The “nine dots” puzzle

The goal of the puzzle is to link all 9 dots using four

continuous straight lines or less.
 The “nine dots” puzzle
The goal of the puzzle is to link all 9 dots using four
continuous straight lines or less.
 IMPORT

Port Klang, Selangor

EXPORT
A Feasibility Study on
Container Construction
in Malaysia

Dr Myzatul Aishah Kamarazaly

Mr Thean Hai Xu
Sr Azrina Md Yaakob

School of Architecture, Building and Design

Faculty of Built Environment, Engineering,
Technology and Design
Taylor’s University
Outline:
• Introduction
• The Issue
• Gap in Literature Reviews
• Objectives
• Conceptual Framework
• Key findings
• Conclusion
Introduction
Standard
High CubeShipping
ShippingContainer:
Container:

9.5
8.5 ft / 2.896
2.591 m
8.0 ft / 2.438 m 20 ft / 6.096 m
40 ft / 12.192m
 Illustration of the corrosion product layers identified on steels
exposed to rural and marine atmospheres for the periods of up to
five years
The Issue
 Maritime Transport
Report 2015

• Global seaborne shipment

volume increased 3.4%
• Containerized trade
consists of 15% of total
trade
• Containerized trade
increased 5.3%, reached
171 million TEUs
Trade Imbalanced Scenario

IMPORT

EXPORT
Container statistics in Port Klang, Selangor
(Source: Port Klang Authority, 2016)

Year 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

Import 1,794,508 1,872,867 1,907,497 1,962,431 1,992,460

Export 1,720,542 1,821,995 1,860,613 1,942,773 1,962,237

Surplus 73,966 50,872 46,884 19,658 30,223

(TEUs)
Keetwonen-
Tempohousing
-Netherlands
CC4441
-Tokyo, Japan
The Kabin
-Kuala Selangor, Selangor
Templer Park
Rainforest Retreat
-Rawang, Selangor
Chaiwalla & Co.
-The Curve, Selangor
Gap in Literature Reviews
Literature Reviews
LIMITATIONS POTENTIALS

• Issues of toxicity of container - • Life cycle assessment of shipping

treated with numerous chemical container (Islam, Guomin, Suheeva
coating (Pagnotta, 2011) & Bhuiyan, 2016)

• Limitation of sizes: Shipping • Analysis of shipping container

container has globalized the building structures (Giriunas, Sezen
production in every scope except & Dupaix, 2012)
for housing – dimensionally houses
are bigger than boxes (Alter, 2011) • Container architecture in the hot-
humid tropics (Ismail, Al-Obaidi,
• Limitation in taking advantage of Abdul Rahman & Ahmad, 2015)
passive strategies like thermal
mass if maintaining container
aesthetic (Hogan, 2015)

• Gaps:
> Feasibility of container
construction
Objectives
The study aims to achieve the following
objectives:-

i. To identify the criteria to be considered prior

implementing the container construction in
Malaysia.
ii. To determine the significant benefits which
influence the adoption of container construction in
Malaysia.
iii. To ascertain the possible constraints associated
with the container construction in Malaysia.
iv. To explore the feasibility of implementation of
container construction in Malaysia
Container architecture design by Ganti Associates (GA)
(Source: Rosenfield, 2015)
Container model result for loading scenario 1
(Source: Giriunas et al., 2012)
Conceptual Framework
Conceptual framework of
container construction
Research Methodology
Scope & Limitation:

• The contractor firms which mainly involve in

building works in Selangor.
• The firms shall be registered under Construction
Industry Development Board (CIDB) Malaysia,
ranged from Grade 1 to Grade 7.
Research method:
• Descriptive survey

Data gathering stage:

• Questionnaires (open-ended & closed)
-random stratified sampling

• Semi-structured interview
-purposive sampling

Sampling frame:
• Building Contractor (G1 – G7)
Questionnaires Interviews

Random Stratified Purposive

Sampling Sampling
Data Analysis

• Content analysis: Frequency counts

• Multi attribute analysis: Mean ratings (MR) of respondent

groupings & Relative Importance Index (RII) of variables being
rated
Multi Attribute analytical technique

• Mean Rating (MR): indicates average rating point of

respondents for the level of importance
5

MR j = ෍ R pjki x %R jk
k=1

• Relative Importance Index (RII): to compare MR

values of the variables in a subset
Mi
RIIi = N
σi=1 Mi
Research Findings
Grade of Contractor Firm

3, 4%

12, 18%

27, 41%

3, 5%

9, 14%

6, 9% 6, 9%

G1 G2 G3 G4 G5 G6 G7
 Findings in relation to Objective 1:
Criteria to be considered prior implementing the container
construction

