Pekeliling flats of kuala lumpur Essay Example For Students

Pekeliling flats of kuala lumpur Essay Outline1 3.1 Introduction to Case Study2 3.2 Assembling Method3 3.3 Evaluation and Comparison4 3.3.1 Cost5 3.3.2 Speed6 3.3.3 Labour Requirement7 3.3.4 Quality8 3.3.5 Productiveness9 Aims10 Description of Datas11 Rationale for Combining Data Points12 Result and Discussion13 Comparison of Labour Productivity between Structural Building Systems14 Cycle Time Comparison between Structural Building Systems15 Summmary16 3.3.6 Wastage17 3.4 Decision 3.1 Introduction to Case Study Pekeliling Flats is situated on the Lebuhraya Mahameru-bound Jalan Tun Razak, Kuala Lumpur. The flats are besides known as Tunku Abdul Rahman public flats. Pekeliling flats are one of Kuala Lumpurs earliest public lodging undertakings and were built in 1967. There were 11 residential blocks consisting 2,969 units. For the building of the first pilot undertaking, the Government held a dialogue with a joint venture company Citra/Boon A ; Cheah which intended to utilize the Gallic Tracoba System of building. But the dialogue was unsuccessful and the undertaking was later opened to public stamp. The stamp was finally awarded to Gammon/Larsen Nielsen utilizing the Danish System of big panel industrialised prefabricated system. The building was so launched in 1968. The strategy at Jalan Pekeliling comprises 4 blocks of 4-storey flats and stores, 7 blocks of 17-storey flats, numbering 3009 units and was completed within 27 month, including the clip taken in the building of the RM 2.5 million projecting pace for the prefabricated elements at 10? stat mis Jalan Damansara. The whole building of the level is constructed utilizing the prefabrication of concrete box method which is similar to the British Truscon System whereby a standard through-shaped concrete boxes, which incorporate frontage walls made from lightweight stuffs, ceilings dwelling of plaster embarkation stapled and every bit good as internal adjustments. 3.2 Assembling Method The boxes are made by precasting the walls panels with ribs downwards and smoothing down the concrete as it has semi-set. Once the walls have hardened, they are so removed from the molds by agencies of an overhead gauntry and placed into a gigue. Foundations tablets are cast and on top of these precast concrete beams, inverted T cross subdivision are so laid. The boxes are now unloaded straight from the lorry and are placed in place upon these inverted T beams. Once the boxes, which form one class from frontage to fa amp ; ccedil ; ade have been bolted together along the wall. After the boxes are connected together at the structural floor degree of two connection home bases, which are bolted with bolts to weave inserts on either side of the joint. Once the boxes, which form one class from frontage to fa amp ; ccedil ; ade have been bolted together along the wall, where once more the cast-in sockets which joined by steel home bases and bolts, there merely thin perpendicular articulations seeable. The perpendicular channels between the bordering ribs of the end-to-end boxes make stiff cross-walls of singular sound insularity. Horizontal support rods are lowered and concrete is cast-in, ensuing in the formation of a party wall. 3.3 Evaluation and Comparison 3.3.1 Cost Industrialised prefabricated building of the Pekeliling undertaking was more expensive than the conventional system. Its cost was 8.1 % higher than a conventional lodging undertaking completed around that clip. There are many advantages you can acquire if you are utilizing precast building method alternatively of utilizing unmoved building method. One of the advantages is the cost deduction. Using precast building method can salvage money or cut down the cost of building because: Time Mass production every bit good as off-site production shortens project timeline, gives earlier return on investing, leting earlier tenancy and maintain in agenda. It is estimated that a precast construction takes up to 20 % less clip to build than a similar dramatis personae in situ construction. For illustration, the walls of a edifice can be manufactured while on-site foundations are being built. If the clip is over the agenda or due day of the month, the company needs to pay the amendss. Lastingness Provides long service for high usage applications and does non necessitate regular care ; salvage cost in long term. Waste Minimization Fewer stuffs are required because precise mixture proportions and tighter tolerances are accomplishable. Less concrete waste is created due to tight control of measures of constitutional stuffs. Waste stuffs are more readily recycled because concrete production is in one location. Sand and acids for completing surfaces are reused. Steel signifiers and other stuffs are reused. Decreased demands for formwork, entree staging and less trust on moisture trades. The decreased demand for site supervising by the chief contractor besides saves money. Compared to project unmoved concrete, the undermentioned per centums of nest eggs can be expected: 75 per cent in footings of formwork and staging and 90 % for wet concrete. Reclaimable precast concrete constructions in urban countries can be recycled into fill and route base stuff at the terminal of their utile life. Fewer trucks and less clip