m) = Span – (2*cover) – bend deductions + hook length (depending on the shape) (For
Bend and hook length IS 2502 was referred.)
Net cutting length (L) = L*no. of bars

The weight of the bars was calculated by multiplying the length with the unit weight: -

Weight of bar (Kgs.) = L*Unit Wt (D^2/162)

By this the total weight of the bar was calculated. Since the standard size of the bars is 12m, cut
length was subtracted from 12m.

Cut length (L) = 12 (Standard length of bar) - L

For determining the scrap, pieces above 2m were optimized in the BBS and below 2m are taken
as scrap. Optimization to reduce the scrap percentage is crucial. Wastage was calculated for each
diameter bar. To calculate the wastage total length of cut piece below 2m and the cut pieces
which could not be used else-where was found out. Weight of those bars by multiplying with the
unit weight was calculated. The wastage percentage was calculated using the formula: -

Wastage % = weight of unused bars/theoretical weight of bars required * 100

12
NICMAR PGP ACM 34TH BATCH 2020-2022
Figure 4.1: Bar Bending Schedule for cast in-situ pier cap.

Figure 4.2: Bar Bending Schedule for precast pier cap.

13
NICMAR PGP ACM 34TH BATCH 2020-2022
 Fig 4.3: Wastage Calculation

4.1.2 Productivity Calculation

Productivity is a crucial feature of the construction business that can be used as a measure
of production efficiency. For productivity calculation, time taken for cutting and bending
in terms of kilograms per day were found out. Transportation time for loading and
unloading in a day and quantity of bars shifted to site from steel yard in batches in a day
were found out. The type of equipment for loading and unloading the steel bars were found.
Lead distance (Km) were calculated assuming the nearest site location. The average
quantity of reinforcement that was placed in a day for a 12-hour shift in terms of kilograms
was identified. The Labor requirement for each task was investigated. Productivity was
then calculated as the Output per work hour.
𝑶𝒖𝒕𝒑𝒖𝒕
Productivity = 𝑾𝒐𝒓𝒌 𝒉𝒐𝒖𝒓

Table 4.2: Time study for productivity calculation for CIS Pier cap

Sr.No. Description No. of Time (in Hours) Resources

Labors
1 Cutting and bending 3 24
of bars
2 Loading of bars 2 0.5
3 Transportation (Up 1 Driver 0.417
transit)
4 Unloading 2 0.5
5 Transportation (Down 1 Driver 0.333
Cutting and bending
machine
Mobile Crane & Open
body trailer trucks
Open body trailer
trucks
Mobile Crane
Open body trailer

14
NICMAR PGP ACM 34TH BATCH 2020-2022
 transit) truck
6 Fixing Bars 10 144
Total 17 170 Hours

With approximately 122 hours and 12 working hours, number of pier cap cast in 1 month is 2. So,
in 1 month, 2 pier caps of same group are constructed which shows 39.386 Ton of reinforcement
being used to complete in 12 working hours per day. From this the productivity is calculated as
bellow: -
𝟏𝟗.𝟔𝟖𝟑
= 0.115 Ton per Work hour
𝟏𝟕𝟎

Table 4.3: Time study for productivity calculation for Precast pier cap

Sr.No. Description No. of Time (in Hours) Resources

Labors
1 Cutting and bending 3 24 Cutting and bending
of bars machine
3 Loading + 2 0.75 Mobile crane and
Transportation (Up Open body trailer
transit) trucks
5 Unloading + 2 0.75 Mobile crane and
Transportation (Down Open body trailer
transit) trucks
6 Fixing component 10 120
Total 17 145 Hours

15
NICMAR PGP ACM 34TH BATCH 2020-2022
With approximately 145 hours and 12 working hours, number of pier cap cast in 1 month is 3 as
three casting beds were available. So, in 1 month, 3 pier caps of same group are constructed which
shows 60 Ton of reinforcement being used to complete in 12 working hours per day. From this the
productivity is calculated as bellow: -
𝟐𝟎
= 0.137 Ton per Work hour
𝟏𝟒𝟓

16
NICMAR PGP ACM 34TH BATCH 2020-2022
 CHAPTER 5
RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

The result of the project is to analyze the wastage in reinforcements and the productivity obtained
by comparing the precast and cast in-situ structures. The cut length calculation for the cast in-situ
and precast structures was done.
Table 5.1: Summarized Result for CIS Pier cap

