DECISION

MAKING MODEL FOR SELECTION

OF BULDING FORMWORK

Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements of the degree of Master of Engineering

Submitted By: Mohan M. Munde

Guided By: Dr. P.H. Sawant

BHARATI A !ID A BHA!AN"S SARDAR #ATEL COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING$ Mu%&'i N()(*$ A%d'e*i +W,$ Mumb(i-.// /01

ABSTRACT
The use of formwork is an essential and necessary ob in any construction pro ect. ! large chunk of total construction cost and time is in"ol"ed in using the formwork system. So# it is necessary to go for proper selection of formwork in sa"ing time and cost. $ot only this# use of the most appropriate formwork system will also help to pro"ide quality concrete. %t is the formwork which predominantly determines the quality of concrete. %n today&s competiti"e market quality# safety and speed is the demand in construction obs. So is the preference of most of the contractors. 'se of con"entional system of formwork is nowadays got outdated. More and more contractors prefer to use Proprietary system of formwork which is not only economic in long run# but also pro"ides quality# speedy and safer construction. This thesis will be quite useful for the middle le"el contractor to decide whether to opt for Proprietary system of formwork lea"ing aside the (on"entional system taking into consideration their financial condition. This paper will also help to determine the most appropriate form material to be used as sheathing material at site.

Li&t 23 Fi)u*e&

S*4 N24 ) 1

Tit5e *nowledge !cquisition Process Hierarchy of Decision .actors (ost per 'se 2s $os. of 'se of (olumn .ormwork

Fi)u*e N24 +.) /.) 0.)

#()e N24 ,) +0 00

Li&t 23 T(b5e&
S*4 N24 ) (omparati"e Strength of Plywood 1 3 , + 4 / 0 )5 )) ))1 )3 ), )+ )4 .ormwork material *nowledge 6ase Hori7ontal Shoring *nowledge 6ase 2ertical Shoring *nowledge 6ase Staging System *nowledge 6ase (olumn and 8all .ormwork *nowledge 6ase !ccess scaffold and Stair tower *nowledge 6ase 09Point scale of 8eightage .actor 09Point scale of 8eightage .actor Preference (hart between :isk .actors Preference (hart between (ost .actors Preference (hart between Performance .actors Preference (hart between (onstraint .actors Preference (hart between ;"erall .actors Performance table between Doka and (on"entional System (omparison of %nitial %n"estment and ;pt < Maintenance e=pense on (ost .actor (omparison of >uality performance# Schedule Performance < System .le=ibility on Performance .actor. )/ (omparison of Manpower requirement# Site space requirement < Material !"ailability on (onstraint .actor /.)) 44 /.)5 4+ /.0 4+ Tit5e T(b5e N24 1.) 4.) 4.4.1 4.3 4., 4.+ /.) /./.1 /.3 /., /.+ /.4 /./ #()e N24 )+ ,1 ,, ,4 ,4 ,/ ,/ +3 443 43 4, 4, 4, 4+

Li&t 23 T(b5e&
S*4 N24 )0 (omparison of System :eliability# System safety on :isk .actor. -5 -) --1 -3 -, -+ -4 -0 -0 15 1) 111 (omparison of :isk# Performance# (ost < (onstraint factor on ;"erall .actor. (omparison of alternate system in their impact on initial in"estment (omparison of alternate system in their impact on ;pt.< Maintenance e=pence. (omparison of alternate system in their impact on >uality Performance (omparison of alternate system in their impact on Schedule performance (omparison of alternate system in their impact on System fe=ibility (omparison of alternate system in their impact on Manpower requirement (omparison of alternate system in their impact on Site space requirement (omparison of alternate system in their impact on Material a"ailability (omparison of alternate system in their impact on System reliability (omparison of alternate system in their impact on System safety .ormwork *nowledge 6ase (omparison of form material by 8eightage factors Preference chart of factors by 8eightage factors 0.) 0.0.1 /+ /0 /0 /.-1 /5 /.-40 /.-) 40 /.-5 40 /.)0 4/ /.)/ 4/ /.)4 4/ /.)+ 4/ /.), 4/ /.)3 44 /.)1 44 Tit5e T(b5e N24 /.)#()e N24 44

Li&t 23 T(b5e&
S*4 N24 13 Material cost of column formwork in (on"entional system. 1, 1+ 14 1/ 10 ?abour cost of (olumn formwork in (on"entional system Total cost of (olumn formwork in (on"entional system Material cost of column formwork in Doka system. ?abour cost of (olumn formwork in Doka system. Total cost of (olumn formwork in Doka system 0.4 0./ 0.0 0+ 0+ 0/ 0.+ 0, 0., 03 Tit5e T(b5e N24 0.3 #()e N24 01

CONTENTS Ti5e& Ce*ti3i6(te A67%285ed)eme%t Ab&t*(6t Li&t 23 Fi)u*e& Li&t 23 T(b5e& C'(9te* : I%t*2du6ti2% ).) ).).1 ).3 -.) -.1.) 1.1.1 1.3 1., 1.+ 1.4 @eneral :equirements of .ormwork selection ;b ecti"e of the study Scope of work %ntroduction :e"iew @eneral Timber Plywood Hard board Steel Plastic !luminum ) 1 1 , , ))1 )3 )4 )/ -5 -#()e N2 i ii iii i" "

C'(9te* ; Lite*(tu*e Re<ie8

C'(9te* = F2*m82*7 m(te*i(5&

Ti5e& C'(9te* . E62%2my i% 32*m82*7 3.) 3.,.) ,.%ntroduction !chie"ing economy @eneral ?<T Doka .ormwork system

#()e N2 -1 -1 -/ -0 15 15 1) 1) 14 1/ 35 331 33 34 3/ 3/ 30 ,5

C'(9te* 0 #*29*iet(*y F2*m82*7 &y&tem

,.-.) %ntroduction ,.-.- Merits of ?<T Doka .ormwork system ,.-.1 System !pplications ,.-.3 System (omponents ,.-., System Description ,.1 6ritish ScaffoldingA%ndiaB ?td. ,.1.) %ntroduction ,.1.- System Description ,.3 Special .ormwork System ,.3.) Slipform ,.3.- @ang form ,.3.1 .lying formsCTable forms ,.3.3 Tunnel form C'(9te* > #*e9(*(ti2% 23 F2*m82*7 7%285ed)e B(&e +.) +.@eneral *nowledge !cquisition Process

+.-.) .amilarisation Stage +.-.- Elicitation Stage +.-.1 ;rganisation and Presentation Stage

Ti5e& C'(9te* ? F2*m82*7 &y&tem 7%285ed)e B(&e 4.) 4./.) /.1 /.3 /., /.+ 0.) %ntroduction *nowledge 6ase (hapter / Decision Making Process %ntroduction Decision Making Process .or Selecting Sheathing Material Decision Making Process .or Selecting .ormwork System !nalytical Hierarchy Process !pplication of !.H.P in formwork selection C(&e Study %ntroduction

#()e N2 ,,,0 ,0 +1 +, +4 43 /, )5) )5-

/.- Pro ect Data

C'(9te* @

C'(9te* :/ C2%65u&i2% Re3e*e%6e& A99e%di6e& A99e%diA I F528 C'(*t O3 De6i&i2% M(7i%) #*26e&& I% Se5e6ti2% O3 S'e(t'i%) M(te*i(5 A99e%diA II F528 C'(*t O3 De6i&i2% M(7i%) #*26e&& I% Se5e6ti2% O3 F2*m82*7 Sy&tem

)5+

)54

CHA#TER : INTRODUCTION

:4: GENERAL .orrnwork is a die or mould used to shape the fresh concrete and support it untill it attains sufficient strength to carry its own weight. %f the formwork is not remo"ed then it is &Permanent .ormwork& and if it is used for support from below then it is called &.alse work&.

.ormwork system includes the sheathing material that remains in contact to concrete and the supporting or the backing material.

.ormwork is a ma or item in construction pro ects. %t consumes nearly 15D of cost and +5D of time in :.(.5 building construction. >uality of concrete finish and soundness of concrete depends upon the formwork system being used. So choosing of an appropriate formwork system may impro"e the followingE

Speed >uality ;"er all Economy Safety

:4; REBUIREMENTS OF FORMWORK SELECTION Still today in the %ndian scenario many contractors adopt the primiti"e method of forrnwork system. This con"entional system of formwork "ery often do not produce good quality there by increasing after cast work like plastering etc. More o"er the reuse "alue of the con"entionally used materials are "ery low. 8ith the increasing demand for faster and safer construction# contractors are willing to go for mechanised and engineered proprietary formwork system. $owadays# in %ndian market a number of proprietary formwork system are a"ailable like ?<T Doka# 6ritish Scaffolding %ndia ?td# S@6# Mewa system etc. 6esides being capital intensi"e the proprietary formwork are more safe and reliable# less labour intensi"e and has great potential to reduce material and labour cost. Selection of formwork system is required to determine whether it would be appropriate to prefer a proprietary formwork system than con"entional one for a type of pro ect the contractor wants to undertake. Selection of formwork system is influenced by "arious factors such as the type of pro ect the contractor wants to undertake# the financial condition of the contractor# a"ailability of the system in the market# system constraints like labour intensi"e or highly mechanised etc. Selection is also influenced by the factors that has been considered during the decision making process. %ntuiti"e way of selection may lead to wrong selection of forrnwork system. So appropriate formwork selection procedure should be followed. Here middle rise residential# commercial and institutional building has been considered as the type of pro ects which a middle le"el contractor wants to undertake only.

:4= OBCECTI!E OF THE STUD The thesis aims at helping the middle le"el contractor to decide whether to use (on"entional system or ?<T Doka proprietary formwork while undertaking pro ects of middle rise residential# commercial and institutional building only and also to decide upon the most appropriate sheathing material to be used for the pro ect undertaken.

:4. SCO#E OF WORK

To apply !.H.PA!nalytical Hierarchy ProcessB in selecting the most appropriate sheathing material for a particular pro ect.

To apply !.H.PA!nalytical Hierarchy ProcessB as a decision making process in selecting the appropriate formwork system out of the (on"entional and Proprietary formwork system A?<T Doka systemB for middle rise building pro ects.

;4 LITERATURE RE!IEW ;4: O!ER!IEW Decision making for selection of building form work ha"e caught

researchersF attention since this kind of decision has play an important role for timely < economical completion of pro ect in the construction industry. Many researchers ha"e attempted to impro"e the decision making by identifying key aspects for form work selection. -.- :!T%;$!? DES%@$ ;. SH;:%$@9T;8E:96!SED .;:M8;:* 6y !"iad Shapira# Member# !S(E the forming of concrete elements commonly in"ol"es two types of issuesE selection and design.The use of industriali7ed formwork Ae.g.# ganged wall forms# flying slab forms# and tunnel formsB. G:ational designG means design based on a structured procedure that yields solutions that both meet the static requirements and are economical. This paper presents a rational approach to the design of ele"ated formwork that is based on shoring towers. More specifically# the paper pro"ides key information for calculating the cost of using shoring towers within a slab formwork system. Ele"ated "ersus :egular Slabs the goal in tower9based formwork is to find that combination of distances between elements that will result in the most economical solution for a gi"en set of formwork elements. ?ike prop9based formwork# tower9based formwork is also concerned with distances between oists and stringersH distances between props are analogous to distances between towers.

;4= NEUROFORMDNEURAL NETWORK S STEM FOR !ERTICAL FORMWORK SELECTION

This paper presents a system that pro"ides the selection of "ertical formwork systems for a gi"en building site.

de"elopment of $euroform# a decision9making system to select "ertical formwork for a building site using a neural network approach.

the decisions regarding the selection of a formwork system are taken by senior company representati"es who ha"e a great deal of e=perience. %n order to lessen the dependency on these e=perienced personnel and to impro"e the consistency in decision making# a computer system such as $euroform is "ery useful.

the reasons for choosing a neural network approach instead of a rule9 based approach for the de"elopment of $euroform.

the most useful properties of neural networks are self9organi7ation# generali7ation# fault tolerance and massi"ely parallel processing.

the network will consider all the learned input patterns that are close to the new pattern and their corresponding output patterns# and generali7e the output for the new pattern. These are the properties that make it attracti"e to build $euroform using a neural network model rather than a rule9based system.

the domain knowledge is abstracted from the training e=amples through self9learning and self9organi7ation of the network.

the rules are often only appro=imate descriptions of more comple= or probabilistic relationships in the real world.

a neural network system allows a much more precise representation of comple= relationships between the inputs and the outputs# and the knowledge can be learned directly from e=perience or e=amples. ! neural network can make generali7ations for the unknown situations from the known e=perience or e=amples.

