Material Waste

minimization

Delivered by: Aksa

Student No.: 101220317

DULN004(Q) KP(JPS)5195/IPTS/1144 05 June 2004 Co. No. 497194-M

To derive the problem
• The Malaysian construction industry is a successful industry

• The construction industry has been held significantly liable for being one of the main causes leading to

largest waste origins Malaysia has (Ikau, Joseph and Tawie, 2016). 

• The generation of wastage as a consequence of construction incorporates both material losses as well as

unnecessary work implemented on site, (Gul Polae and Glenn Ballard, 2004).

• The wastage as a consequence of construction has been divided by Al-Moghany (2006) as; wastage of

material, time wastage plus and wastage of the machinery used.

• Still, the context of this research will be based on the wastage of material, this is because majority of the

cost of the project is because of the materials purchased, i.e. around 50-60% (Naief TurkiIbn and - Homaid,

2002)

DULN004(Q) KP(JPS)5195/IPTS/1144 05 June 2004 Co. No. 497194-M

To derive the problem
• Malaysia is among the countries who are facing issue of illegal dumping on a significant scale (Yahaya & Larsen

2008). Illegal dumping is an outcome of material waste generation.

• By reducing material waste generation. The instances of illegal dumping will also reduce significantly.

• Several contributory factors of material waste generation at the design, procurement as well as construction

stages are already recognized in previous researches, such as Site layout (Zikhun Ding et.el. 2017), Details in

drawings (Rafael Gavilan and Leonhard Bernold ,2018), Order Placement (Bossink & Brouwers 1996), quality of

materials ((Wandee et al., 2019) and equipment quality, Use of material (Bossink & Brouwers 1996).

• The wastage as a consequence of construction has been divided by Al-Moghany (2006) as; wastage of

material, time wastage and wastage of the machinery used.

• The context of this research will be based on the wastage of material, this is because majority of the cost of

the project is because of the materials purchased, i.e. around 50-60%

(Naief TurkiIbn and - Homaid, 2002),

DULN004(Q) KP(JPS)5195/IPTS/1144 05 June 2004 Co. No. 497194-M

To derive the problem

• The minimization of generated waste as a consequence of construction will help in reducing

environmental pollution, also decreases the project budget by reducing quantity of materials used,

lifespan of the landfills will be increased (Florence Ling & Mark Lim 2002, Lingard, Graham & Smithers

2000).

• Given the importance of minimizing material waste generation and the strong impact material waste

generation factors have on each other at different stages, this study will analyze the design, procurement

and as built stages in an undergoing construction project in Kuching, Malaysia, to determine the possible

correlation among the identified material waste generation factors, and develop a tookit to minimize

Material waste.

DULN004(Q) KP(JPS)5195/IPTS/1144 05 June 2004 Co. No. 497194-M

To derive the problem
 
• The three stages of MWG, first, design, then procurement and finally construction stage, each have a
significant part in minimization of MWG. 
• It is during the design stage that the concept development of the project starts, this involves the entire
design process including specifications of materials to be used. All the drawings are drafted during this
stage and based on these drawings the quantity of materials like concrete, paint, brick work is calculated
• Once the blueprints are made available, comes the procurement stage, during which the materials that
are wasted in the construction project are purchased. This makes the material waste management
significant during this stage.
• Lastly, the as built stage is where the final drawings based on the construction and modifications made to
the deisgn are produced.

DULN004(Q) KP(JPS)5195/IPTS/1144 05 June 2004 Co. No. 497194-M

To derive the problem
• Most of the studies conducted in design stage concluded that majority of the MWG in the design stage
comes under the concept development factor and the cause being improper designing, which has resulted in
33% of MWG (Bossink & Brouwers 1996, Agyekum, Ayarkwa and Adjei-Kum 2013, Zikhun Ding et.el. 2017,
Rafael Gavilan and Leonhard Bernold ,2018, Wandee et al., 2019).
 
• Until today, very less research has been performed to identify MWG factors and causes for MWG in the
procurement stage. Most of the studies conducted in this area concluded that majority of the MWG in the
procurement stage comes under the order placement factor and the cause being Ordering error i.e. over-
ordering or under-ordering of materials (Bossink & Brouwers 1996, Zikhun Ding et.el. 2017. Rafael Gavilan
and Leonhard Bernold, 2018).