Criteria of implementing the container construction MR RII Rank

Type of insulation to achieve indoor comfort 4.18 0.109 1

Compliance to local authorities requirements 4.00 0.104 2

Shipping container’s condition 4.00 0.104 3

Building type 3.91 0.102 4

Transportability of shipping container 3.82 0.099 5

Adaptability of local climate 3.82 0.099 6

Design of building in terms of space and shape 3.82 0.099 7

Location of the project 3.68 0.096 8

Installation method for plumbing and services 3.64 0.095 9

Availability of shipping container 3.59 0.093 10

 Criteria to be considered prior implementing the container construction

5
Builder’s perspective:
4.18 - Ceramic paint: best solution among
4 4
4 3.91 3.82 3.82 other
3.82type of insulation
3.68 efficiency
- Improved thermal 3.64 while
3.59
remain exposed to original surface
of container
3
Botes (2013) & Ismail (2015):
- Adequate & proper insulation is
2 essential for container architecture
especially for hot0humid country

Smith (2006):
1 - Recycled container’s condition
should be a concern as the
container was facing a high chance
0 of superficial damages caused by
Type of Compliance to Building type Transportability Adaptability of Design (shape & Location of the Installation of
insulation LA's
Shipping
container’s local climate bad packing project
space) & shipping event.Availability
M&E services shipping
of

requirements condition container

 Findings in relation to Objective 2:
Significant benefits which influenced the adoption of
the container construction

Benefits of implementing the container construction MR RII Rank

Reduces the project duration 4.27 0.125 1

Minimizes construction wastage 4.09 0.120 2

Overall cost saving 3.96 0.116 3

Provides affordable houses 3.96 0.116 4

Sustainable and green approach 3.91 0.114 5

Minimizes the environmental impact 3.68 0.108 6

High strength and durable 3.55 0.104 7

Flexibility in design 3.55 0.104 8

Enhances aesthetic value 3.23 0.094 9

 Benefits of implementing the container construction

5
Respondents greatly emphasized on
4.27 time factors compared to cost &
4.09 quality
3.96 3.96 3.91
4
3.68
Container construction can be
3.55 3.55
completed within shorter period 3.23
– 2 to
3 months
3
Affordable housing solution

2 Fast product delivery with a lower cost

– triggered the innovative trend of the
container construction
1 Islam et al (2016):
- Container house provides a fast
project delivery due to it’s
standardized and effective factory
0
Reduces the Minimizes Overall cost Provides Sustainable controlled
Minimizes manufacturing
the High strength Flexibility in process.
Enhances
project construction saving affordable and green environmental and durable design aesthetic
duration wastage houses approach impact value
 Findings in relation to Objective 3:
Potential constraints associated with the container
construction

Constraints of implementing the container construction MR RII Rank

Inflexibility in design 3.68 0.135 1

Structural failure due to over modification 3.55 0.130 2

Limited by local planning regulation 3.55 0.130 3

Not approved by fire certification requirement 3.50 0.128 4

Increase in pre-planning work 3.36 0.123 5

Increase in project coordination 3.36 0.123 6

Lack of technical ability 3.23 0.118 7

High project risk 3.05 0.112 8

 Constraints of implementing the container construction

5
• Additional cost

4
• Extension & combination of
3.68 containers overcome the sizes
3.55 3.55 3.5
3.36 limitation
3.36
3.23
3.05
3
• Reinforcement & installation of
extra supporting members are able
to minimize the impact on the
2
design

0
Inflexibility in Structural Limited by Not Increase in Increase in Lack of High project
design failure due to local approved by pre-planning project technical risk
over planning fire work coordination ability
modification regulation certification
requirement
 Findings in relation to Objective 4:
Feasibility of implementation of Container
Construction in Malaysia

35 • Current state of container 33

construction being recognized in
30 Malaysia’s construction industry
24
25 • Great potential for future
development
20

15

10

5 3 3 3

0
Strongly Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree
disagree
Significant contribution:

FEASIBILITY
Recommendations:

• In-depth case study of container project especially

housing

• Life cycle costing of container project

• Comparison between conventional and container

construction
Conclusion
THANK YOU
References:
Giriunas, K., Sezen, H., & Dupaix, R. B. (2012). Evaluation, modeling, and analysis of
shipping container building structures. Engineering Structures,43, 48-57.

Islam, H., Guomin, Z., Setunge, S., & Bhuiyan, M. A. (2016). Life cycle assessment of
shipping container home: a sustainable construction. Energy and
Buildings, 128, 673-685

Ismail, M., Al-Obaidi, K. M., Abdul Rahman, A. M. & Ahmad, M. I. (2015). Container
Architecture in the Hot-Humid Tropics: Potential and Constraints. International
Conference on Environmental Research and Technology, 142-149.

Rosenfield, K. (2015). GA Designs Radical Shipping Container Skyscraper for

Mumbai Slum. Retrieved 9th November 2016 from
http://www.archdaily.com/772414/ga-designs-radical-shipping-container
-skyscraper-for-mumbai-slum

United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) (2015). Review

of Maritime Transport 2015. Retrieved 24th November 2016 from
http://unctad.org/en/PublicationsLibrary/rmt2015_en.pdf