The term formwork refers to a total system of support for freshly placed concrete including the mold or sheathing that contacts the concrete as well as all supporting members# hardware# and necessary bracing AHurd )0/)B. .orming systems are categori7ed as hori7ontal forming systems and "ertical forming systems depending on whether they support hori7ontal slabs or "ertical structural elements# i.e.# walls and columns. This paper focuses on

"ertical formwork systems.

8all form is a rule9based e=pert system for "ertical form work selection# which is only one of its kind reported in the literature

%n 8all form the domain knowledge is captured in the form of ifIthen rules and its inference mechanism operates on these rules.

%t was found that $euroform# because of its fault tolerant and generali7ation properties# gi"es the same results# with 0,D confidence inter"al# whether pro"ided with the complete or the incomplete inputs.

;4. D*4 N4 Sub*(m(%ium has suggested the "arious aspects that should be considered to attain economy in building construction. Economy can be attained in each of the fi"e stagesE )B Planning -B Estimation of ?oads 1B !nalysis of loads 3B Material selection ,B Method of construction +B Design and detailing 4B E=ecution and /B Maintenance.

;40 A *e92*t '(& bee% 9*e9(*ed by A4C4I4 62mmittee =.? to pro"ide guide to form work for concrete. %t dealt with general form work material# design# planning# construction and safety measures that are needed to be taken care of . it also pro"ides guidelines for achie"ing economy in form work.

;4> FuEEy LOGIC FOR E!ALUATING ALTERNATI!E (;$ST:'(T%;$ TE(H$;?;@J

this paper presents a fu77y9logic9based# risk9incorporating approach to e"aluating new construction technology# intended to produce consistent technology implementation decisions.

6ecause of the changeable nature of the construction en"ironment# the producti"ity and cost of a technology often e=hibits great "ariability. To address the risk concern of builders# (hao and Skibniewski A)00,B apply utility theory under uncertainty to e"aluating a new construction technology as a way to correct the shortcomings of the e=pected "alue method

!nother approach to the stated problem is use of the analytical hierarchy process# in which technological alternati"es are e"aluated based on pair9wise comparisons of decision factors. Here risk is treated as one of the decision factors in the hierarchy# and the relati"e strengths and impacts of the factors are rated and aggregated in a structured manner leading to the ranking of the alternati"es ASkibniewski and (hao )00-B. !lthough intuiti"e udgment plays an important role in the analytical hierarchy approach# there is no function or rule established e=plicitly to go"ern and underpin the rating of the factors.

This paper presents a fu77y long decision system incorporating the risk factor for e"aluating a new construction technology.

in"estments in new technologies in other industries# an in"estment in a new construction technology may offer a better e=pected return# but it is often associated with greater risk due to the high initial capital requirement and the many uncertainties that emerge during the implementation phase.

'sing the concepts of fu77y sets and fu77y logic# the methodology presented in this paper produces such an e"aluation guided by decision rules that reflect the builder&s priorities and concerns. !n ad"antage of applying fu77y9logic9based decision analysis# rather than the utility theory approach# to new construction technology

implementation is the use of "erbal description of preference in the rules# which may be more comprehensible and thus easier to de"elop for a gi"en scenario.

-.4 %ntroducing controlled permeability form work

! significant increase in concrete durability in the critical co"er 7one# impro"ed surface appearance# and a substantial reduction in form work pressures. Jet these can all be achie"ed using the new technique of controlled permeability form work A(P.B which is specially designed to be permeable to air and water but not to cement particles.

The system comprises a filter# drain# and structural support Asee drawingB. 8hile the concrete is being compacted# air and some of the mi= water escape through the form lea"ing the concrete in the co"er 7one with a reduced water9cement ratio and significantly increased durability. (P. has been used in the 'nited *ingdom# Sweden# and !ustralia to a limited e=tent and much more widely in Kapan.

The form work design engineer de"eloped a system based on a nonwo"en geote=tile. the main benefit being a significant reduction in form work pressure.

Te=tile form 9 The te=tile form uses a single te=tile which combines the filter and drain. %t is laid o"er con"entional form work pierced by a g rid of 5.)9 to 5.-9inch9diameter holes at 39inch centers. The cast concrete surface is imprinted with the te=ture of the wo"en te=tile which helps to mask minor "ariations Asee photoB. This is a better looking finish than smooth concrete

surfaces where the eye is drawn to minor surface imperfections.

!pplications in Kapan ha"e included dam construction and repair# bridge piers# tunnels# retaining walls# and building structures.

Silk form 9The silk form system is made up of a polyester filter and a polyethylene drainage cloth tensioned o"er plywood and stapled to the back of the panels which normally measure 1=+ feet. ;ne significant difference between this system and the te=tile form is that the panels donFt contain drainage holes.

S!P form work 9 Made of con"entional form work lined with superabsorbent polymer AS!PB sheeting# S!P form work absorbs up to -55 times its weight of water and is permeable to air both trans"ersely and longitudinally. The S!P sheets are simply cut to length# folded o"er the form edge# and stapled. !t present # S!P sheets are used only once.

;41 L F T DOKA F2*m82*7 &y&tem brouchers has gi"en detailed description of the entire formwork system. The system formwork includes hori7ontal and "ertical system including staging and the scaffolding system. %t also pro"ides information regarding its material and labour producti"ity.

;4@ BSL 6(t(52)ue dealt with scaffolding and formwork produces and ser"ices as manufactured by 6S?. %t included mainly (uplock scaffolding#

ad ustable telescopic spans#Metriform system and "arious other accessories.

;4:/ !e*ti6(5 &5i9 32*mi%) (& ( 62%&t*u6ti2% t225

Slipforms ha"e been successfully applied to many other types of structures including bridge piers# building cores# apartment houses# chimneys# communications towers# cooling towers# and offshore drilling platforms.

Slipforming is normally used to cast concrete walls# piers# towers or other structures capable of being e=truded.

Slipforming is being utili7ed effecti"ely in the construction of bearing9 wall designed buildings. %n this system the slabs# whether cast9in9place# precast# steel or some composite of these# are cast or installed a few stories below the slipform. ! system must be de"eloped for construction of such buildings to reap the time sa"ings and economy of construction inherent in this method.

(onstruction sequences

Significant construction economies are possible with slipforming although it can be "ery e=pensi"e if improperly used. .or e=ample# it is possible to slide tapered structures using slipforms# but this is more e=pensi"e than sliding "ertical walls. Most tall chimneys now being built in the power industry are ne"ertheless being slipped because it is worth a premium to cut

the construction time in half or less.

! minimum of )- and ma=imum of 15 inches is recommended. %f there is less than )- inches of hard concrete in the forms the slide speed must be reduced to allow the concrete to set further. %f the amount of hard concrete e=ceeds 15 inches# the rate of slide must be increased to pre"ent binding of the forms.

%n recent years there ha"e been se"eral interesting combined uses of slipforming with other techniques. ;ne such combination was the erection of central cores by the slipform method# and then the raising of the floor slabs into place using the lift9slab method. (ast9 in9 place concrete strips were used to close the connection between the slabs and walls.

the architects and engineers who designed these structures kept the e=ecution of their design in mind from the "ery beginning. This has resulted in their using ad"anced concrete construction techniques to the best ad"antage and achie"ing for their clients buildings of quality as well as economy.

Slipforming is destined to be an important member of the team in systems building and urban rede"elopment. %t increases our capabilities in speed of construction# automation# minimum disruption of an area# durability# fire proofing# soundproofing and use of local unskilled labor.

There are "ery e=citing areas for further ad"ancementE more

automation# impro"ed aesthetic finishes# better integration with other construction techniques and rapid construction generally.

-.)) :elati"e costs of Site9made and proprietary .ormwork by :.M.8. Horner < D.(. Thomson

The cost of formwork for a typical wall# column# beam and slab soffit was studied. Two designs were produced for each element# one based on traditional# site9made timber forms# the other on proprietary forms.

Site agents and contracts managers are frequently faced with deciding whether to make# hire or buy formwork# without ha"ing time to conduct thorough rational analysis of the a"ailable alternati"es. !lthough many factors will affect the final decision# cost is arguably the most significant.

ThomsonL1M has identified some 45 factors affecting the choice of formwork system# To consider each indi"idually is clearly impossible# especially since many are not readily quantifiable.

The important parameters affecting the choice of formwork can be classified under four headings.

A)B Type of building element to be formed. A-B Type of sheathing material. A1B Safety and ser"iceability of the structural frame. A3B Economics.

concrete faces were formed with wrought boarding. %n modern times# steel# plaster# rubber# polythene and glass fibre ha"e all been usedL,M. There is little doubt# howe"er# that plywood sheathing currently finds greatest fa"our in the construction industry. %ts ad"antages include good structural properties and surface finish# few oints# little warping and ease of handling. %t was therefore chosen as the basis of this study for both site9made and proprietary formwork.

%nformation on proprietary forms was sought from some -5 potential suppliers.

ThomsonL1M concluded that the single most important factor affecting the choice of formwork system is cost.

(%:%! :eport $o. 14L4M concludes that deflection is the controlling factor in plywood design and there is therefore no need to check the other criteria.

The results cannot be held to be uni"ersally true. They will hold pro"ided that the ratios of labour to and pro"ided that hire charges and

purchase prices of proprietary forms maintain the same relationship to the cost of labour and materials. The building elements chosen for analysis# though typical# were "ery simple. .or more complicated shapes# we would e=pect greater relati"e economies with site9made forms. %t should be emphasi7ed that although costs are important# the many other factors listed by ThomsonL1M must also be taken into consideration before the most appropriate type of formwork can be help practicing engineers quickly to discard those alternati"es which can be seen to be uneconomic and to highlight those situations in which more detailed analysis may be necessary.

-.)- (onditions and (onstraints in the .ormwork Systems for (omple= High9rise 6uilding N with cases from Hong *ong

.ormwork systems are among the key factors determining the success of a construction pro ect in terms of speed# quality# cost and safety of works. $owadays# most pro ects are required by the client to complete in the shortest time possible as a means to minimise costs. The key to achie"e this# again from the production point of "iew# is by the use of a system of efficient and appropriately designed formwork. Modern buildings can be "ery comple=# either in terms of scale# architectural or structural design# sophisticated building ser"ices or other facilities

requirements. The design and use of the right formwork system# as well as

stipulation of an effecti"e resource planning strategy to control and ma=imise the use of the formwork# are crucial to the o"erall success of a pro ect.

!iming purely at speed often contradicts the achie"ement of other quality targets. Problems such as misalignment# misplacement# deflecti"e concrete or holding up other works causing serious interruption can result. This paper# supplemented with se"eral recent Hong *ong case studies# highlights conditions and constraints in the application of formwork# and illustrates the practices and methods that the local construction industry uses to construct comple= buildings of "arious kinds.

-.)-.) (lassification of .ormwork .ormwork can be classified according to a "ariety of categories# relating to the differences in si7es# the location of use# construction materials# nature of operation# or simply by the brand name of the products.

-.)-.- (lassification according to si7e (lassification according to the si7e of formwork can be "ery straightforward. %n practice# there are only two si7es for formworkH small9si7ed and large9si7ed. The most common systems are made of timber and aluminium# and are usually in the form of small panels. The increase in the weight of the formwork panels is insignificant as a crane will be used in most cases.

-.)-.1 (lassification according to the location of use Different elements in the structure of building ha"e different design and performance requirements in the use of formwork. ! number of formwork systems are particularly designed for constructing internal or e=ternal walls# "ertical shafts# columns# beams and floor slabs.

-.)-.3 (lassification according to materials of construction Materials used for formwork are traditionally quite limited due to finding the difficult balance between cost and performance. Timber in general is still the most popular formwork material for its relati"e low initial cost and adaptability. Steel# in the form of either hot9rolled or cold9formed sections and in combination with other sheeting materials# is another popular choice for formwork materials. %n the past two to three years# full aluminium formwork systems ha"e been used in some cases but the performance is still being questioned by many users# especially in concern to cost and labour control. ;ther types of metals and alloys are still uncommon on construction sites# due to their cost and easy substitution by other common metals.

-.)-., (lassification according to nature of operation .ormwork can be operated manually or by other power9lifted methods.

Power9lifted formwork can be of the self9climbing and crane9lifted types. Self9climbing formwork uses built9in hydraulic or screw ack systems under full9form or sectioned arrangement.