• The researchers mentioned above identified the MWG factors by adopting their own unique techniques and
methods. Al-Hajj and Hamani (2011) used questionnaires, Whereas, Wang, Li and Tam (2014) used the
software venism in order to develop a system dynamics model. Ajayi and Oyedele, (2018), and Wang et al
(2019) performed their research by using qualitative sampling and data collection via interviews, and
quantitative data collection via questionnaires respectively. Also, AMOS 21 was used by both the researchers
for structural equation modelling (SEM) so as to be able to form and verify the correlation shown by the
different variables.
DULN004(Q) KP(JPS)5195/IPTS/1144 05 June 2004 Co. No. 497194-M
To derive the problem
• Knowledge Gap:
• Previous researches have been done showing the MWG factors separately at the design, procurement
construction and demolition stages. Recently, MWG factors at the design and construction stage have
been shown in correlation to each other. However, the research gap, correlating the MWG factors at the
MWG stages which are design, procurement and as built , still remains, and are required to be targeted.
So as to reduce MWG, three stages i.e. design, procurement as well as as built cannot be treated
independently.
• According to Ding et al., (2016) these three stages act as a system together where any alterations made in
design stage influences the procurement and as built stages. This research paper focusses on identifying
the material quantity variation at the three stages resulting in possible material wastage and developing a
toolkit in order to minimize possible material wastage cause of variation.

DULN004(Q) KP(JPS)5195/IPTS/1144 05 June 2004 Co. No. 497194-M

Importance to Sarawak
• Around 45 landfills are prevalent in Sarawak, among which 40 have been regularly inspected by

the NREB (Lau and Whyte, 2007). Most of the waste coming from construction projects which

are on a smaller scale is dumped at illegal dumping sites in Kuching (Lau and Whyte, 2007). This

research is based on a construction project in Kuching, Sarawak. On, successful identification of

the MWG factors and their correlation, also the development of an SOP at the three stages of

material waste generation i.e. design, procurement and construction, there will be minimization

of material waste. Reducing material waste will eventually lead to the decrease in the rate of

increasing number of landfills, also the lifespan of landfills will be extended eventually.

DULN004(Q) KP(JPS)5195/IPTS/1144 05 June 2004 Co. No. 497194-M

 Research Question
 
• How is the material variation at the different stages i.e. design procurement and as built leading to material
wastage?

• How will a tool kit help in material waste minimization?

  Aim
• Material waste minimization

Objective

• To identify the material variation and wastage through the design-procurement-as built stages

• To develop a tool kit helping in material waste minimization.

DULN004(Q) KP(JPS)5195/IPTS/1144 05 June 2004 Co. No. 497194-M

Sub-problems and Hypotheses

Hypotheses:

• By reducing material waste at the design stage, less

procurements will be made and less wastage will occur
in the as built stage.

DULN004(Q) KP(JPS)5195/IPTS/1144 05 June 2004 Co. No. 497194-M

Research Method
Question Objective Method Task
1. How is the 1. To identify the 1. To determine 1.1 To develop BOQ
material variation at material variation material variation for the selected
the different stages and wastage through and wastage through materials as per the
i.e. design the design- the design- approved drawings.
procurement and as procurement-as built procurement and as (BQ1)
built leading to stages built stage
material wastage? 1.2 To obtain the
procurement bill for
the selected
materials from the
office (PQ)

1.3 To draft the as

built drawing of the
project (BQ2)

1.4 To measure the

consumption of the
selected materials as
per as built drawing
(BQ2)
1.5 BQ1-BQ2
PQ-BQ2
2. To develop a tool
kit helping in
2. To develop a tool
kit helping in
2.
material waste material waste
minimization. minimization.

DULN004(Q) KP(JPS)5195/IPTS/1144 05 June 2004 Co. No. 497194-M

Delimitations and Definitions
• Delimitations :
• This study will not focus globally or will not take into consideration the
construction industry in the entire Malaysia
• It will focus only on selected materials
– Definitions of terms
– Construction waste: Construction waste consists of unwanted material produced directly
or incidentally by the construction or industries. This includes building materials such as
insulation, nails, electrical wiring, shingle, and roofing as well as waste originating from
site preparation such as dredging materials, tree stumps, and rubble.

–  Material Waste: Any materials unused and rejected as worthless or unwanted; "they

collect the waste once a week"; "much of the waste material is carried off in the
sewers" waste, waste matter, waste product

DULN004(Q) KP(JPS)5195/IPTS/1144 05 June 2004 Co. No. 497194-M

Item Red bricks- BQ1
Size of red bricks used Unit

Length 220 mm

Breadth 96 mm

Height 69 mm

Volume of red bricks 1457280 mm^3

Size of red bricks with 10 mm mortar

Length 230 mm

Breadth 106 mm

Height 79 mm

Volume of red bricks with 10 mm mortar 1926020 mm^3

Volume of red bricks with 10 mm mortar 0.068016746 cft

No: of bricks in 1 cft 14.70226166 pieces

DULN004(Q) KP(JPS)5195/IPTS/1144 05 June 2004 Co. No. 497194-M

 Item Red bricks- BQ1
Wall 2 Unit

Unit 1 / 4 Length 970 mm

Kitchen
Breadth 106 mm
Wall 1 Unit
Height 3300 mm
Length 2847 mm
Volume of wall 2 339306000 mm^3
Breadth 106 mm
Height 3300 mm Volume of wall 2 11.98247686 cft

