Singla, Prince (2018) Comparative study on precast concrete and cast in-situ reinforced concrete panels for building construction in Queensland. [USQ Project]
Abstract
This report aims to improve building industry by finding the best solution from a comparison of In-situ reinforced concreting or precast construction, particularly in Queensland. From the initial research, it is found that less popularity of precast is due to skill shortages and lack of adequate knowledge within construction industry (Blismas & Wakefield 2009). This report aims to fill those knowledge gaps.
This report follows two broad methods of reach to reach a successful conclusion; Literature review and Site visits. Literature evaluation on both methods, concludes that environmental impact with the precast concrete method is 12.2% lower than cast-in-situ concrete slab (Wang et al. 2018). Economic impacts of both methods depend upon several factors e.g. Availability and distance of precast factory, transportation, skilled labour etc.
Seven parameters are identified as the major components of construction and will be measured in terms of time (hours) and manpower. These parameters are Building walls, Formwork building, Steel-fixing, Precast Installation, Plumbing and Electrical, Concrete Pour, Formwork Removal. A range of nine sites was selected to provide sufficient data for each construction method; eight out of which provide data for cast-in-situ construction and one out of which provide data for precast (Hollowcore plank) construction method. All data were normalised for 900 m2 floor area before comparison and analysis were conducted.
Data analysis on Time (hours) suggested that key difference is found in Formwork Ericson, Steel fixing, Concrete pour and Formwork Removal in both methods, making precast 20% more effective over the in-situ casting method. Data analysis on Manpower suggested key differences found in same parameters Formwork Ericson, Steel fixing, Concrete pour and Formwork Removal making precast 34% effective over in-situ casting method.
Combining Time (hours) and manpower gave rise to Man-hours. Data analysis on man-hours concludes that precast is 57% efficient then in-situ casting by saving 294 man-hours. This efficiency achieved due to 56% effectiveness in Formwork erection, 85% effectiveness in Steel-Fixing, 69% effectiveness in Concrete Pour and 80% effectiveness in Formwork removal. Further work on precast data is needed to find exact man-hour efficiency.
|
Statistics for this ePrint Item |
| Item Type: | USQ Project |
|---|---|
| Item Status: | Live Archive |
| Additional Information: | Bachelor of Engineering (Honours) (Civil) |
| Faculty/School / Institute/Centre: | Historic - Faculty of Health, Engineering and Sciences - School of Civil Engineering and Surveying (1 Jul 2013 - 31 Dec 2021) |
| Supervisors: | Manalo, Allan |
| Date Deposited: | 31 Aug 2022 03:11 |
| Last Modified: | 05 Sep 2022 02:32 |
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | precast concrete; In-situ reinforced concreting; building construction |
| URI: | https://sear.unisq.edu.au/id/eprint/40713 |
Actions (login required)
 |
Archive Repository Staff Only |
