Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/237190668
CITATIONS READS
21 1,599
2 authors:
All content following this page was uploaded by Gary R. Smith on 27 April 2015.
Estimates indicate that 30 to 70 percent of cast-in-place concrete cost is attributable to the assembly and stripping
of formwork. This wide percentage range is partially due to factors that are not well understood with regard to their
influence on productivity. The purpose of this paper is to identify the factors that influence formwork productivity
and identify a methodology to evaluate productivity data. Two groups of factors were found to have a great effect
on formwork productivity: non-measurable factors such as contract document and measurable factors such as engineering
design. This paper discusses the effect of both groups of factors on the productivity of vertical formwork. T o quantify
the effect of the measurable factors on formwork productivity, a case study of the productivity of a crew of carpenters
erecting wall formwork for a three-story underground parking structure is presented and analyzed. Data were collected
by physically measuring the daily output of vertical formwork erected and the total daily work hours.
Key words: formwork, productivity, construction methods.
Des estimations revdent qu'entre 30 et 70 pour cent des cofits du beton coule sur place sont attribuables a l'assemblage
des coffrages et au demoulage. Ce grand ecart est en partie attribuable a des facteurs qui influent sur la productivite
et qui sont ma1 compris. Le but de cet article est d'identifier ces facteurs et d'etablir une mithodologie afin d'evaluer
les donnees de productivite. On a constate que deux groupes de facteurs avaient une grande influence, soit des facteurs
For personal use only.
non mesurables de nature contractuelle et des facteurs mesurables comme la conception technique. Cet article discute
de l'effet de ces deux groupes de facteurs sur la productivite dans le domaine de la mise en place de coffrages verticaux.
Afin de quantifier cet effet, une etude de cas de la productivite d'une Cquipe de charpentiers travaillant a l'erection
des coffrages d'un garage de stationnement souterrain de trois Ctages est presentee et analysee. La collecte de donnies
s'est faite en mesurant la quantite quotidienne de coffrages verticaux erigis et le nombre total d'heures de travail par jour.
Mots clis : coffrage, productivite, methodes de construction.
[Traduit par la redaction]
should be shown to the owner when special materials such Contract document
as architectural concrete are required. Contract documents are not a measurable factor with
respect to concrete formwork productivity. However, the
Designer's role influence of the contract on performance can be a major
Economical design for concrete is not necessarily achieved
factor on the project. The flexibility of the contract docu-
by minimizing the dimensions of the structural elements.
ment in allowing the constructor to use personal experience
Some other factors have larger influences on building costs.
in designing and constructing the forms affects the degree
For example, labor for formwork is an item representing
to which labor can be effectively used on site in formwork
38% of cast-in-place concrete costs; thus a few changes in production. When possible, the exact location of construc-
column size or wall height to achieve uniformity and repeti-
tion joints should be determined by the design engineer and
tion can result in a substantial cost reduction in overall form-
the contractor to maximize form reuse and, consequently,
work cost. When designing a building, the designer should
increase productivity. If the contract document does not
consider each of the following methods of reducing the cost
specify a particular method of construction, the constructor
of formwork (Hanna 1989):
Can. J. Civ. Eng. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by Hubei university on 06/04/13
the elements consistent. Uniformity is achieved by maintain- struction needed, and other factors. These factors have been
ing a constant dimension for the different structural catalogued elsewhere for application in knowledge-based
elements. Specific examples of consistency include (a) expert systems. Table 1 is a summary for vertical formwork
maintaining constant breadth and depth for all beams, (b) extracted from a broader research effort (Hanna and
maintaining constant column dimensions and spacing Sanvido 1990). While this table has a great deal of infor-
between columns, and (c) maintaining constant spacing mation related to the selection of formwork systems for a
between beams and joists. project, it represents one facet of the system selection
equation. f able 2 is a partial list of criteria that should be
Contractor's role
considered by a contractor when selecting or comparing
Most contractors carefully study the influence of form-
work on project cost and progress. In selecting formwork, various concrete form suppliers.
a contractor's primary list of concerns (Hanna 1989) is the Selecting the proper formwork system requires adequate
following: information about available forming systems. Any infor-
1. To design formwork to achieve high quality with a mation collected that describes the formwork systems should
minimum of possible cost and time. Safety is another major include the criteria used by contractors to select the system.
concern for the contractor; inadequate shoring and reshoring These criteria (Hanna 1989) are the following:
can result in failure or excessive deflection which requires 1. The formwork system should be available and its use
chipping and grinding or demolition. economically feasible for the contractor.