Volume of wall 995880600 Total no of bricks used 352.3390204 Pcs

Volume of wall 35.16918725 cft

Total no of bricks used 1034.133187 PCS
Wall 3

Length 1763 mm
Deduction
Breadth 106 mm
Window (W3) Unit
Length 1800 mm Height 3300 mm

Breadth 106 mm Volume of wall 3 616697400 mm^3

Height 1100 mm Volume of wall 3 21.77846053 cft

Volume of W3 209880000 mm^3
Total no of bricks used 640.3852504 Pcs
Volume of W3 7.411841359 cft
Bricks used for this volume 217.9416621 PCS

Net brick used for wall 1 816.1915245 PCS

DULN004(Q) KP(JPS)5195/IPTS/1144 05 June 2004 Co. No. 497194-M

 Item Red bricks- BQ1
Living Area
Wall 5
Dining Area Length 2447 mm
Wall 4 Breadth 106 mm
Length 2720 mm Height 3300 mm
Volume of wall 5 855960600 mm^3
Breadth 106 mm
Volume of wall 5 30.22795968 cft
Height 3300 mm
Total no of bricks used 888.8387452 Pcs
Volume of wall 4 951456000 mm^3
Volume of wall 4 33.6003475 Cft
Total no of bricks used 988.0022014 Pcs

Deduction
Door D5
Length 2250 mm
Breadth 106 mm
Height 2100 mm
Volumne of Door D5 500850000 mm^3
Volumne of Door D5 17.6873487 cft
Bricks used for this volume 520.0880572 Pcs

Net bricks used in Wall 4 467.9141442 Pcs

DULN004(Q) KP(JPS)5195/IPTS/1144 05 June 2004 Co. No. 497194-M

 Item Red bricks- BQ1
Wall 6
Length 1236 mm
Breadth 106 mm
Height 3300 mm
Volume of wall 6 432352800 mm^3
Volume of wall 6 15.2683932 cft
Total no of bricks used 448.9598239 Pcs

Deduction
Window W2
Length 600 mm
Breadth 106 mm
Height 1800 mm
Volume of window W2 114480000 mm^3
Volume of window W2 4.04282256 cft
Bricks used for this volume 118.8772702 Pcs

Net bricks used in Wall 6 330.0825537 Pcs

DULN004(Q) KP(JPS)5195/IPTS/1144 05 June 2004 Co. No. 497194-M

Item Red bricks- BQ1
Wall 7
Length 5420 mm
Breadth 106 mm
Height 3300 mm
Volume of wall 7 1895916000 mm^3
Volume of wall 7 66.95363361 cft
Total No of bricks used 1968.739681 Pcs

Deduction
Door D1
Length 3150 mm
Breadth 106 mm
Height 2100 mm
Volume of door D1 701190000 mm^3
Volume of door D1 24.76228818 cft

Window W1
Length 1800 mm
Breadth 106 mm
Height 1800 mm
Volume of window W1 343440000 mm^3
Volume of window W1 12.12846768 cft

Net volume for deduction 36.89075586 cft

Bricks used for this volume 1084.755091 Pcs

Net bricks used in wall 7 883.98459 Pcs

DULN004(Q) KP(JPS)5195/IPTS/1144 05 June 2004 Co. No. 497194-M

Item Red bricks- BQ1
WC1
Wall 8
Length 1257 mm
Breadth 106 mm
Height 3300 mm
Volume of Wall 8 439698600 mm^3
Volume of Wall 8 15.52780765 cft
Total No of bricks used 456.5877821 Pcs

Deduction
Window W5
Length 600 mm
Breadth 106 mm
Height 600 mm
Volume Window W5 38160000 mm^3
Volume Window W5 1.34760752 cft
Total No of bricks used 39.62575674 Pcs

Net Bricks used 416.9620253 Pcs

Total bricks unit 1 and 4 5830.83104 Pcs

DULN004(Q) KP(JPS)5195/IPTS/1144 05 June 2004 Co. No. 497194-M

Hypothetical ToolKit
Material Qty Variation Variation % Cost Total cost Cost wot/ variation Difference in cost Cost increase %
Red bricks 5000 1000 20 30 150000 120000 30000 25
Tiles 7000 2000 28.57142857 75 525000 375000 150000 40

Red bricks 1 1.25

Tiles 1 1.4

Red bricks 4 5
This will help in recognizing the materials
wasted most responsible in increasing cost.
Tiles 11 15.4
The issue can be solved by replacing with
less expensive materials or reducing the
wastage margin