-.)-.+ (lassification according to brand name of the product Se"eral patented or branded formwork systems ha"e successfully entered the local construction market in the past decade. These include products from S@6# :MD# 2S?# M%2!$# Thyssen and (antile"er. Some can e"en pro"ide a "ery wide range of ser"ices including design support or tender estimating ad"ice. The input through research and de"elopment by the well9 established formwork manufacturers is no doubt a contributing factor.

CHA#TER-= FORMWORK MATERIALS =4: GENERAL ! large "ariety of form materials are a"ailable to be used in concrete construction. %t includes lumber# plywood# hardboard# plastics# fiber forms# steel# aluminum# plastics and plaster of paris. The selection of the suitable material for formwork should be based on ma=imum economy to the contractor# consistent with safety and the quality required in the finished work. !ppro"al of the architect or the engineer should be based on safety and quality of the finished work. 8here concrete surface aesthetics are critical# the architect or engineer should make pro"ision for pre9 construction mock9ups. Sheathing material is the supporting material of the formwork closest to the concrete. %t may be in direct contact to the concrete or may be separated by a form liner. %n selecting and using these materials for structural concrete following considerations are required. ). Strength -. Stiffness 1. :euse and costCuse 3. Surface characteristics impaired to the concrete ,. Easeness in cutting# drilling and attaching fastners +. Easeness in handling 4. !daptability to weather condition !rchitectural concrete differs from structural concrete in that the appearance of the e=posed surface of the former is of greater importance than the strength. So# for architectural concrete the form sheathing must be of

appropriate quality to maintain uniformity of concrete surfaces and to control deflection within permissible limits. 6e sure that it pro"ides the required surface te=ture. ! detailed description of different formwork materials has been gi"en below#

=4; TIMBER Timber is the most basic material. %t is easy to shape and is easily a"ailable. %t is light in weight for handling and is of limited durability. 2ariation in its moisture content causes significant dimensional changes. The pattern of grain on the face against the concrete lea"es an imprint which may be unacceptable. Surfaces in contact with the concrete gets damaged easily. Hence# it is preferable to use it as a supporting material of the sheathing material. %t is also a basis of a number of sheet materials. These include plywood# chipboard# hardboard. !ll these depend on glue for holding together the timber "eneers 9 the thin sheets from the log9 or the particle of which they are made. Timber 6alli is of great use in construction by the contractors. These 6alli&s are made up from Eucalyptus tree. Since nowadays there has been restriction in cutting trees in so use of these timber materials has been e=pensi"e. .or normal floor heights the timber 6allis& can be easiy used for propping. There has been a number of cases of prop failure due to inconsistency in the quality of the timber 6alli. 'ntreated timber if carefully handled can be used upto atleast )5 times. :andom width and random thick

rough sawed lumber in which the grain has been raised by soaking the lumber in water or in ammonia can produce concrete ha"ing rough te=tural surface which are attracti"e. The main problem with it is that on cutting it becomes a waste for other purpose.

=4= #L WOOD Plywood is e=tensi"ely used for formwork for concrete# specially for sheathing# decking# and form linings. %ts ad"antages are as followsE ?arge panels for economical erection and remo"al. !"ailability in se"eral thickness Smooth surfaces to pro"ide desirable concrete surfaces. :elati"ely low cost fabrication

Plywood has some strength in both its directions# but because the outer "eneers gi"e greater strength in the direction of their grain# the sheet should always span that way. 8aterproof glue is used to oin the plies together to form multi9ply panels. Ply wood is made in panels consisting of odd number of plies# each placed at right angles to the ad acent ply thus accounting in resisting bending# shear# and deflection. The ma=imum limit for the moisture content is )0D and limiting deflection is limited to )C1+5. Plywood is readily acceptable as a form material where cur"ed surfaces of the concrete are desired. Shorter radii can be de"eloped by wetting or steaming the ply prior to bending.

There are a large "ariety of ply a"ailable in the market. The common use is of the Marine ply# !ssam ply# Plastic coated ply. !ll these are ha"ing different number of possible reuses. Plywood is a"ailable in different thickness ranging from O to )C3 inches. The thinner sheets are used for lining purpose while thickness abo"e 2inches are used for sheathing material. Mill treated plywood should be oiled between successi"e uses to pre"ent the grain from rising# to assure that it will not adhere to the concrete. Plywood has better mechanical properties than the timber from which it has been manufactured. Shuttering ply is more than twice stronger than the timber of same thickness. The table below shows the comparati"e strength.

T(b5e N2& : =4: T'i67%e&& 23 &25id timbe* 95(%t& )-9), mm -,915 mm 1,935 mm EGui<(5e%t t'i67%e&& 23 &'utte*i%) 95y822d +mm 0mm )-mm

=4. HARDBOARD

Hardboard consists of timber particles bonded with a matri= of plastic glue# the low stiffness of the glue leads to a board which is less stiff than plywood or solid timber of same thickness. >uality of concrete produced from using the hardboard may not be smooth enough and the detonation of such surfaces can be fairly rapid. Tempered hardboard is sometimes used to line the inside surfaces of forms as it helps in minimi7ing the absorption. Hardboard is frequently used to form lines for architectural concrete where smooth surfaces entirely free from grain markings are desired. The edges of ad acent sheets should be nailed to the same backing boards to pre"ent slight offsets that may accentuate the oints. Koints between ad acent sheets may be filled with cold water putty. ! light sanding with sand paper noE; will make the oint smooth and practically in"isible. Holes for form ties should be drilled with a worm9center bit to a"oid tearing of the board. Surface of the hardboard should be oiled before it is used.

8ith "ery good quality hardboard ma=imum 1 to 3 number cf reuses are possible. ?ow cost of hardboard ensures that it can be easily replaced when any wearing occurs.

=40 STEEL Steel can be used for both as sheathing material and as hot or cold formed sections to form the support or framing. %t has the ad"antage that it has higher durability than any other form material although it is a sheet. %f it is used too thin then it may dent. %t being a hea"y material the cost of handling may likely to be higher. Steel is used for fabrication of standard as well as special purposes formwork accessories and hardware. %t is e=tensi"ely used in any proprietary formwork system. %t is used as form material# for both "ertical and hori7ontal propping# as grids to be used in stair towers# as "erticals and standards and their bracing. Though it is dimensionally stable# it&s main disad"antage is that it easily rusts. :ust will come off on the concrete.

Steel is a"ailable in "arious grades of strength but with formwork the usual criteria for design is stiffness of the material. Since stiffness of almost all grades of steel are same so it is not ad"antageous to spend on higher grade of steel. %t is easier to do any wielding ob with a low grade of steel. !s it is a hard unyielding material so oints between ad acent pieces of steel are difficult to make in a water tight fashion. %t should be noted that butt oints# rather than laps of metal# are used between ad acent sheets to eliminate or reduce the oint effects. 'se of steel forms are economical if there are enough number of reuses. Steel forms can be easily erected# disassembled# mo"ed and re9 erected rapidly. %t can be used for as many as + to 4 years if care is taken in its handling. 'nless special precaution taken they offer little or no insulation protection to concrete placed.

The surface of concrete produced by a steel form is smooth# and of egg shell surface te=ture. Surface cast against formwork manufactured from strip mill quality steel will sometimes be glossy. $ew highly polished steel faces may cause a characteristics black coloration on the finished surface. To obtain high class finishes from such forms# &pre9aging& is done either by allowing them to rust Aand then cleaning prior to useB# or alternati"ely by lightly grit blasting the face. The impermeability of the forms leads to the formation of the &blow holes&. Steel forms are often used as permanent formwork. Metal forms and moulds are sometimes used with architectural concrete. Since concrete tends to adhere to gal"ani7ed iron# black iron should be used for formwork. The surface in contact to the concrete should be oiled lightly. $owadays use of tubular steel has been popular for scaffolding purpose.

=4> #LASTICS The main drawback of all plastics is that it has low modulus of elasticity or stiffness which pre"ented them from using in flat surfaces. Different types of plastics are a"ailable like @lass reinforced plastics A@:PB# thermoplastics# E=panded plastics e.t.c. @lass reinforced plastics A@:PB makes satisfactory circular column form# Dome pan form and if used with suitable stiffening framing then it can also be used as forms for rectangular columns. @:P is also useful for three dimensional cur"es like making of waffle slab. .ollowing are the ad"antages of using the @:P.

!llows greater freedom of design. 'nusual te=tures and designs can be moulded into the form %f many reuses are possible it can the most economical %t is lightweight and can be easily stripped %t eliminates the rust and corrosion problem

Two types of waterproof coatings are used. ;ne is plastici7ed treatment for use where the forms are to be remo"ed and a clean finish concrete is specified. The other is the wa= treatment for use where the form will not be remo"ed or where the condition of the e=posed surface of the concrete is not important. (areful temperature and humidity control must be e=ercised at all times during the manufacture of the forms. Materials which soften on heating and then stiffen again on becoming cool is called &Thermoplastics&. %t can also be used for similar purposes Making connections to pieces of plastic like this is difficult# and so it is used for creating patterned finishes where separate pieces are appropriate. Plain thin plastic sheeting as a liner is not satisfactory# because it is e=tremely difficult to fi= ends successfully and the plastic cannot be made to lie completely flat. Plastics are used successfully as surfacing iriaterial bonded to plywood sheets. E=panded plastics are of considerable use e.g. blocks of e=panded polystyrene are used where recesses and pockets ha"e to be formed in the concrete. %t is useful for "oid forming in bridge decks and the like. 8here the ornamental details for architectural concrete are so intricate and complicated that it is impossible to use wood moulds# plaster moulds are used. Since these are destroyed while stripping # they are called waste mould.

=4? ALUMINUM 'se of aluminum as sheathing as well as framing material has been popular in foreign countries. Due to its lower density than steel it is lighter weight and it can be easily handled rather than steel components. The main disqualification is its high cost compared to steel. 6ecause the strength of aluminum in handling# tension and compression is less than the strength of steel# it is necessary to use larger sections when forms are irade of aluminum. Due to its light weight it ensures faster use of formwork and low labour cost on using it. So construction can be completed early. 8hen used as face contact material# pure aluminum reacts with the alkali in the fresh concrete# in the presence of moisture. This can be minimi7ed by pretreatment and the use of selected release agents. Pre9 etching of the face is essential before first use to ensure uniform concrete color.

CHA#TER -. ECONOM IN FORMWORK .4: INTRODUCTION Since the form work costs nearly 15 to 35 D of total cost of construction# hence it necessary to think for the economy in this respect by cutting down its cost to nominal. Economy in formwork should begin with the design of a structure and continue through the selection of the form materials# the design and erection# stripping# care between uses# and the reuse of the form. The architect Cengineer can help o"erall economy in the structure by planning so that formwork costs are minimi7ed. This demands careful thought and planning by the architect Cengineer when designing and specifying the structure# and by the contractor when designing and specifying the formwork.

.4; ACHIE!ING ECONOM 8hen designing a building# consideration should be gi"en to each of the following methods of reducing the cost of formworkE To simplify formwork and permit ma=imum reuse# the dimensions of footings# columns# beams should be of standard material multiplies# and the number of si7es should be minimised. 8hen the interior columns are of same width or smaller than the girders they support# the column forms become a simple rectangular or square bo= without cut outs# and the slab form does not ha"e to be cut out at each corner of the column. 8hen all the beams are made one depth Abeams framing into beams as

well as framing into columnsB# the supporting structures for the beam forms can be carried on a le"el platform supported on shores. 8hen all the widths and depths are made the same for beams and oists# and the a"ailable si7es of the dressed lumber# plywood# and the "arious ready9made formwork components are considered when determining the si7es of the structural members# labor time will be sa"ed in cutting# measuring# and le"eling. Try to use same si7e of columns from the foundation to the roof# if impracticable retain the same si7es for se"eral stories. Space columns uniformly throughout the building as far as possible or retain the same position from floor to floor. ?ocate columns such that distances between ad acent faces are multiplies of standard sheet si7es of ply for slab decking. 8hen commercially a"ailable forming systems such as one Iway or two9 way oist system are used# design should be based on the use of one standard depth where possible. The structural design should be prepared simultaneously with the architectural design so that the dimensions can be better coordinated. :oom si7es can often be "aried a few inches to accommodate the structural design. 8hile considering architectural features like depressions# and openings for mechanical or electrical work detailing should be done keeping in "iew of achie"ing ma=imum economy. Depression in the top of slabs should be made without a corresponding break in ele"ations of the soffit of the slabs# beams# or oists.

Embedment for attachment to or penetration through the concrete structure should be designed to minimi7e random penetration of the formed surface.