2. To use forming systems instead of job-built forms; this 2. All major parties - owner, designer, and contractor
reduces labor costs (which represent 38% of the cost of cast- - should be familiar with the selected forming systems,
in-place concrete. Formwork systems can reduce the labor since certain systems, such as slip forms, require special
cost by 50%. economic evaluation, design configurations, and safety
3. To plan the formwork as an integrated part of the precautions.
overall planning procedure so that the process of erecting 3. The selected formwork system must be consistent with
and dismantling the forms can be accelerated. the architectural and structural requirements of the building.
For example, if architectural concrete is required for the
external columns, then slip form systems do not provide the
Factors affecting formwork productivity appropriate forming solution.
Two groups of factors were found to have an effect on 4. The selected system must be compatible with the
formwork productivity: non-measurable factors such as con- mechanical and electrical requirements of the building. For
tract document and measurable factors such as engineering example, self-rising forms are not an economical solution
design. This paper discusses the effect of some of these when there are extensive penetrations through the slab (e.g.,
measurable factors on the productivity of vertical formwork. electrical and mechanical).
These measurable factors include factors related to engineer- Systems requiring special assembly tools can create unex-
ing design such as interior versus exterior walls and straight pected problems. When critical assembly tools for pro-
versus interrupted walls and factors related to construc- prietary formwork systems are misplaced or otherwise
tibility such as modular versus gang forms. unavailable, productivity rapidly decreases. Good
TABLE1. Factors affecting selection of vertical formwork systems (Hanna 1989)
Formwork systems
Can. J. Civ. Eng. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by Hubei university on 06/04/13
Conventional
Influence factor column/wall form Ganged forms Jump form Slip form Self-raising form
(a) Building design
Lateral support
Lateral support system Most suited for frames Shear walls Shear walls Shear walls Shear walls
and retaining walls Bearing walls Frames and framed Tube systems
Retaining walls shear wall Tube-in-tube
Building shape
Column/wall size System can handle Same as for System can handle Walls should be of System can handle
and location variation of column/ conventional column/ moderate variation of the same location reasonably modular
For personal use only.
wall size and location wall form system columns/walls size Walls size variation design
and location can be accommodated
System can handle Variation in opening's Openings/inserts Should be minimum System can handle
openings/inserts of size/location can be should be regularly Too many openings/ moderate variation in
different size and accommodated at occurring from floor inserts make this openings size and
location additional cost to floor system impractical location
Construction sequence Slabs and walls are Slabs and walls are System is used when Typically walls are Walls are ahead of
placed concurrently placed concurrently no floor slab is placed entirely or at the floor
Walls can be placed available least several stories Other method is used
ahead of the floor slab ahead of the floor for the first 2-3 stories
Cycle time 1 floor every 3-4 days 1 floor every 2-3 days 1 floor every day 1 floor every 2-3 days
Rate of placing
= 8-20 in./h
Formwork systems
Conventional
Influence factor column/wall form Ganged forms Jump form Slip form Self-raising form
Reuse Less than 10 Between 40 and 50 Between 15 and 30 Between 50 and 100 At least 30 reuses
Reuses could be (i.e., between 200 and should be available
horizontally or 400 ft high) vertically
vertically
Hoisting equipment
Location of adjacent Generally not a factor A major factor, system Same as for ganged Minimum free space Not a major factor,
building and must have a free space forms should be available for system can be used in
obstruction to be moved from crane movement downtown restricted
For personal use only.