DULN004(Q) KP(JPS)5195/IPTS/1144 05 June 2004 Co. No. 497194-M

Refrences
•  
• Ikau, R., Joseph, C. and Tawie, R. (2016). Factors Influencing Waste Generation in the Construction Industry in Malaysia. Elsevier, 234.
• Raza Ali Khan, Mohd Shahir Liew and Zulkipli Bin Ghazali (2015). Malaysian Construction Sector and Malaysia Vision 2020: Developed Nation Status.
Elsevier, 109.
• Zhikun Ding, Guizhen Yi, Vivian Tamb, W. and Tengyue Huang (2016). A system dynamics-based environmental performance simulation of
construction waste reduction management in China. Elsevier, 51.
• Gul Polae and Glenn Ballard (2004). Waste in Turkish Construction: Need for lean construction techniques. Elsevier.
• Al-Moghany, S. (2006). Managing and Minimizing Construction Waste in Gaza Strip. Elsevier.
• Naief TurkiIbn & -Homaid 2002, "A Comparative Evaluation of Construction and Manufacturing Materials Management", International Journal of Project
Management, vol. 20.
• Florence Ling, Y & Mark Lim, C 2002, "Implementation of a Waste Management Plan for Construction Projects in Singapore", Architectural Science
Review, vol. 45, no. 2.
• Lingard, H, Graham, P & Smithers, G 2000, "Employee perceptions of the solid waste management system operating in a large Australian contracting
organization: implications for company policy implementation", Construction Management and Economics, vol. 18, no. 4.
• Liu, G, Wu, Z, Yu, A & Shen, L 2014, "Quantifying construction and demolition waste: An analytical review", Waste Management, vol. 34, no. 9.
• Rahman, N 2015, "Structural modelling of cause and effect factors of construction waste generation in Malaysian construction industry (Doctoral
Dissertation)".
• Yahaya, D & Larsen, I 2008, "Federalising Solid Waste Management In Peninsular
• Malaysia", Proceedings of the International Solid Waste Association (ISWA) World Congress. Singapore.
• Osmani, M., Glass, J. and Price, A. (2008). Architects’ perspectives on construction waste reduction by design. Waste Management, 28.
• Poon, C. and Jaillon, L. (2014). Life cycle design and prefabrication in buildings: A review and case studies in Hong Kong. Automation in Construction, 39.
• Wang, J., Zhengdao, L. and Tam, V. (2014). Critical factors in effective construction waste minimization at the design stage: A Shenzhen case
study,China. Resources,Conservation and Recycling, 82.
• Baldwin, A., Poon, C., Shen, L., Austin, S. and Wong, I. (2009). Designing out waste in high-rise residential buildings: Analysis of precasting methods and
traditional construction. Renewable Energy, 34(9).

DULN004(Q) KP(JPS)5195/IPTS/1144 05 June 2004 Co. No. 497194-M

Refrences
•  Brito, J. and Coelho, A. (2012). Influence of construction and demolition waste management on the environmental impact of buildings.
Waste Management, 32(3).
• Bossink, B. and Brouwersz, H. (1996). Construction waste: Quantification and source evaluation.
• Construction Engineering and Management,
• Ofori, G. and Ekanayake, L. (2000). Construction material waste source evaluation. Proceedings of the 2nd Southern African Conference on
Sustainable Development in the Built Environment: Strategies for a Sustainable Built Environment, Pretoria.
• Brooks, K., Cassandra Adams and Demsetz, L. (1994). Germany’s construction and demolition debris recycling infrastructure: What
lessons it have for the US? Sustainable Construction.
• Bossink, B & Brouwers, H 1996, "Construction Waste: Quantification and Source Evaluation", Construction Engineering and Management.
• Caban, G. and Faniran, O. (1998). Minimizing waste on construction project sites. Engineering, Construction and Architectural
Management.
• Kong, C. and Li, H. (2001). An e-commerce system for construction material procurement. Construction Innovation.
• Formoso, C., Soibelman, L., Cesare, C. and Isatto, E. (2002). Material Waste in Building Industry: Main Causes and Prevention.
Construction Engineering and Managemnet.
•  
• Ajayi, S. and Oyedele, L. (2018). Waste-efficient materials procurement for construction projects: A structural equation modelling of
critical success factors. Waste Management.
•  
• Ajayi, S., Oyedele, L., Akinade, O., Bilal, M., Alaka, H. and Owolabi, H. (2017). Optimising material procurement for construction waste
minimization:An exploration of success factors. Sustainable Materials and Technologies
• Wandee, S., Chakkrit, L., Singh, I. and Vachara, P. (2019). Factors Influencing Construction Waste Generation in Building Construction:
Thailand’s Perspective. Sustainaibility.

DULN004(Q) KP(JPS)5195/IPTS/1144 05 June 2004 Co. No. 497194-M

Thank You

DULN004(Q) KP(JPS)5195/IPTS/1144 05 June 2004 Co. No. 497194-M