(ost of forms include three items E materials# labour# and the use of equipment required to fabricate and handle the forms. !ny effort in reducing the combined cost will sa"e money. .ollowing are the methods of achie"ing economy. Design the forms to pro"ide the required strength with the smallest amount of materials. 8hen planning forms # consider the sequence and methods of stripping. 'se the lowest grade of lumber that will pro"ide the required strength# rigidity# and surface condition when it is in contact with the concrete. 'se prefabricated panels where it is possible. 'se largest practicable prefab panel that can be handled by men or equipment on the ob. 'se patented from panels and other members that are frequently less e=pensi"e than forms built entirely for the ob. 'se the smallest and fewest nails required to pro"ide the required strength and rigidity. (lean# oil# and renail form panels between reuses. Strip forms as soon as it is safe and possible to do if they are reused on the structure to pro"ide ma=imum number of reuses. !fter all it is a oint effort from the client i.e. the architect and the contractor to help in achie"ing the economy in this area.

CHA#TER 0 #RO#RIETAR FORMWORK S STEM 04: GENERAL Still today many contractors depend upon the primiti"e method of using timber as supporting material for the formwork system. This formwork system is labour intensi"e# unsafe# unreliable and takes a lot of time for making# assembling and disassembling. 8ith the increasing demand for faster# safer and quality construction contractors are going for mechani7ed method of proprietary formwork system which ro"ides following basic ad"antages to the con"entional one. .aster Safer 6etter quality Economic 6etter producti"ity @reater number of reuses 'seful in case of special type of constructions

There are a number of proprietary formwork systems a"ailable in the market like ?<T Doka system# 6S?# Mi"an system# S6@ etc. These formwork systems are e=pensi"e in terms of their initial in"estment for which many contractors of e"en middle le"el can&t afford it. The proprietary formwork system consists of ready made components which require lesser time than con"entional for making and assembling. Moreo"er# they ha"e greater number of reuses# so ultimately the cost per use comes down e"en below the

con"entional one in most cases. !nother important point is that they require lesser number of skilled labours than that required for con"entional systems. So initial cost of owning a proprietary system is the main criteria to keep middle le"el contractors at bay. 'nwillingness to adopt a new technology in formwork system may be another factor for non utilisation of proprietary system. This chapter is dealt with ?<T Doka and 6S? proprietary formwork system and also with special formwork system for special construction obs

04; L F T D OKA FORM WORK S STEM 04;4: INTRODUCTION

?<T formwork system is based on the know9how of &D;*!& formwork company of !ustria who is one of the world leaders in the proprietary formwork system. This system combines fle=ibility of timber with the strength of steel which can be easily be assembled at site.

04;4; MERITS OF LFT DOKA FORMWORK S STEM Simplicity in assembling of the system Easy to understand for the labours System is highly fle=ible (omponents are "ersatile :equires less skilled labour Pro"ides high material and labour producti"ity

 Ensures speedier and safer construction %n"estment can be made on minimum quantity of formwork items.

04;4= S STEM A##LICATIONS ?<T9Doka fle= System 8all and (olumn formwork (limbing formwork o (limbing scaffold o !utomatic (limbing formwork o Tra"elling (limbing formwork ?<T Hea"y duty towers Stair tower !ccess Scaffolding .oundation formwork ?ift shaft formwork Slipform Tunnel form

04;4. S STEM COM#ONENTS Steel forms H9)+C)9)9-5 PlywoodP Timber beams Standard steel components

04;40 S STEM DESCRI#TION Stee5 32*m& %t is manufactured of - mm A) 3gaugeB sheet with pressed flanges and stiffeners. %t is a"ailable in se"eral standard si7es of )-55=+55 and 055=+55. %t can pro"ide e=posed smooth surface finish up to 35 uses at least. %ts useful life is nearly , to + years.

H-:>:H-;/ #5y822dH Timbe* be(m& The &%& shaped glue laminated timber beams are called H-:>H H-;/ beams. %t is the basic element of the ?<T Doka formwork system and is used mainly as a fle=ural element. %t is light in weight# sturdy# consistent in strength# uniform in si7e. %t is a "ersatile component used in all types of system applications. %f properly used it can be used nearly / times more than con"entional timber. %t is a"ailable in two different section si7es AH)+C H9-5B and in three different lengths. %t is a ready made component and needs no cutting and thus it helps in a"oiding wastage. (ost per use of H beams with respect to con"entional beams is nearly )E 1.,. $early ?;D less timber is required than equi"alent rectangular con"entional timber due to its special &%& shaped section.

LF T-D27( 35eA Sy&tem %t consists of H beams# collapsible steel props# folding tripods# four way head# supporting head# beam forming head# spring locked pin. This system is used for slab and beam casting up to height of 3.3 m height. The plywood or steel plates sheathing are supported by H beams at primary and secondary

layer. (ollapsible steel props are used for "ertical shoring and thus "ariation in height and space can be made easily. These props are more reliable and safe and can take higher loads than &6alli& props. ?apping of H beams at primary and secondary le"el is possible by using four way heads at the top of the steel props. The prop needs only tripod for its self stability. %t has higher producti"ity of /9)5 sq.m% day than con"entional system. This system needs few skilled labours in compared to the con"entional. %t needs minimum making and assembling time. %t facilitates re9propping and thus enhances frequent use of fcnnwork materials.

LF T W(55 (%d C25um% 32*m82*7 %n case of wall formwork system the H beams along with steel walers and accessories make up the assembly. The wall formwork facilitates fi=ing of working platforms for access# checking of reinforcements# concreting etc. The formwork panel with the working platform and alignment systems can be lifted as a single unit using a crane thus the labour in"ol"ed in each operation of erection and deshuttering is reduced to minimum. The panels are formed in the carpentry workshop at site and the number of operationsC assembly of components at each location is minimal and accuracy is maintained. Since large panels are handled as single units the damage or loss of small component is eliminated. %n absence of crane panels can be handled manually. Same components that has been used for wall formwork can be reassembled to form the column formwork thereby lending fle=ibility. This "ertical formwork system can handle "ery large pressures of concrete.

 LF T CLIMBING FORMWORK .or tall surfaces climbing formwork systems are a"ailable. Three types of climbing formwork is possible. They are E9 (limbing scaffold Tra"elling climbing formwork !utomatic climbing formwork .or climbing operations panels are used along with a climbing scaffold# climbing cone and suspension platform. C5imbi%) &6(3325d This system consists of standard wall panels with alignment ad ustable props supported on standard brackets with a suspended working platform. ;n completion of each lift the wall formwork is broug.it to the ground with help of a crane for cleaning purpose. This bracket is to be dismantled and fi=ed in its ne=t position with the help of a crane. T*(<e5i%) 65imbi%) 32*m82*7 %n this system wall form is fi=ed to a "ertical walling and scissor action spindle. ;n completion of a lift the wall form can be mo"ed with scissor action spindle up to 4,5 mm away from concrete surface. !fter cleaning entire can be lifted and fi=ed to its ne=t position by crane. Thus lowering of wall form to ground le"el for cleaning purpose is a"oided. Aut2m(ti6 65imbi%) 32*m82*7 Doka automatic climbing machine combine the standard wall form and working platform with automatic climbers which automatically hoists up formwork assembly step by step. %t cuts the crane cost from the ground up and speeds up the flow of work. %t also safeguards against wind and other

e"entualities enabling to adhere to tight control of time schedule and costs. %t is useful for construction of $atural Draft (ooling Tower. LF T He(<y du5y t28e*& The H.D.T AHea"y duty towersB can pro"ide for both low and high rise structures with narrow# long# smaller# or wide rooms. %t is economical when floor to floor height is more than nominal and slab thickness is more than -,5 mm. Tower can be handled as a unit ha"ing plan dimension of ),-3=),-3 and --,5=),-3. %t&s total capacity is -,5 *$. Height ad ustment can be made up to /55 mm ma=imum by using spindles at top and bottom. Tower as a unit can be handled by a crane or can be rolled by transport de"ices. ?arge and hea"y table forms can be made out of tower by fitting wheels. %t can be used for scaffolding purpose and also as stair tower by adding few components. !dditional frames can be attached to it to gi"e twin configuration. %t can support cantile"er scaffold brackets thereby reducing high staging at cantile"er ends. LFT St(i* T28e* The stair tower is built by adding few standard additional components to H. D. Tower. %t is "ery stable and can be easily plumbed. %t can be used up to great heights of nearly ) ;;m. %t only needs bracings to the permanent structures at e"ery +m. le"el. %t can also be easily handled with a crane. %t is much safer to use than the con"entional stair used for construction purpose. LFT A66e&& S6(3325d %t is light weight and easy to erect up to 35m. height with bracing to the permanent structure at e"ery +m. height. %t uses lighter frames compared to H.D. Tower staging. %t allows free mo"ement of workmen without obstruction

at all le"els. 6racings ser"e as handrail also. This scaffold can be shifted manually and also by crane. 8orking platforms are made of steel and are much safer than bamboo strips that are used con"entionally. The access scaffold can also be used for staging of normal floor loads.

LF T F2u%d(ti2% 32*m82*7 .or foundation formwork steel panels of standard are used minimising making at site. H beams# props and other accessories are used for foundation formwork. LFT Li3t &'(3t32*m82*7 %t pro"ides a platform for shutter and workmen inside the closed area of the lift well# and a deshuttering mechanism for stripping of formwork without dismantling the panels or their sheathing. %t uses standard wall formwork components with a few additional accessories.

04= BRITISH SCAFFOLDING +INDIA, LTD4 04=4: INTRODUCTION This is another proprietary formwork system like ?<T Doka system. The 6.S.? formwork system pro"ides "arious system components. They areE9 Staging and scaffolding items !d ustable telescopic spans !d ustable telescopic props 6S? .loor C Slab forms Metriform system

04=4; S STEM DESCRI#TION St()i%) (%d &6(3325di%) item& 6.S.? has introduced the (uplock scaffoldings. %t is the safest# fastest and most "ersatile scaffolding e"er designed by 6.S.?. (uplock standards or "erticals are made of higher grade steel tubes with load carrying capacity of ,4 *$Cleg. $odal or connection points at standard is set at ,55))555 mm spacing. !ll ledgersC hori7ontals are ha"ing identical forged blades to fit into the cup of the standards. ?oose spigots are used to pro"ide trouble free and stronger connection between "erticals. !t each node four hori7ontals can meet from four directions. .or fi=ing only hammering is required which the labours prefer most. %t has less number of loose parts and hence losses are reduced. Suitable acks are pro"ided at bottom and top of the "erticals to pro"ide ad ustment up to +,5 mm. This scaffolding can be used for "ertical shoring under slab forms and also for cantile"er scaffolding. %t is the most popular scaffolding item in use.

AdIu&t(b5e te5e&629i6 &9(%& The ad ustable telescopic spans act as hori7ontal shores below the slab

panels forms. %t consists of two members per unit such that one member telescope inside the other thereby pro"iding "ariations in its length. Hori7ontal flanges pro ecting from the ends of shores rets on supporting beams or walls. The units are manufactured with ad ustable built in camber setting de"ices to compensate for deflection under loading. This spans do not need any intermediate shoring so that they can be easily installed and remo"ed. Hence#

it reduces congestion at the lower floor area for other construction work or for the storage of materials. %t&s length can be "aried from ).4,m to ,.,m and it is a"ailable in se"en different span types.

AdIu&t(b5e te5e&629i6 9*29&

Kust like collapsible steel props of ?<T Doka system its height can be ad usted as required within certain limits. These are self supporting and needs bracing at either direction beyond 1.+m height.

BSL F522* HS5(b 32*m&

%t is manufactured of )3 gauge sheets with pressed flanges and stiffener and is a"ailable in se"eral standard si7es of ) ),5=+55# 055=+55. %t is useful to pro"ide smooth finish to concrete cast.

Met*32*m &y&tem 6S? Metriform system is a formwork system used for construction of

concrete floors and walls. %t incorporates the ad"antages of early striking of forms while slab being supported on props with drop heads only. This increases output to a large e=tent. Metriform system is used with 6S? props for normal heights and with (uplock scaffolding for grater floor heights. Metriform beams are a"ailable in different spans making it suitable for different grids. Three days after casting the drop heads are raised and Metriform beam is remo"ed for further assembly at other location.

C2%6*ete H(*d8(*e

6S? produces hea"y duty tie system of capacity up to , MT and also tie bolts with its accessories.