Crane time Not a factor, system Crane dependent System substantially Crane is used only for Crane independent
can be hand set system, sufficient crane reduce crane time materials delivery and system
time is a must Average crane time pick concrete placing
= 20 min
Operating system Hand-set system, Crane-set system Crane is used only to Motion is provided by System is lifted by
crane increases system Crane serves two lift the forms electric, or hydraulic hydraulic, electric, or
efficiency and reduces functions: lifting and Crane is not used for jacks climbing on steel pneumatic lifters
cost supporting the forms forms dismantling rods
Safety management
Safety No special safety Special care for Safe guarded platform For hydraulic systems, Same as for slip form
features is required handling the large No one needs to be on special safety precautions
ganged units by crane the form during crane must be taken to prevent
handling fire several hundred feet
above the ground
Yard facility
Supporting yard System is more System must have an System is rented Continuous materials System is preassembled
facility, supplier efficient, if a local adequate make-up area or purchased delivery; uninterrupted Make-up area is not
or make-up area yard facility is available or close by supplier concrete placement must a factor
be assured
CAN. 1. CIV. ENG. VOL. 20, 1993
TABLE3 . Estimates of factors impacting formwork labor productivity (Thomas et a/. 1991)
Can. J. Civ. Eng. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by Hubei university on 06/04/13
No. of projects
Value factor Source included Impact Remarks
General factors Thomas et a/. Numerous Varies from 5% Information, staff, crew,
Management PTI Report (1990) to over 100% supervision, tools,
direct or indirect congestion, overtime,
changes
Shape
Straight Means (1986) Baseline
Curved Richardson (1990) 1.5-2% Greater than straight
Locations Unclear
Interior/exterior Bennett (1990); Qabbani 2 30-75% Confused factors
2nd level up Means; Peurifoy (1979) Add 10% Of installation
housekeeping and inventory management skills for the hard- sulted, a tabulation similar t o Table 3 can be generated to
ware associated with some modular systems are important show the current estimates and impact of various factors
to maintaining peak productivity rates. It is easy to imagine influencing concrete formwork productivity. Many of the
that the system which uses the fewest pieces to complete a factors have been based on single project studies or by the
wall section would have the edge in productivity. When same researcher. Without comparative studies, no definitive
various literature and manufacturers' resources are con- conclusion should be drawn from the information.
SMITH A N D H A N N A
TABLE
4. Design factors influencing formwork productivity (Smith and Hanna 1991)
TABLE 5. Project summary data Bracing: Once wall panels were set, the panels were
braced with wales and strongbacks. Bracing need to be
Project cost $10 million removed and reset for individual parlels and the constructed
Underground structure 3 levels, reinforced concrete walls remain attached to the gang form system. Measure-
Aboveground structure 7 levels, reinforced masonry ment of bracing was estimated on the basis of the square
Floor plan area 2028 m2
feet of the form which had wales and strongbacks attached.
Site area 2545 m 2
Formwork contact area 4837 ft' Alignment: Alignment included installation of the tie
Number of work days required 148 rods, plumbing vertically, and levelling the form system.
Time frame January-August 1987 Time spent on additional adjustments to prepare the form-
Average crew size 14 work for concrete placement was also included. Measure-
Labor force Nonunion ment of alignment was based on the square feet of the wall
section prepared for concreting.
Stripping: Stripping is the removal of the formwork sys-
Can. J. Civ. Eng. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by Hubei university on 06/04/13
tem from the curing concrete. Cleaning and oiling the forms
The ability of the site supervisory personnel to interpret the for the next use were considered incidental work. Measure-
drawings as accurately as possible and to effectively com- ment of stripping was based on the square feet of form
municate what shape is to be formed, how it should be removed from the wall.
formed, and what tolerances are needed will reduce rework
and increase speed and efficiency in form construction. Rules of credit
An engineer at the site can influence productivity through All of the tasks described above are not usually performed
adequate planning. Adequate planning involves examining in a single day on the same wall section. Rules of credit were
the drawings in detail and extracting the component parts developed (Thomas and Kramer 1987) as a method to
that have the same dimensions to allow for repetitive use. account for the effort contributed by each task to a com-
Adequate planning also involves fabricating the forms into pleted section of formwork. The rules provide a simple
modular and largest sizes possible according to the available procedure for counting the contribution of partially com-
handling equipment that will permit reuses without pleted work to the overall work package (Thomas and
re-fabrication. Kramer 1987).