are required for building because concrete is made offsite ; peculiarly beneficial in urban countries where minimum traffic break is critical. When fewer trucks are required agencies lesser the cost needed to lease vehicles. The decrease in site labour which partially offsets a deficit of skilled site workers. Priced in the $ 55 $ 65 scope per additive pes of wall, precast systems are competitory with other foundation walls, peculiarly when costs are examined as an assembly that includes termss and sub-slab drainage. Precast walls can be installed rapidly in any conditions. Because the concrete is cured in the mill, precast foundations can be backfilled every bit shortly as the slab is placed and first floor brace is in topographic point, heightening jobsite safety and site handiness. Door and window gaps, steel beam pockets, and brick shelfs must be cast into the panels, so orders must be customized. The wall sub-base must be compacted and leveled, similar to preciseness required of termss. In doing cost comparings between alternate systems, it is imperative that entire like for like costs are considered. There are significant nest eggs to be made utilizing precast building which are non apparent when a direct elemental cost comparing is made with alternate building methods. To acquire an accurate like for like cost, whole edifice costs must be estimated. To accurately assess whole edifice cost, each of the advantages of precast must be accurately costed. Savingss through factors such as earlier completion day of the months, built-in fireproofing, reduced formwork, staging, reduced wet trades and increased budget control can be important. Besides, fast-track procurance and building may understate capital costs by cut downing funding costs and procuring earlier rental income. The precast frame bundle typically includes columns, beams, floors, wall panels, stepss, landings, balconies etc. , all of which have an built-in minimal one-hour fire protection. Specialist precast frame manufacturers will help design squads in measuring the range for standardised precast constituents for a peculiar undertaking. Budget costings and hard-on programmes can be prepared by the precaster on reception of outline drawings and a list of public presentation standards. For contractors and specifiers, there is a large difference between monetary value and cost. While monetary value is but one component of cost, it is the initial, most seeable and the easier of the two to understand. Concentrating on monetary value is non a preferable scheme in any concern, particularly where high-quality, dependable manufactured goods are concerned. Alternatively, for precast concrete merchandises, the focal point should be on the Entire Cost of Ownership ( TCO ) . How is TCO calculated? The Entire Cost of Ownership is equal to the amount of the four cost constituents: quality, service, bringing and monetary value. In footings of cost elements, a distinguishable advantage of precast concrete over cast-in-place ( CIP ) is speed of bringing and easiness of installing, or service. Both contribute straight to take down Total Cost of Ownership. Precast concrete, particularly when produced in certified workss, boasts the extra benefit of higher quality. Controlled batch proportions placed under unvarying conditions systematically creates a better merchandise than can be cast in topographic point. For illustration intents, we will utilize an ordinary precast belowground construction. On the building site, programming is an of import, unpredictable and expensive hazard. Nature stacks the cost odds against CIP concrete. It is a much quicker and less hazardous pick to hold the precast delivered and installed the same twenty-four hours instead than unearth, signifier, pour and deprive the CIP concrete, remedy, moist cogent evidence and backfill. Given the cost matrix in Example 1, it could salvage six yearss in building programming. For illustration intents, see a typical below-grade construction. For the inside dimensions of a 4-by-8-by-4-foot construction of either precast ( 6 inches thick ) or CIP ( 8 inches thick ) , assume these facts: CIP requires three separate yearss to pour the base, walls and top. Bring arounding and depriving adds one twenty-four hours to each measure, necessitating six yearss to project on site. Damp proofing adds one twenty-four hours to the CIP procedure, numbering seven working yearss of open-hole clip. Leting an mean $ 350 per three-dimensional pace for little occupations ( ready mix, rebar, mastic, labour and equipment ) , the 4 three-dimensional paces of CIP required monetary values out at $ 1,400. Precast takes merely one twenty-four hours to present and put in, including backfill of the pre-damp proofed unit. The precast option to bring forth and truck to the occupation site monetary values out at $ 2,000. Installing the precast requires a four-hour minimal charge of $ 400 for a 20-ton Crane. Hardware costs for adjustments, embedded points, etc. , are indistinguishable for precast and CIP. The TCO of precast is fixed at $ 2,400. However, the TCO of CIP is merely get downing at $ 1,400. That raises the inquiry among skeptics as to why a contractor would pass more for precast. But many savvy contractors and specifiers recognize that their costs are really less