04. S#ECIAL FORMWORK S STEM 04.4: SLI#FORM Slipform means a continuously mo"ing form# mo"ing at such a speed that the concrete when e=posed has already achie"ed enough strength to support the "ertical pressure from concrete still if the form as well as to withstand nominal lateral forces. Slipform is of 1 typesE o Straight Slipform o Tapering Slipform o Slipforrn for special application

Some typical structures require straight Slipform like Silos# Straight chimney# (olumns etc. Tapering chimney and "entilators are being constructed using tapering slipform. (onstruction of lifts# stairwell# :.(.5 pylons# needs slipform technique which comes under special applications because of their comple= si7es# shapes and loads to be lifted along slipform like walkway truss etc. Slipform helps in rapid monolithic construction of tall structures using hydraulic acks thus a"oiding crane requirement for lifting of the formwork system.

:eduction in shell diameter can be achie"ed by ad ustable screws while slipforrning. :ate of concreting can be as high as +m per day depending on the hoisting capacity. %t is high in compared to con"entional ump form limiting it to 193 per week. :ate of slipforming has to be matched with the setting time of concrete to pre"ent bulging or sticking of concrete to forms. Ply faced timber frames of ) to ).-m height are used as fomwork with slight batter of + to )5mm so that on mo"ing upwards they gradually free themsel"es from the concrete. The forms are held apart by metal yokes with "ertical legs and linking cross heads which can be ad usted for "ariation in wall thickness. 8hole assembly is lifted by acks wkch bear under the cross heads. The forms don&t mo"e continuously but in small increments of -,mm e"ery , to )5 minutes. !ccess decks are pro"ided le"el with top of forms and hanging platforms are suspended below to inspect finished concrete. ;n large slides# an upper deck is sometimes pro"ided mainly for fi=ing "ertical reinforcements. This slipform technique has been de"eloped by "arious international companies like Doka# %nterform# 6ugging etc.

04.4; GANG FORM

@ang forms are used for concreting of large sections of high walls and are usually handled by a crane in large sections from one location to another. To facilitate accurate alignment of these forms plumbing frames and special types of concrete hardware are used.

04.4= FL ING FORMS I TABLE FORMS .lying form or table form is a system of form components that are assembled into a unit and used to cast slab or floor# beams or shear walls. %t is then remo"ed with no disassembling of parts and used again to form other floor. Each unit of the floor system usually consists of structural components such as trusses and shores# steel or wood beams as stringers# oists and plywood decking# all assembled and rigidly connected. %t can be used in constructing structures pro"ided there will be enough uses to ustify relati"ely high initial cost of fabricating the forms. %t thus reduces labour cost and sa"es time in compared to using con"entional method of formwork. 8hen concrete attains sufficient strength the form is lowered retracted to clear the concrete and hoisted by crane for reuse at higher floor. The table forms are ha"ing wheels for easy mo"ement of the system.

040 TUNNEL FORM The tunnel form technology is designed to facilitate speedy construction of houses with good quality. %t can also help to construct a flat a day. %n the tunnel form system two walls on opposite sides and the floor or roof forming a & tunnel& are cast in one go# G in formsG specially erected for this purpose. The forms are remo"ed soon after concrete has de"eloped sufficient strength. The sped of construction can be as high as )55sq.m of floor area cast in a day with one set of form. ;ften accelerated curing technique is applied in this. The form finish is of superior quality# hence plastering is not required. There are two types of tunnel formwork.

). Half9 Tunnel formwork 9 %n this only one wall and half slab is cast simultaneously. -. .ull9 Tunnel formwork 9 %n this two walls and a slab are cast monolithically. Tunnel formwork is applicable for both single storey and multistorey buildings. %t&s optimum use is in multi9 unit shear wall structure with identical floor layout at each le"el.

Ad<(%t()e& 23 Tu%%e5 32*m te6'%252)y4 %t is made entirely of steel with all load bearing parts pro"iding 7ero deflection. %t pro"ides surface plain to the accuracy of 5.,mm o"er -m of length. %t pro"ides smooth finish and hence decorati"e finish can be applied directly on walls and slab. The time sa"ing on using this technology is nearly ,5D in compared to con"entional technique as erection time is merely 5.) to -., hlsqm. %t gi"es high output with minimum number of skilled labour. %t has led to minimisation of bearing wall thickness and hence carpet area increases by about 1.,D in compared to blockCbrick masonry wall. %t also helped in reducing the dead load of the structure. ?intels abo"e doors and windows are eliminated completely. ;n using it steel consumption is ).- to ).3 kgCsq.ft on plain area while it is -.1 to -., kgCsq.ft for column framed structure. %nitial cost of tunnel formwork can be reco"ered after +5945 operations.

Tunnel formwork is good for use for at least ,55 times.

 Limit(ti2%& 23 Tu%%e5 32*m te6'%252)y !ll load bearing walls should be in line and parallel without any offsets. The ceiling should be uniform. %n this type of construction floor slab is designed as one way slab supported on :.(.5 wall. This is not feasible for construction of large span halls. Ma=imum opening in the tunnel wall is ),55 mm.

The structural design must be integrated with the requirements of the tunnel formwork through a clear and regular floor layout. The requirements can only be met only through coordination between the architect# engineer and the site management.

CHA#TER > #RE#ARATION OF FORMWORK KNOWLEDGE BASE >4: GENERAL %n today&s competiti"e market a number of proprietary formwork system are a"ailable besides the con"entional system. 8ith the increasing demand contractors are using the proprietary system. %n this thesis out of "arious proprietary system ?<T Doka system has been compared with the (on"entional system. .ormwork knowledge base has prepared for ?<T Doka system# (on"entional system . %n this chapter the process of acquiring knowledge on ?<T Doka system and thereby formulating a knowledge base has been described. This knowledge base can be prepared only after meeting those contractor who has already used the system. %t is the e=perience of the contractors that pro"ides the knowledge base. This knowledge base thus will help the new contractors to determine whether it would be appropriate to prefer the proprietary system than the (on"entional system for a particular type of pro ects under gi"en set of working conditions. Here middle rise residential# commercial# institutional building has been considered as the pro ects which the contractor should only take.

>4; KNOWLEDGE ACBUISITION #ROCESS The technique of e=tracting knowledge and creating knowledge base falls into three categories. .amillarisation stage Elicitation stage ;rganisation and presentation stage.

>4;4: F(miJ(*i&(ti2% &t()e This stage includes literature re"iew# site inspection and unstructured inter"iews. The purpose of this stage is to find scope and comple=ity of the problem domain.

?iterature re"iew Te=t books# technical papers# ournals periodicals presented at "arious conferences are the primary source of the literature re"iew. !ll these gi"e information regarding the "arious proprietary systems a"ailable in the %ndian market as well as globally. 6ut it gi"es least information regarding the circumstances under which these formwork systems should be used. %t often gi"es information regarding the use of the formwork systems.

Site i%&9e6ti2% %nspection of "arious sites are important so as to get farniliarise with the application of different formwork systems practically otherwise it remains a mere imagination. %t also helps to get information regarding the limitations and problems related to different formwork systems in use. Suitability of "arious

systems at different sites can be found out.

U%&t*u6tu*ed i%te*<ie8& These inter"iews pro"ide the basis for establishing a comprehensi"e set of questions for more structured inter"iews. The person in"ol"ed in building up of the knowledge base prepares a probable list of questions to ask the contractors. This will later help to build up detailed specific questions to be asked.

>4;4; E5i6it(ti2% &t()e !t this stage structured inter"iews are organised to get e=perts approach to the problem to elicit his knowledge of rules used to sol"e problems. This stage helps to build knowledge base efficiently. %n this stage inter"iew is conducted for data acquisition which includes Preparing questionnaires %dentifying e=perts in the field Preparing data collection forms to be filled quickly during inter"iew session. (onducting structured inter"iews.

>uestionnaires is prepared based on unstructured inter"iews. .ollow up inter"iew is conducted to obtain final conclusion.

>4;4= O*)(%i&(ti2% (%d 9*e&e%t(ti2% &t()e4 The purpose of this stage is to structure key concepts# rules and the

knowledge and transform into a matri= format. The outcome is a comprehensi"e knowledge base. Different stages are described belowE Re62*d i%te*<ie8 *e&u5t&

!fter se"eral inter"iews the data collection forms are cross checked to detect the areas of conflict. %f e=perts answers are incompatible# a follow up inter"iew is conducted then.

O*)(%i&e 7%285ed)e b(&e

!t this stage acquired knowledge is organised. This is done in a tabular format which helps to compare different formwork systems each depending upon the factors in"ol"ed. The different stages are shown in .igure $o

KNOWLEDGE ACBUISITION #ROCESS KOWLEDGE ACQUISITION PROCESS

FAMILIARIZATI ON STAGE

ELICITATION STAGE

ORGANISATION AND REPRESENTATI ON STAGE

LITERATURE REVIEW SITE INSPECTION UNSTRUCTURED INTERVIEWS

STRUCTURED INTERVIEW

RECORD INTERVIEW RESULTS

ORGANISE KNOWLEDGEBASE

Fi)u*e N24 : :

CHA#TER ? FORMWORK S STEM KNOWLEDGE BASE

?4: INTRODUCTION !fter going through the "arious stages of knowledge accuisition process# the formwork system knowledge base has been prepared for ?<T Doka formwork system and the (on"entional system required for particular type of pro ects. ?ike here in this thesis middle rise residential# institutional and commercial building has been considered as pro ects.

?4; KNOWLEDGE BASE .ormwork system consists of two main components. They are E9 ). The Sheathing material 9 This remains in direct contact with the fresh concrete. -. The 6acking or the Supporting material 9 This pro"ides the immediate supports to the sheathing material and transfers the total load of entire formwork to suitable ground. %t helps to keep the entire formwork system intact. The support system is of two types E9 Hori7ontal shoring 2ertical shoring

Hence formwork knowledge base is prepared for all the two components of the formwork system.

THE SHEATHING MATERIAL

Most commonly used sheathing material is Plywood and Steel plates for building constructions. .or waffle slab constructions @lass reinforced plastics A@:PB moulds are the most preferred one. So knowledge base for these three materials has been prepared and is gi"en in table noE4. ) T(b5e N2: ?4:
MATERIAL !ALUES +WEIGTHAGE FACTORS, Stiffness $os. of :euse (ostCuseCsq.m in :s. Surface finish .ireeresistanac e Easenessin cutting Thermal insulation Easeness in assembly Surface Defects A&&(m #5y #L WOOD #5(&ti6 62(ted #5y MediumA1B 15A)B ),A,B M(*i%e #5y Stee5 GR#

Medium A1B )+A)B ),A,B

MediumA1B 1,A)B ),A,B

HighestA4B )55A4B -3A1B

?owestA)B 45A,B 3,A)B

SmoothA)B ?owestA)B

SmoothA)B ?owestA)B

SmoothA)B ?owestA)B

SmoothA)B HighestA,B

SmoothA)B MediumA1B

8ooden drips

8ooden chips 6eamCSlab# column# footing# staircase

8ooden chips 6eamCSlab# column# footing# staircase

6low holes

6low holes

Probable 'se

6eamCSlabCcolumn # .ooting# Staircase

6eamCSlab# column# footing# staircase

:ound column slab !rchitectural effect 8affle slab# Done

T'e B(67i%) 2* t'e Su992*ti%) m(te*i(5 H2*iE2%t(5 &'2*i%) K

(on"entionally hard wood timber is cut into desired dimension to pro"ide the immediate support to the sheathing material. %t is called soldiers or studs for column formwork while for slab9beam formwork it is called oist and runner. %n some cases &6alli& wood is used as oist or runner.

?<T Doka uses &%& section beams made of timber and piywood called &H9)+& and &H9-5& beams. %t&s salient features are :equires 35D less timber than con"entional timber for the same strength requirement.

$eeds no cutting (onsistent in strength ?ight in weight Higher number of reuses (ostCuse is 1., times less than con"entional timber

6esides these 6S? are ha"ing &!d ustable telescopic span& or Q!crowF for hori7ontal shoring. %t consists of two units so that one member slide inside the other. Details regarding this has been mentioned in (hapter noE ,

T(b5e N2: ?4;

FACTORS $os. of reuse (ost C reuse AratioB Dimensional "ariation ?abour producti"ity in hori7ontal formwork ?abours reqd# to handle 8eight StrenghtCStiffness Easeness in attaching accessories Safety end reliability Type of labour required Site space requirement 'ses H-BEAMS )-5 ) ).-m#-.3m#1.+m / to )5 sqmCday CON!ENTIONAL TIMBER )5 1., !ny 1 sqmCday ACROW )5/ to -55 $ot a"ailable ).4,m to ,.,m , sqmCday

) , kgCrm Medium A,B Easy A1B

) 4 kgCrm ?owest A)B Difficult A)B

$ot a"ailable Highest A4B Easy A1B

Highest A,B SemiC'nskilled Medium A1B Hori7ontal and "ertical formwork

?owest A)B Skilled C Semiskilled High A)B Hori7ontal and "ertical formwork

Highest A,B SemiC'nskilled ?ow A,B Hori7ontal formwork

!e*ti6(5 S'2*i%) Two types of "ertical shoring system are a"ailable in Proprietary system.