For personal use only.
-
Interior Wall, Level 2
-
SE Walls, Level 2
---.----
lnterior Wall, Level 3
SE Walls. Level 3
Can. J. Civ. Eng. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by Hubei university on 06/04/13
I 0 Weather
A Material - related
Sequencing
1 0 Accident
0 Ironworkers did not work
Gangforms
mw2
-
rn Modular forms
Mixed forms
For personal use only.
w
,q
Workdays
FIG. 2. Daily productivity plot.
In addition to recording the daily quantities of formwork, plished on time, and therefore disrupted the work of the
other notations were made in the records about major prob- formwork crew. Shore removal and incomplete footing
lems that occurred on the site. Weather was noted as an preparation were also noted as sequencing problems.
influential factor when extremely cold temperatures were
recorded. On 7 days it snowed either the night before or
during the day. One workday had heavy rain that suspended Analysis
work for the entire day. Various categories of disruptions had a noticeable impact
Productivity is measured in terms of work hours per unit to daily productivity. The overall mean productivity for days
area (wh/m2). As a result, higher productivity is repre- without disruptions was estimated as 4.95 wh/m2 and daily
sented by smaller numbers. Figure 2 illustrates a sample plot productivity on disrupted days averaged 14.42 wh/m2.
of the equivalent daily productivity rates for 80-120 When statistically tested, this relation has an F-ratio of 47.17
workdays. Review of Fig. 2 reveals high productivity and a level of significance, P, of 0.000. Disruptions were
between workdays 80 and 90 and low productivity between further classified into weather, material management,
workdays 100 and 120. The low productivity was caused by sequencing, and accident disruptions for analysis. Table 7
interference, safety, and materials problems. Material summarizes the mean productivity for each disruption cat-
storage was a problem because of the inadequate storage egory. However, the finer categorization of data reduces the
area on the project. All materials were stored inside the researchers' ability to confidently analyze the data, and no
building footprint. Material storage areas were often moved significance can be clearly identified from the analysis.
as the building progressed. The frequency of movement Since no classification scheme has been developed that
resulted in some materials being misplaced, lost, or could differentiate design difficulty factors, the walls were
damaged. Sequencing was noted as a disruption in several separated into three ad hoc groups. Straight easy walls were
occasions. The movement of material was not being accom- those that had no intersecting walls such as the northeast
152 CAN. J. CIV. ENG. VOL. 20, 1993
TABLE
7. Mean productivity: disruptions by category TABLE
8. Wall formwork productivity
is shown by the difference between the productivity of data in a consistent manner for inclusion in a larger data
modular versus ganged forms. The mean gang form pro- set and for further analysis. The focus of continued research
ductivity was 5.5 wh/m2 (n = 86) and the mean modular will be to update or identify the impact factors affecting
form productivity was 6.88 wh/m2 (n = 47); no statistical formwork productivity. Better definition will enable con-
significance could be measured between these two values. tractors to better predict resource requirements and costs.
Smith, G.R., and Hanna, A.S. 1991. Factors affecting formwork Report to the Construction Industry Institute (CII), Austin, Tex.,
productivity. The Annual Conference of the Canadian Society Source Document 35.
for Civil Engineering, Vancouver, B.C. Thomas, H.R., Smith, G.R., and Horner, R.M.W. 1991. Proce-
Smith, G.R., and Thomas, H.R. 1991. Formwork productivity dures manual for collecting productivity and related data of
measurement and analysis. Proceedings, International Con- labor-intensive activities on commercial construction projects:
ference on Construction Project Modeling and Productivity, concrete formwork. The Pennsylvania State University, Univer-
Dubrovnik, Yogoslavia, pp. 235-240. sity Park, Pa.
Thomas, H.R., and Kramer, D.F. 1987. The manual of construc-
tion productivity measurement and performance evaluation.
Can. J. Civ. Eng. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by Hubei university on 06/04/13
For personal use only.