Akyol, B and Resatoglu, R (2019) Investigating the effect of solid and lightweight hollow block slabs on construction cost. Proceedings of Institution of Civil Engineers: Management, Procurement and Law, 172(2), pp. 70-79. ISSN 17514304
Abstract
In the design of reinforced-concrete buildings, solid and lightweight hollow block slabs are commonly preferred. In general, it is believed that the cost of lightweight hollow block slabs is higher than that of solid slabs. This research aims to examine the effect of solid and lightweight hollow block slabs on construction cost both in a parametric study and in actual buildings. In the parametric study, both the x and y directions included a variation of two to four spacings, while on the vertical plane an increase up to ten floors has been taken into account, and accordingly construction costs have been compared. Then, ten structures which have solid slabs, whose number of floors was up to ten and which had been designed in accordance with updated earthquake regulations, were chosen to obtain the cost difference when designed with lightweight hollow block slabs. In all examinations, it has been confirmed that lightweight hollow block slabs cost more than solid slabs, creating a 10·49-21·93% cost difference ratio, and that the cost difference ratios obtained from the actual structures also agree with these findings. The study presents increase curves depending on the slab type, modal analyses and strength comparisons.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | structures & design; concrete structures; slabs & plates |
| Index terms: | variation, earthquake, concrete structure, regulation, construction cost |
| Subjects: | structural engineering, political science, financial and cost management, contractual condition, environmental hazards |
| Topics: | Engineering Principles, Governance, Sustainability, Cost Management, Contract Administration |
| Descriptive scope: | 2 PC |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here