.irst one# for normal floor heights and general floor depths up to -, 5mm ma=imum# Steel ad ustable props are a"ailable. Second one# for greater floor heights nearly more than 3m. or so and slab depth more than -,5mm# Steel hea"y duty towers from ?<T and (uplock scaffolding from 6S? are a"ailable. !d ustable steel props are helpful in making ad ustment in heights as required at site. Heights can be "aried from ).3m to 3.)m. These props are self stable with a tripod. These props are "ery "ersatile as they can be used as alignment props for supporting column formwork. These are economical in

using for -,5mm slab depth at normal floor heights and up to 3.) in height at -55mm slab depth Ama=B. %t can be laid faster than &6alli& props and also plumbing can be done with a ack at bottom more accurately. %t needs no splicing at connections as required in &6alli&. :unners and oists can easily rest upon the steel props.

The con"entional use for "ertical propping is the timber &6alli&. &6alli& is usually made from &Eucalyptus& tree. !t normal height up to 1.,m height it needs no hori7ontal or "ertical bracings. 6ut these are unsafe and unreliable. @eneral requirement for a &6alli& prop of 3 inch at top is )Csqm.of slab area. To increase its height it requires another member to be spliced with it. %t has lesser number of reuses than steel props and it often becomes a waste as floor height requirement "aries from site to site as well as from location to location at the same site.

.or floor heights greater than normal heights and slab thickness more than -, 5mm use of H.D.Tower or (uplock scaffolding is economical. !s at greater heights &6alli& need to be erected at stages which is a labour intensi"e ob. H.D.T. Tower or (uplock scaffolding can be shifted as required as a whole unlike the con"entional &6alli& or &6amboo& scaffold. Detailed discussion of this two items has been made in chapter noE ,.

T(b5e N2: ?4=

FACTORS $os. of :euse StrengthCStiffness .le=ibility in length 8eight Safety and reliability ?abour producti"ity Material costCuse Stablity Easeness in plumb 2ersatility LFT STEEL #RO#S -55 Aup to / yrsB 1.3 MT ).3) m to 3.) m -5 kg Ama=B Highest A4B / to )5 sqmCday :s. +.,5 6y tripods Easier by spindle A+B !s alignment props for column and wall formwork# "ertical shoring TIMBER #RO#S -, 5., to 5.+ M.T. A+RdiaB .i=ed length ), kg ?east A)B 1 aqm. C day :s. /.45 6y 6racings $ot so easy A)B :estricted use due to fi=ed length A"ertical and inclined shoringB

T(b5e N2: ?4.

FACTORS ?oad capacity Height ad ustment ?abour (ost Material (ostC(um Tower si7e a"ailable $odal distance at "erticals 6racings Mobility Easeness in plumbing 2ersatility LFT H4 D TOWER -, mt /55 mm :s. -Ccum $! A),-3=),-3B#A--,5=),-3B 055#)-55#)/55mm Hori7ontal# Diagonal 6y transportation wheel 6y tower spindle Staging# Stair tower# (antile"er support CU#LOCK S STEM --./ MT --, mm N +,5 mm :s. ).,C cum $ot !"ailable A)-,5=),55B ,55#)555mm ;nly Hori7ontal 6y castor wheel 6y Tower spindle Staging# (antile"er support

! formwork knowledge base has also been prepared for (olumn98all formwork of ?<T9Doka and (on"entional system# ?<T !ccess scaffold# ?<T

Stair tower. T(b5e N2: ?40

FOR COLUMN AND WALL FORMWORK FACTORS Ma=imum use of formwork LFT FORMWORK / uses a month CON!ENTIONAL 1 uses a month

?abour reqd. for assembly ?abour reqd. for disassembly ?abour reqd. for making Easeness in plumbing Material costCsqm ?abour costCsqm .ormwork stability Safety and reliability ?abour quality required

)./ man hrCsqm 5.0man hrCsqm )./ man hrCsqm Easier A3B $! :s. ,59+5C sqm Higher A,B Higher A,B SemiCunskilled

1.5 man hrCsqm )., man hrCsqm 1.5 man hrCsqm ?ess easy A)B $! :s. 459/5C sqm ?ower A)B ?ower A)B SkilledCunskilled

Table $oE 4.+

FACTORS .rame height a"ailable Erection :ate Safety and reliability Height :estriction 2ersatility LFT ACCESS SCAFFOLD 5.0#).-#)./m 5., man hrCcum Higher than con"entional 35 m (an be used for staging also LFT STAIR TOWER ).-m ,.), cumCman day Higher than con"entional )55 m $o such

CHA#TER 1 DECISION MAKING #ROCESS

14: INTRODUCTION

This chapter deals with the decision making process that a middle le"el contractor should follow while selecting a proprietary formwork system rather than con"entional one for particular type of pro ects. %n this thesis ?<T9Doka proprietary formwork system has been compared to the (on"entional AtraditionalB system for middle rise commercial# residential and institutional building pro ects.

The decision making process will be applied separately for selecting the sheathing material as well as the supportingC backing material which constitute the entire formwork system as a whole.

The decision making process needs two types of data for its e"aluation.

L #*2Ie6t D(t( L F2*m82*7 K%285ed)e B(&e$

14; #ROCECT DATA The Pro ect data required for selecting the sheathing material is based on the followings.

:4 B(&ed 2% C2%t*(6t &9e6i3i6(ti2%& C2%t*(6t 62%diti2% - %f in the contract document the type of formwork material to be used is mentioned specifically then no selection procedure is followed thereafter.

C2%6*ete 3i%i&' *eGui*ed - %f type of concrete finish along with architectural finish is mentioned then choose materials which can only pro"ide the required finish.

#*2Ie6t du*(ti2% - %f pro ect schedule is "ery tight then choose the form material which can be easily made# assembled and disassembled.

;4 B(&ed 2% bui5di%) ty9e Re)u5(*ity i% bui5di%) &'(9e - %f number of uses of form material required is high# then choose that material which can pro"ide greater number of reuses.

Ty9e 23 &5(b - Slab to be constructed can be simple slab with beam# can be flat slab or waffle slab. So choice of form material gets "aried preferred for waffle slab than other materials. @enerally plywood or steel plates are used as form material. =4 B(&ed 2% &ite 62%diti2% -

S9(6e 62%&t*(i%t (t &ite - .orm material that needs enough space for fabrication at site should not be preferred where there is space constraint at site. .ormwork can be made crane dependent partly or fully. So using the formwork systems that require crane# depends on the possibility of using the crane at site.

.4 B(&ed 2% L(b2u* (<(i5(bi5ity .ew formwork materials require large number of skilled labours for its making and assembling. So form material should be choosen such that labour requirement is easily fulfilled at site.

04 B(&ed 2% e%<i*2%me%t(5 62%diti2% (ontractor should check beforehand the site weather condition. %t may often need that the form material should be good heat insulator to let proper hardening of concrete. Plywood and Plastic moulds are good heat insulators to be used as form material.

>4 B(&ed 2% m(te*i(5 (<(i5(bi5ity %f the contractor is ha"ing any form material with him beforehand then the contractor would try to use the material for his pro ect. The Pro ect data required for the backing C supporting material i.e. the formwork system is as followsE9

:4 #*2Ie6t du*(ti2%

(hoice of proprietary formwork system is ob"ious when pro ect duration is "ery small.

;4 L(b2u* (<(i5(bi5ity Proprietary system needs less skilled labour than con"entional one and needs mainly semi9skilled and unskilled labour. So choice of any system depends on the a"ailability at site.

=4 S9(6e 62%&t*(i%t (t &ite To choose whether formwork system should be crane handled or not depends on then space a"ailability at site. Proprietary system needs lesser making at site# so it is preferred to use where fabrication space is restricted.

.4 Su992*ti%) C2%diti2% The Proprietary systems are highly capital intensi"e so contractor should check the financial condition of his own so as to decide whether to purchase or to hire the Proprietary formwork system if required.

14= DECISION MAKING #ROCESS FOR THE SHEATHING MATERIAL .or the selection of the sheathing material the decision making process takes two steps

Ste9 : ;ut of the most probable selected materials selection is done by applying.!.H.P A!nalytical Hierarchy ProcessB. The factors that has been considered for applying !.H.P areES

StrengthCStiffness $umber of reuse (ostCuse Surface finish it pro"ides .ire resistance Ease ness in assembly Ease ness in cutting Material a"ailability to contractor.

The contractor is supposed to gi"e his preference of importance among these abo"e factors depending on the &Pro ect Data& i.e. Pro ect requirement and constraints on a 09 point scale basis. These points are called &8eightage 2alues&. !gain weightage "alue is e"aluated for each formwork material with respect to each factors based on formwork knowledge base. This weightage "alue shows the degree of e=cellence of one material o"er the other with respect to each factors. !fter this !.H.P is applied as a decision making process. The guideline for the 0 point scale of weightage factors is gi"en below.

Table $oE /.)

Le<e5 23 im92*t(%6e by 8ei)'t()e 3(6t2*& ) 1 , 4 0 -#3#+#/ De3i%iti2%

Equal importance 8eak importance of one o"er the other Essential or strong importance 2ery strong or demonstrated importance !bsolute importance %ntermediate "alues between ad acent scale "alues

This 0 point scale has is used for all types of !.H.P analysis. !pplication of this method is shown in a the flowchart is gi"en in !ppendi= $o E %.

14. DECISION MAKING #ROCESS FOR SELECTING FORMWORK S STEM Two methods of decision making process has been suggested for selection of formwork system. Met'2d : 6y utilising !.H.PA!nalytical Hierarchy MethodB based on the following factors. Ri&7 3(6t2*& 9 System Safety System :eliability #e*32*m(%6e 3(6t2* 9 >uality Performance Schedule performance System fle=ibility C2&t 3(6t2* 9 %nitial in"estment ;perational and maintenance e=penses

C2%&t*(i%t 3(6t2*

- Manpower requirement Site space requirement Material a"ailability

The abo"e procedure is followed for decision making in selecting between &(on"entional formwork system& and &?<T IDoka& proprietary forrnwork system. The contractor is supposed to gi"e his preference of importance on a 0 point scale basis among the abo"e factors depending on the type of pro ects he is going to undertake and his financial condition to afford the proprietary system. 6ased upon formwork knowledge base# the abo"e two systems are e"aluated by weightage factors# for each specified factors# to show the dominance of one o"er the other.

This method can be utilised by any new contractor# to decide whether to buy a proprietary formwork system or use the (on"entional formwork system# for particular type of pro ects he is going to undertake taking into account all his desires and limitations.

140 A4H4#+A%(5yti6(5 Hie*(*6'y Met'2d, ;"er the past decade there has been a number of technical inno"ations in the construction industry. Howe"er# the process of introducing new technologies into practice has been "ery slow. %t is attributed to a number of factors. %t is difficult to quantify the intangible benefits of ad"anced technologies and the risk in"ol"ed in implementing such technologies with the use of traditional economic analysis techniques. ! new technique is

introduced which takes into account intangible benefits ha"ing strategic significance for an organisation to compare different technologies. This technique is !.H.PA!nalytical Hierarchy MethodB. This approach gi"es stresses on the importance of the intuiti"e udgement of a decision maker for comparison of alternati"es in a decision making process. !.H.P helps in taking decision based on knowledge and e=perience. !.H.P. helps decision makers to identify and set priorities on basis of their ob ecti"es# knowledge and e=perience for a particular problem.

The !.H.P solution process is as follows ). ! comple= problem is structured by decomposing it into a hierarchy with enough le"els to include all attribute elements to reflect the aim of decision makers. -. Elements are compared using same scale to measure their relati"e importance and the o"erall priorities are established among the elements. 1. 'sing the same scale e"aluate relati"e importance of each alternati"es with respect to each criteria element in the hierarchy. 3. !ggregate the o"erall score of each alternati"e.

Hie*(*6'y: The hierarchy reflects the goals and concerns in the decision9 making solution to set up criteria for comparing different alternati"es.

e.g.E .or comparing different alternati"e technologies A! Proprietary system and (on"entional systemB to select a formwork system for a particular pro ect.