Total Weight 19.693

Total Wastage (in meter) 8mm = 66.48
10mm = 78.74
12mm = 142.24
16mm = 494.95
20mm = 54.32
32mm = 495.93
Total Wastage (in kgs) 8mm = 26.26
10mm = 48
12mm = 126.44
16mm = 782.14
20mm = 134.12
32mm = 3134.79
Wastage (in %) 8mm = 0.78
10mm = 3.38
12mm = 0.75
16mm = 6
20mm = 0.80
32mm = 18.70
Total quantity for each task 19.683 Ton
Total work hour 170 Hours

17
NICMAR PGP ACM 34TH BATCH 2020-2022
 Productivity 0.115

Table 5.2: Summarized Result for Precast Pier cap

Total Weight 20 Ton

Total Wastage (in meter) 8mm = 133.92
10mm = 36.18
12mm = 107.2
16mm = 331.82
20mm = 53.58
32mm = 283.5
Total Wastage (in kgs) 8mm = 52.907
10mm = 22.333
12mm = 95.289
16mm = 524.358
20mm = 132.296
32mm = 1792
Wastage (in %) 8mm = 1.574
10mm = 1.555
12mm = 8.425
16mm = 8.592
20mm = 8.122
32mm = 28.644
Total quantity for each task 20 Ton
Total work hour 145 Hours
Productivity 0.137

18
NICMAR PGP ACM 34TH BATCH 2020-2022
 CHAPTER 6
CONCLUSIONS

It is vital to investigate the problem with a specific task on the job site and take corrective action.
The above project demonstrated that large-scale precast segmental construction is a viable choice.
The accepted precast technology allows for long-distance elevated expressways.
The Precast pier cap was observed to be denser reinforcement structure and also has complex
shape, confined working space while working on the cage, lack of knowledge of the labors and
supervisor (unable to comprehend the drawing in the first explanation).
From the above calculations, it was observed the number of working hours required for the entire
construction of pier cap from cutting and bending to fixing of reinforcement, was comparatively
less in precast pier cap. But wastage in precast pier cap was comparatively more than that in cast-
in-situ construction.
When productivity rates were compared, it was evident that CIS method of construction showed
lower productivity but the wastage was also less. Whereas in precast, the wastage and productivity
both were higher.
In conclusion, if productivity is kept in mind, then Precast construction is more beneficial in case
of the particular project taken into consideration. A recommendation that can be made based on
the study's findings to decrease material waste on construction sites to a minimum is to prepare
the BBS such that the maximum number of cut pieces are reused. It can be reused for making
different shape of bar or can be used to make chairs that are used in a reinforcement cage or other
ancillary work.

19
NICMAR PGP ACM 34TH BATCH 2020-2022
 REFERENCES

1. Desai, P. A. & Patil, S. B., 2019. Labour Productivity Measurement for Precast Fly Over
Bridge Construction Project. International Journal Of Engineering Research and
Technology, 8(9).
2. Jaillon, L. & Poon, C. S., 2007. Advantages and Limitations of Precast Concrete
Construction in High Rise Buildings: Hong Kong Case Studies. s.l., s.n., pp. 2504-2514.
3. Karthigai, P. P. & Neamitha, M., 2018. A Comparative Study of Precast Construction and
Conventional Construction. International Research Journal of Engineering and
Technology, 5(8), pp. 839-842.
4. Mire, A. & Singh, R. C., 2017. Study of Precast Construction. International Journal of
Mechanical and Production Engineering, 5(11), pp. 101-103.
5. Mogadala, R. B. K. & Rajasekaran, D. C., 2018. Study on the Methods of Precast systems
for Indian Construction industry. International Journal of Scientific and Engineering
Research, 9(4).
6. Nanyam, V. N. et al., 2017. Implementation of Precast Technology in India Oppotunities
and Challenges. s.l., Procedia Engineering, pp. 144-151.
7. Sasidharani , B. & Jayanthi, R., 2015. Material Waste Management In Construction
Industries. International Journal of Science and Engineering Research, 3(5), pp. 1-12.
8. Shankari, R. S., Ambika, D. & Kavithra, S. S., 2017. A Review on Waste Material
Minimization in Construction Industry. International Research Journal of Engineering
and Technology, 4(1), pp. 1306-1309.
9. Sherfudeen, A. P., N, R., Pillai, R. G. & Kalidindi, S. N., 2015. Productivity in Precast
concrete construction sities in India. s.l., Research Gate, pp. 1-8.
10. Suhaini, N. . A., Abas, N. H., Nagapan, S. & Nabarason, K., 2019. Identification of
Construction Waste Generated at Precast Concrete Plants: Case study. s.l., IOP
publications.

20
NICMAR PGP ACM 34TH BATCH 2020-2022
Appendix

21
NICMAR PGP ACM 34TH BATCH 2020-2022