with precast. Career Goals EssayComparison of Labour Productivity between Structural Building Systems This subdivision evaluates the labour productiveness comparing between structural constructing systems. Table 4 presents the descriptive statistic for labour productiveness comparing between undertakings while Table 5 presents the labour productiveness comparing between constructing systems utilizing the mean information from the seven undertakings. Analysis of Variance ( ANOVA ) consequences of labour productiveness between the four edifice systems was found to be statistically important different as shown in Table 6. The precast concrete system was the most productive edifice system with labour productiveness of 1.33 manhours/m? followed by dramatis personae unmoved half tunnel ( 1.88 manhours/m? ) , cast unmoved table signifier ( 2.70 manhours/m? ) and conventional edifice system ( 4.20 manhours/m? ) . Taking the conventional edifice system as the benchmark of 100 % , the dramatis personae unmoved table signifier system achieved a building velocity of 135 % followed by the dramat is personae unmoved half tunnel signifier system of 155 % and precast concrete system of 168 % . The consequence was in tandem with the figure of trades for each edifice system. For illustration, the conventional edifice system consisted of four major operations, viz. the hard-on of scaffolding and formwork, installing of support bars, casting of concrete and dismantlement of scaffolding and formwork ; hence, it was extremely labour intensifier. However, merely a few building operations are needed for industrialised edifice system. For case, the precast concrete system was pre-assembly in mill, therefore cut downing on-site labor input. Besides that, no staging is required for cast unmoved tunnel signifier system to back up the slab. Cycle Time Comparison between Structural Building Systems This subdivision examines the rhythm clip measured in yearss required to finish the structural component of one unit house. Table 7 shows the rhythm clip for each undertaking while Table 8 shows the mean rhythm clip for four structural constructing systems. In Table 9, analysis of discrepancy ( ANOVA ) consequences indicated that there was important different between the four edifice systems in term of rhythm clip per house, . The average rhythm times were 4.9 yearss for conventional edifice system, 3.9 yearss for cast unmoved tabular array signifier, 2.9 yearss for cast unmoved half tunnel signifier and 2.3 yearss for precast concrete system. In term of per centum, the conventional edifice system required 26 % more rhythm clip than cast unmoved tabular array signifier system, 41 % of cast unmoved half tunnel signifier system, and 53 % of precast concrete system. Summmary This survey has introduced the standardised informations aggregation methodological analysis for mensurating and comparing the edifice structural component of conventional and industrialized edifice system. Research workers are enabled to unite informations points from assorted undertakings to bring forth a larger database if they adopt this methodological analysis. The rational for uniting the information point is that the bulk of residential undertakings has a simple structural layout program and do non hold any distinctive features architectural characteristics. A sum of 499 labour productiveness informations points were obtained from seven ongoing residential undertakings. The consequences and treatment evolves on comparing between structural constructing systems in footings of labour productiveness and rhythm clip per structural component of one house. In facet of labour productiveness comparing, the precast concrete system was the most productive edifice system with labour productiveness of 1.33 manhours/m? compare to the conventional edifice system with labour productiveness of 4.20 manhours/m? . Besides that, presuming the conventional edifice system as the benchmark of 100 % , precast concrete system achieved a building velocity of 168 % . For case, when the first house constructed utilizing conventional edifice system is merely done, whereas the first house constructed utilizing precast concrete system was done and the 2nd house is constructed about 68 % completed. The comparing of rhythm clip per house indicated that the two edifice systems were significantly different. The average rhythm times were 4.9 yearss for conventional edifice system and 2.3 yearss for precast concrete system. In term of per centum, the conventional edifice system required 53 % more rhythm clip than precast concrete system. Finally, the precast concrete system is preferred comparison with conventional edifice system because the edifice plants can be done faster since it requires less clip to build wholly. 