?e"el - is decision makers& general criteria for e"aluation. !t le"el 1 each criteria are di"ided into specific e"aluation attributes. ;ften each attributes are further sub9di"ided at se"eral intermediate le"els. The alternate solutions will occupy the last le"el of hierarchy. (omparison of elements at each le"el of hierarchy regarding relati"e importance with respect to relati"e impact and the elements at ad acent upper le"el are made.

#(i*8i&e 62m9(*i&2%: The comparisons are made pair9wise. .or comparison of elements in a group on one le"el of hierarchy with respect to an element at the ne=t higher le"el a n = n matri= is constructed# where n is the number of elements in the group. Elements of the group are put in the heading row and in the heading column of the matri=. 'sing a predetermined scale same group elements are compared one against the another in their preference. The le"el of importance is e=pressed on a 0 point scale. This scale should be consistently used e"erywhere in the pair9wise comparison process to maintain consistency. The scale of comparison is gi"en below.

T(b5e N2: 14;

Le<e5 23 im92*t(%6e by 8ei)'t()e 3(6t2*& ) 1 , 4 0 -#3#+#/ De3i%iti2%

Equal importance 8eak importance of one o"er the other Essential or strong importance 2ery strong or demonstrated importance !bsolute importance %ntermediate "alues between ad acent scale "alues

The ratings in pair9wise comparison will be inserted into the matri=. The elements in the upper right triangle of the matri= are e=actly the reciprocals of the elements in the lower left triangle. The largest eigen "alue is then sol"ed as a measure of the consistency of the pair9wise comparison in the matri=.

$ormalised eigen "ector components for e"ery comparison matri= is found out and is used in the aggregation process to determine o"erall priority ordering of alternati"es# to calculate principal eigen "ector. A))*e)(ti2% 23 62m9(*i&2% *e&u5t&: The aggregation of comparison results which are in the form of normalised eigen "ectors is accomplished by means of matri= multiplication in a bottom up fashion. S2u*6e& 23 i%32*m(ti2% 32* e<(5u(ti2%: To determine different attributes of the hierarchy and their priorities# group discussion is preferred within the organisation so as to incorporate "arious interests and concerns of the organisation. !s choosing any alternati"e requires large in"estment for the organisation. @ood

communication is required among departments like finance# technical de"elopments# safety etc. (omparing alternati"es by gi"ing weightage to different attributes largely depends on knowledge# e=perience and

anticipation. Since different e=perts may ha"e different desire on the weightage factors so group response from questionnaire reflects consensus of opinion and may be used as basis of e"aluation.

14> Met'2d: A##LICATION OF A4H4# IN FORMWORK SELECTION4 Here# in this thesis only middle le"el contractor has been considered and he is going to undertake only residential# commercial and institutional building as his pro ect. So the contractor is supposed to gi"e his preference of importance on a 0 point scale basis among the factors as mentioned before depending on the type of pro ects he is going to undertake and his financial condition to afford the proprietary system.

The following tables indicates the preference of the middle le"el contractor depending on his pro ect type and financial condition.

T(b5e N2: 14=

:%S* .!(T;:S SJSTEM :E?%!6%?%TJ SJSTEM S!.ETJ SJSTEM :E?%!6%?%TJ ) SJSTEM S!.ETJ 5., )

T(b5e N2: 14.

(;ST .!(T;: %$%T%!? %$2ESTME$T ;PT. < M!%$TE$!$(E ETPE$(E / )

%$%T%!? %$2ESTME$T ;PT. < M!%$TE$!$(E ETPE$(E

) 5.)-,

T(b5e N2: 140

PE:.;:M!$(E .!(T;: >'!?%TJ PE:.;:M!$(E S(HED'?E PE:.;:M!$(E SJSTEM .?ET%6%?%TJ >'!?%TJ PE:.;:M!$(E ) S(HED'?E PE:.;:M!$(E 1 SJSTEM .?ET%6%?%TJ 5.,

5.111

5.-,

T(b5e N2: 14>

(;$ST:!%$T .!(T;: M!$P;8E: :E>'%:EME$T S%TE SP!(E :E>D. M!TE:%!? .?ET%6%?%TJ M!$P;8E: :E>'%:EME$T ) S%TE SP!(E :E>D. M!TE:%!? .?ET%6%?%TJ ,

5.-

) 5.111

1 )

T(b5e N2: 14?

;2E:!?? .!(T;:S :%S* .!(T;:S PE:.;:M!$(E .!(T;: (;$ST:!%$T .!(T;: (;ST .!(T;: :%S* .!(T;:S PE:.;:M!$(E .!(T;: 5., ) (;$ST:!%$T .!(T;: 1 , (;ST .!(T;:

) -

5.111 ).,

5.111

5.-

5.)3-/

5.+++

!gain based upon formwork knowledge base# the ?<T Doka Proprietary system and (on"entional systems are e"aluated by weightage factors# for each specified factors# to show the dominance of one o"er the other.

T(b5e N2: 141

;2E: !?? .!(T;:S ?<T D;*! SJSTEM , , , , , 3 1 ) ) ) (;$2E$T%;$!? SJSTEM ) ) ) ) ) ) ) , , ,

:%S* .!(T;:

SJSTEM :E?%!6%?%TJ SJSTEM S!.ETJ

PE:.;:M!$(E .!(T;:

>'!?%TJ PE:.;:M!$(E S(HED'?E PE:.;:M!$(E SJSTEM .?ET%6%?%TJ

(;$ST:!%$T .!(T;:

M!$P;8E: :E>'%:ED S%TE SP!(E :E>'%:EME$T M!TE:%!? !2!%?!6%?%TJ

(;ST .!(T;:

%$%T%!? %$2ESTME$T ;PT. < M!%$T!$(E ETPE$(E

G*2u9 Iud)eme%t :

.rom the gi"en weight age factors the principal eigen "alues are found out. (omparison of %nitial in"estment and ;perating and maintenance e=pense on (ost factorE

T(b5e N2: 14@

(;ST .!(T;: %$%T%!? %$2ESTME$T ;PT. < M!%$TE$!$(E ETPE$(E / )

%$%T%!? %$2ESTME$T ;PT. < M!%$TE$!$(E ETPE$(E P:%$(%P!? E%@E$ 2E(T;:

) 5.)-,

5./0

5.))

(omparison of >uality performance# Schedule performance and System

fle=ibility on Performance factorE

T(b5e N2: 14 :/
PE:.;:M!$(E .!(T;: >'!?%TJ PE:.;:M!$(E S(HED'?E PE:.;:M!$(E SJSTEM .?ET%6%?%TJ P:%$(%P!? E%@$ 2E(T;: >'!?%TJ PE:.;:M!$(E ) S(HED'?E PE:.;:M!$(E 1 SJSTEM .?ET%6%?%TJ 5.,

5.111

5.-,

5.1-

3 5.)-

) 5.,+

(omparison of Manpower requirement# Site space requirement and Material a"ailability on (onstraint factorE

T(b5e :14::
(;$ST:!%$T .!(T;: M!$P;8E: :E>'%:EME$T ) 5.5.,/ S%TE SP!(E :E>D. ) 5.111 5.1) M!TE:%!? .?ET%6%?%TJ , 1 ) 5.))

M!$P;8E: :E>'%:EME$T S%TE SP!(E :E>D. M!TE:%!? .?ET%6%?%TJ P:%$(%P!? E%@$ 2E(T;:

(omparison of System reliability and System safety on :isk factor. .actorE T(b5e N2: 14:;
:%S* .!(T;:S SJSTEM :E?%!6%?%TJ SJSTEM S!.ETJ P:%$(%P!? E%@$ 2E(T;: SJSTEM :E?%!6%?%TJ ) 5.11 SJSTEM S!.ETJ 5., ) 5.+4

(omparison of :isk factor# Performance factor# (onstraint factor and (ost factor on ;"er all .actors

T(b5e N2: 14:=

;2E:!?? .!(T;:S :%S* .!(T;:S PE:.;:M!$(E .!(T;: (;$ST:!%$T .!(T;: (;ST .!(T;: P:%$(%P!? E%@$ 2E(T;: :%S* .!(T;:S PE:.;:M!$(E .!(T;: 5., ) (;$ST:!%$T .!(T;: 1 , (;ST .!(T;:

) -

5.111 ).,

5.111

5.-

5.)3-/

1 5.)4

5.+++ 5.1)

4 5.5+

) 5.3+

(omparison of alternati"e systems in their impact on %nitial %n"estmentE

T(b5e N2: 14:.

%$%T%!? %$2ESTME$T ?<T D;*! (;$2E$T%;$!? P:%$(%P!? E%@E$ 2E(T;: ?<T D;*! ) + 5.)3 (;$2E$T%;$!? 5.)/ ) 5./+

(omparison of alternati"e systems in their impact on ;perating and Maintenance e=penses T(b5e N2: 14:0
;PE:!T%$@ < M!%$TE$!$(E ETPE$(ES ?<T D;*! (;$2E$T%;$!? P:%$(%P!? E%@E$ 2E(T;: ?<T D;*! (;$2E$T%;$!?

) 1 5.-,

5.11 ) 5.4,

(omparison of alternati"e systems in their impact on >uality performance

T(b5e N2: 14:>

>'!?%TJ PE:.;:M!$(E ?<T D;*! (;$2E$T%;$!? P:%$(%P!? E%@E$ 2E(T;: ?<T D;*! ) 5.5./1 (;$2E$T%;$!? , ) 5.)4

(omparison of alternati"e systems in their impact on Schedule performance T(b5e N2: 14:?
S(HED'?E PE:.;:M!$(E ?<T D;*! (;$2E$T%;$!? P:%$(%P!? E%@E$ 2E(T;: ?<T D;*! ) 5.5./1 (;$2E$T%;$!? , ) 5.)4

(omparison of alternati"e systems in their impact on System fle=ibility T(b5e N2: 14:1
SJSTEM .?ET%6%?%TJ ?<T D;*! (;$2E$T%;$!? P:%$(%P!? E%@E$ 2E(T;: ?<T D;*! ) 5.5./1 (;$2E$T%;$!? , ) 5.)4

(omparison of alternati"e systems in their impact on Manpower requirement.

T(b5e N2: 14:@

M!$P;8E: :E>'%:EME$T ?<T D;*! (;$2E$T%;$!? P:%$(%P!? E%@E$ 2E(T;: ?<T D;*! ) 5.-, 5./ (;$2E$T%;$!? 3 ) 5.-

(omparison of alternati"e systems in their impact on Site space requirement.

T(b5e N2: 14;/

S%TE SP!(E :E>'%:EME$T D;*! (;$2E$T%;$!? P:%$(%P!? E%@E$ 2E(T;: D;*! ) 5.11 5.4, (;$2E$T%;$!? 1 ) 5.-,

(omparison of alternati"e systems in their impact on Material a"ailability.

T(b5e N2: 14;:

M!TE:%!? !2!%?!6%?%TJ D;*! (;$2E$T%;$!? P:%$(%P!? E%@E$ 2E(T;: D;*! ) , 5.)4 (;$2E$T%;$!? 5.) 5./1

(omparison of alternati"e systems in their impact on System :eliability.

T(b5e N2: 14;;

SYSTEM RELIABILITY DOKA CONVENTIONAL PRINCIPAL EIGEN VECTOR DOKA 1 0.2 0.8 CONVENTIONAL 5 1 0.1!

(omparison of alternati"e systems in their impact on System Safety.

T(b5e N2: 14;=

SJSTEM S!.ETJ D;*! (;$2E$T%;$!? P:%$(%P!? E%@E$ 2E(T;: D;*! ) 5.5./1 (;$2E$T%;$!? , ) 5.)4

A))*e)(ti2% 23 e<(5u(ti2% *e&u5t&: The same le"el eigen"ectors are first arranged in a matri= and the comparison results are aggregated in a bottom9up fashion by means of matri= multiplication. The matri= containing the "ectors for comparison of the two alternati"es with respect to the two cost factors A%nitial in"estment# ;perational < Maintenance costB isE

!U

5.)3 5./+

5.-, 5.4,

The relati"e importance of %nitial in"estment# ;perational < Maintenance cost on (ost factors is represented by "ector 6.

6U

0.8" 0.11

2ector ( thus represents the relati"e impact of the two alternati"es based on (ost factor which isE CMAABM 0.1521 0.8#!"

Similarly# the matri= containing "ectors for comparison of the two alternati"es with respect to the two :isk factors ASystem reliability and System safetyB is DU 0.8 0.1! 0.8 0.1!

The relati"e importance of System reliability and System safety on :isk factors is represented by "ector E. EU 0. 0.$!

2ector . thus represents the relati"e impact of the two alternati"es based on :isk factor which is .UD=EU 0.8 0.1! Similarly# the matri= containing "ectors for comparison of the two alternati"es with respect to the three Performance factors A>uality performance# Schedule performance and System fle=ibilityB isE 0.8 @U 0.1! 0.8 0.1! 0.8 0.1!

The relati"e importance of >uality performance# Schedule performance and System fle=ibility on Performance factors is represented by "ector H. 0 2 HU 0.12 0.5$

2ector % thus represents the relati"e impact of the two alternati"es based on Performance factor which is E 0.8 %U@=HU 0.1!

Similarly# the matri= containing "ectors for comparison of the two alternati"es with respect to the three (onstraint factors AManpower requirement# Site space requirement and Material a"ailabilityB is E

0.8 KU 0.2

0.!5 0.25

0.1! 0.8

The relati"e importance of Manpower requirement# Site space requirement and Material a"ailability on (onstraint factors is represented by "ector *. 0.58 *U 0. 1 0.11

2ector ? thus represents the relati"e impact of the two alternati"es based on (onstraint factor which is E ?UK=*U 0.!152 0.28#8

The obtained four sets of o"erall priorities# "ectors F$ I and L indicate that the :isk factor# Performance factor and the (onstraint factor of the Q?<TF Doka Properietary systemF are higher than Q(on"entional systemF while "ector ( indicate that the (ost factor of the &?<T Doka Proprietary system& are lower than &(on"entional system&. The components of the (# .# % and ? "ectors are combined in the matri= M. MU 0.1521 0.8 0.8#!" 0.1! 0.8 0.1! 0.!152 0.28#8

!t the top le"el# the relati"e importance of the (ost factor# :isk factor# Performance factor and the (onstraint factors is represented by "ector $E 0.#$ $U 0.1! 0. 1 0.0$

The final e"aluation result for the &?<T Doka Proprietary system& and the &(on"entional system& is gi"en by "ector PE 0.51128 #MMANM 0.48872

The results show that the final score for the &?<T Doka Proprietary system& option outweighs that for the &(on"entional system&. Hence it would be worth while for middle le"el contractors to opt for &?<T Doka Proprietary system& for using in building pro ects.

! flowchart showing the decision making process in selecting the formwork system is shown in !ppendi= noE %%.

A##LICATION OF A4H4# IN FORMWORK SHEATHING MATERIAL

Ste9 : ;ut of the most probable selected materials# selection is done by applying !.H.P A!nalytical Hierarchy ProcessB.

8eightage "alue is gi"en for each forrnwork material with respect to each factors based on .ormwork knowledge base. This weightage "alue shows the degree of e=cellence of one material o"er the other with respect to each factors. The weightage "alue is gi"en below.

T(b5e N2: @4;

MATERIAL +WEIGTHAGE FACTORS, +9*i%6i9(5 ei)e% <e6t2*, Stiffness $os. of :euse (ostCuseCsq.m in :s. Surface finish .ireeresistanace Easenessin cutting Thermal insulation Easeness in assembly Surface Defects Probable 'se A&&(m #5y #L WOOD #5(&ti6 62(ted #5y )A5.)4B )A5.)-,B 3A5./B )A5.,B )A5.)4B ,A5./1B ,A5./1B )A5.)4B )A5.)4B 6eamCSlab# column# footing# staircase M(*i%e #5y Stee5 GR#

)A5.)4B )A5.)-,B 3A5./B )A5.,B )A5.)4B ,A5./1B ,A5./1B )A5.)4B )A5.)4B 6eamCSlabC column# .ooting# Staircase

)A5.)4B )A5.)-,B 3A5./B )A5.,B )A5.)4B ,A5./1B ,A5./1B )A5.)4B )A5.)4B 6eamCSlab# column# footing# staircase

)A5.)4B )A5.)-,B 3A5./B )A5.,B )A5.)4B ,A5./1B ,A5./1B )A5.)4B )A5.)4B 6eamCSlab# column# footing# staircase

,A5./1B 4A5./4,B )A5.-B )A5.,B ,A5./1B )A5.)4B )A5.)4B ,A5./1B ,A5./1B 6eamCSlabCc olumn# .ooting# Staircase

The contractor is supposed to gi"e his preference of importance among the factors considered depending on the &Pro ect Data& i.e. Pro ect requirement# constraints and his financial condition on a 09 point scale basis.

T(b5e N2: @4=

8eightage .actor Stiffness $os of reuse 5.11 ) (ost Cuse Surface finish .ire resistance Ease in cutting ) 1 Thermal insulation Ease in assembly Material a"ailability

Stiffness $os of reuse (ost Cuse Surface finish .ire resistance Ease in cutting Thermal insulation Ease in assembly Material a"ailability

) 1

5.11 )

5.11 )

1 ,

1 ,

5.11 ).11

5.-, )

1 1

) )

) )

) )

3 ,

3 ,

).11 ).11

) )

5.11

5.-

5.-,

5.-

5.,

5.-,

5.-

5.11

5.,

5.11

5.,

5.11

5.11

5.-

5.-,

5.-

5.,

5.-,

5.-

5.4,

5.4,

5.4,

).11

The relati"e impact of the two alternati"es APlywood and Steel plates B on the 0 factors is gi"en in the matri= below according to the table noE 0.1! 0.8 0.125 0.8 0.8!2 0.2 0.5 0.5 0.1! 0.8 0.8 0.1! 0.8 0.1! 0.1! 0.8 0.1! 0.8

!U

!t the top le"el the relati"e importance of the 0 factors is represented by "ector 6 U

0.0$ 0.1! 0.1$ 0.1! 0.0 0.0$ 0.0 0.15 0.1!

The final e"aluation result is represented by "ector (. 0.37865 (U!=6U 0.62135

The results show that the final score for the &Steel plates& option outweighs the &Plywood& option to be used as form material for beam9slab casting. So it would be wise to use Steel plates& rather than &Plywood& in the pro ect as form material for beam9slab casting.

CHA#TER @ CONCLUSION %t is by this thesis an effort has been made to help any contractor in a decision making process for selecting the most appropriate form material to be used at site# taking into consideration of all the possible factors that are required to be considered during the selection process. Thus it will help them to use the most appropriate material taking into consideration their intuition and wishes too.

This thesis will also help the middle le"el contractor in taking decision while choosing between the &Proprietary system& and the &(on"entional system& taking into consideration their financial condition and the pros and cons of using the Proprietary system o"er the (on"entional system. This decision making process can also be applied in other cases also where a number of factors are in"ol"ed and decision makers intuition and wishes need to be considered.

Selection of the most appropriate formwork system is a "ery complicated work since it in"ol"es a number of quantifiable and inquantifiable factors. So# the suggested process may not be the most appropriate method for selection. Selection of forrnwork system depends on formwork knowledge base. So the more knowledge base can be prepared the more appropriate selection would be.

REFERENCES

RATIONAL DESIGN OF SHORING-TOWER-BASED FORMWORK By A<i(d S'(9i*($ Membe*$ ASCE

NEUROFORMDNEURAL NETWORK S STEM FOR !ERTICAL FORMWORK SELECTION

FuEEy LOGIC FOR E!ALUATING ALTERNATI!E CONSTRUCTION TECHNOLOG

!e*ti6(5 &5i932*mi%) (& ( 62%&t*u6ti2% t225 I%t*2du6i%) 62%t*255ed 9e*me(bi5ity 32*m82*7 L F T DOKA F2*m82*7 &y&tem BSL 6(t(52)ue Re5(ti<e 62&t& 23 Site-m(de (%d 9*29*iet(*y F2*m82*7 by R4M4W4 H2*%e* F D4C4 T'2m&2%

C2%diti2%& (%d C2%&t*(i%t& i% t'e F2*m82*7 Sy&tem&

32* C2m95eA Hi)'-*i&e Bui5di%) K 8it' 6(&e& 3*2m H2%) K2%) A *e92*t '(& bee% 9*e9(*ed by A4C4I4 62mmittee =.? 8884&6ie%6edi*e6t462m

8884)22)5e462m

).

!"iad Shapira# G:ational design of shoring Itower based formworkG# .Kournal of (onstruction Engineering and Management September&0,# pp9-,,9-+5.

-.

6arfoot Kack# G Mould system firm&s decade of de"elopmentG# (oncrete March&/+# pp91)9)3.

1.

6S 9 ,041 G (ode of practice for access and working scaffold and special scaffold structures in steelG

3. ,. +.

6S 9 ,04, G(ode of practice for falsework.G 6S9 ,,54 GMethod of test for falsework equipmentG (amble 2ictor# G :educing concrete pressure with Hy9 :ibG# (oncrete MarchC!pril &03# pp9 -4 I-0.

4.

(arter T. Dedolph Kr. and Edward K. Kaseiskis# G%nno"ati"e wall system for construction industryG Kournal of !rchitectural Engineering

December&04#pp9)4+9)/3. /. Eur %ng Peter . Pallett# G 'pdating good formwork practiceG# (oncrete MayCKune&0, # 0. Eur %ng Peter . Pallett# G%ntroduction to formwork sceneG# (oncrete Marchl!pril& 03 pp9 ))9)-. )5. Eur %ng Peter . Pallett# G8ood based panel products in formworkG# (oncrete Marchl!pril&03# pp9 3)93+. )). )-. G.ull tunnel formwork technologyG %.(.% 6ulletin&04.. $oE ,/# pp949)3 G.ormwork 9 a guide to good practiceG# (oncrete Kournal# Kanuary&/+

pp9 -49-/. )1. Hart : %an# G (oncrete release agents # associated materials and surface finishesG# (oncrete MarchC!pril &03# pp911913. )3. Homer :.M.8# Thompson D.(# G :elati"e costs of Site made and Proprietary formworkG# 6uilding and En"ironment& /) 2ol. )+ $o E3 pp9 -31 9 -,5. ),. lorns E Martin# G$ew pontoon technology fa"ours all concrete constructionG# Tunnels and Tunneling Kuly&03# pp9 ,0 I+). )+. %:( 9 /4 G@uidelines for the design and erection of false work for road bridges. )4. )/. %S 9 ))+) GSpecification for steel tubes for structural purposeG. %S 9 )-10 G Specification for mild steel tubes# tubulars and other wrought fittingsG. )0. -5. -). --. -1. %S 9 -4,5 GSpecification for steel scaffoldingsG %S 9 100 G(lassification of commercial timbersG %S 9 3005 G Plywood for concrete shuttering workG. %S9 1114 GSpecification for 6allis for general purposeG. Koon H.Paek and Kong H. ;ck# G%nno"ati"e building construction techniqueE Modified 'pCDown methodG# Kournal of (onstruction Engineering and Management Kune&0+ pp9 )3)9)3+. -3. *amarathi 2.Sagar # Sandi"o 6. 2ictor and *umar :.T. Soundar G$euroform9 $eural $etwork system for "ertical formwork selectionG# Kournal of (omputing in (i"il Engineering 2ol E+# $o9- !pril &0- pp )4/9 )00 -,. ?<T Doka formwork system catalogue by E(( construction group.

-+.

?awson :.M.# G:ecent trends in (omposite constructionG# (oncrete .ebruary& /+ pp9 ,99+.

-4.

?i9 (hung (hao and Miroslaw K. Skibniewski# G.u77y logic for e"aluating alternati"e construction technologyG. Kournal of (onstruction Engineering and Management KulyC!ugust )00/# pp9 -04 to 153

-/.

?i9(hung (hao# GE"aluation of ad"anced construction technology with !.H.P methodG# Kournal of (onstruction Engineering and Management 2ol9 il / $o 1 September&0- pp9,449,01.

-0.

Peeks

D#

G(oncrete

suspended

flooring

systemG#

(oncrete

.ebruary&/+# 15. Phadke !.6# G.ormwork special applicationsG# %.(.% 6ulletin $oE 3+ March&03 pp9l,9l+. 1). 1).Photios @.%oannou and Kulio (. Martine7# G(omparison of construction alternati"es using matched simulation e=perimentsG# Kournal of (onstruction Engineering and Management September&0+# pp9 -1)9 -3). 1-. :oss P.S# GSlip forming I% and %%G# (oncrete Kournal# Kanuary&/+ pp9 -)9--# -,9-+. 11. 13. Scaffolding and .ormwork catalogue published by 6ritish scaffolding. Shaifer ?ifson# GDecision and risk analysis for construction

managementG 1,. Subramaniam $# GEconomy in building constructionG ?(.% 6ulletin noE,5 KanuaryP March&0,# pp9 ),9 -). 1+. 14. 8ilshere (.K# G.ormworkG 8ilson Da"id# G(ontrolled permeability formworkG# (oncrete

Marchl!pril&03 pp9 -59--.