3.3.6 Wastage In the field of structural concrete building, two basic constructs are by and large applied in pattern which is precast concrete building and conventional dramatis personae unmoved building. Wastage can be defined as goods that are damaged, out of day of the month, reduced, or by and large unsalable, which are destined to be thrown off and which are written off as a loss. Construction waste can be divided into three chief classs viz. material, labour, and machinery waste. However, material wastage is given more concern because most of the natural stuffs used in building industry come from non-renewable resources. The building industry is a major generator of waste stuff. Traditionally, building waste is defined as any stuff, apart from Earth stuffs, which need to be transported elsewhere from the building site or used within the building site itself for the intent of land filling, incineration, recycling, recycling or composting, other than the intended specific intent of the underta king due to material harm, extra, non-use, or non-compliance with the specifications or being a byproduct of the building procedure. Material building waste can be classify as natural waste ( ineluctable waste allowed for in the stamp ) , indirect waste ( stuff used for intents other than that for which it was ordered ) , and direct waste ( stuff which is encountered for ) . It is by and large known that there is a comparatively big part of the stuffs being wasted because of hapless stuff control on edifice sites. The job of stuff wastage is non an stray issue on building sites. It is besides an environmental concern. When building waste is viewed from an environmental position a different type of classification must be considered. The environmental standards include the consideration of solid waste. This is divided into four classs: risky waste production, non-hazardous waste production, inert waste production, and radioactive waste production. The building industry consumes a important sum of edifice stuffs and produces big measures of edifice waste. Construction and destruction ( C A ; D ) stuff is a mixture of inert and non-inert stuffs originating from building, digging, redevelopment, destruction and roadwork. The composing of building waste is divided into two major classs: inert stuffs ( soft and difficult inert stuffs ) and non-inert waste. The soft inert stuffs ( such as dirt, Earth and slurry ) can be reused as fill stuffs in renewal and Earth make fulling plants. The difficult stuffs ( such as stones and interrupt concrete ) can be reused in renewal plants and/or recycled for building work as farinaceous stuffs, drainage bedclothes beds and concrete application. The non-inert waste ( such as metal, lumber and packaging waste ) can be recycled or disposed of in landfills. Further, it was shown that there is a noticeable difference in the coevals of material waste between pre-cast and in situ.In general, any decrease in on-site concreting leads to blow decrease. Precasting and prefabrication therefore offers important chances for the decrease of waste. In comparing, the wastage in using precast concrete building method has smaller sum than conventional cast unmoved building method.The chief ground behind this may be due to the negligible wastes arisen during transit and installing at the site. The pre-cast concrete elements transported to the site were stored unit wise by makers themselves to avoid harm to the elements. Hence the waste originating during transit had been minimized and identified as nothing. Since pre-cast elements were supplied harmonizing to the needed length, waste originating during installing of elements was at a minimal degree and waste happening due to over ordination of stuffs was besides eliminated. Further, the pre-cast elements were produced at mills under proper supervising utilizing steel molds which can be formed of different sizes. Therefore, the wastage of stuffs during fabrication besides reduced to a considerable sum. On the other manus, there have larger sum of wastage due to conventional unmoved building than precast concrete building. This big measure of wastage for conventional unmoved building was identified due to the deficiency of supervising, inaccurate commixture methods, inappropriate type of equipment used, hapless storage of stuffs and hapless quality craft and this led to higher waste of stuffs in the undermentioned ways: extra cement being used to speed up the hardening procedure extra concrete being used due to the breakage of signifier work higher waste in theodolite and handling of metal and sand and extra concrete being used in uneven surfaces The aim of an unmoved method is to extinguish and cut down the traditional site-based trades like traditional lumber formwork, brickwork, stick oning and to cut down labour content. Conventional dramatis personae in situ building method utilise lightweight prefabricated formwork made of steel, fibre glass or aluminium in order to replace the bing conventional lumber formwork. The method is suited for big Numberss of lodging units that require insistent use of formwork. The formwork can be reused as many times as possible with minimum wastage. There is a noticeable difference between the waste of pre-cast building and in situ building. However, because of the important differences in other stuff wastes, it can be said that there is a important decrease of stuff wastages of pre-cast concrete compared to the stuff wastages of conventional unmoved concrete. Therefore it can be concluded that there is a important waste decrease when pre-cast concrete is used. 3.4 Decision From the surveies that have been done, it can be concluded that the precast method is better than the conventional Cast-In-Situ method in footings of cost, velocity, labor, quality, wastage and productiveness.