INFORMATION TO USERS

This m anuscript has b een reproduced from the m icrofilm m aster. U M I

films the text directly from the original o r copy subm itted. Thus, som e
thesis and dissertation copies are in typew riter face, w hile others m ay
be from any type o f com puter printer.

T he quality o f th is reproduction is dependent upon th e quality o f th e

copy su b m itted . B ro k en o r indistinct p rin t, co lo red or p o o r q u ality
illustrations and photographs, print bleedthrough, substandard m argins,
and im proper alignm ent can adversely affect reproduction.

In th e unlikely ev en t th a t th e a u th o r did not send U M I a co m p lete

m anuscript an d th ere are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if
unauthorized copyright m aterial had to be rem oved, a note will indicate
th e deletion.

O versize m a terials (e.g., m aps, draw ings, ch arts) a re re p ro d u c e d by

sectioning th e original, beginning a t the u p p er left-h an d co rn e r and
continuing from left to right in equal sections with sm all overlaps. E ach
o rig in a l is also p h o to g ra p h e d in o n e ex p o su re a n d is in c lu d e d in
reduced form at th e back o f the book.

P hotographs included in the original m anuscript have b een reproduced

x erographically in this copy. H ig h er quality 6" x 9” b lack an d w hite
p hotographic prints are available for any photographs o r illustrations
appearing in this copy for an additional charge. C ontact U M I directly
to order.

U niversity Microfilms International

A Beil & Howell information C om p an y
3 0 0 North Z e e b R oad. Ann Arbor. Ml 4 8 1 0 6 -1 3 4 6 USA
3 13 7 6 1 -4 7 0 0 8 0 0 5 2 1 -0 6 0 0
 Order Num ber 0230051

A utom ated Interactive Cost Estim ating System for reinforced

concrete building structures

Lee, Hyun-Soo, Ph.D.

The University of Michigan, 1992

UMI
300 N. Zeeb Rd.
Ann Arbor, MI 48106
AUTOM ATED INTERA CTIV E COST ESTIM A TIN G SYSTEM
FOR
REIN FO RCED CO N CRETE BUILDING STRUCTURES

by

Hyun-Soo Lee

A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment

of the requirement for the degree of
Doctor of Philosophy
(Civil Engineering)
in The University of Michigan
1992

Doctoral Committee:

Professor Robert I. Carr, Co-Chairperson

Professor Photios G. Ioannou, Co-Chairperson
Professor Robert E. Johnson
Professor Iris D. Tommelein
 RULES REGARDING TH E USE O F
M ICROFILM ED DISSERTATIONS

M icro film ed o r b o u n d copies o f d o c to ra l d iss e rta tio n s s u b ­

m itte d to T h e U n iv e rsity o f M ich ig an a n d m a d e a v a ila b le th ro u g h
U n iv e rsity M icrofilm s In te rn a tio n a l o r T h e U n iv e rsity o f M ich ig an are
o p e n for in sp ectio n , b u t they are to b e u sed o n ly w ith d u e re g a rd for th e
rig h ts of th e a u th o r. Extensive co p y in g of the d isse rta tio n o r p u b licatio n
o f m a te ria l in excess of s ta n d a rd c o p y rig h t lim its, w h e th e r o r n o t th e
d is s e rta tio n h a s b ee n c o p y rig h te d , m u s t h a v e b ee n a p p ro v e d b y th e
a u th o r as w ell as b y th e D ean o f th e G ra d u a te School. P ro p e r cred it m u st
b e g iv e n to th e a u th o r if an y m a terial fro m th e d iss e rta tio n is u se d in
su b se q u e n t w ritte n or p u b lish ed w ork.
 To
My wife, Jong-Ae
and
My son, Min-Hong
For their love and encouragement

ii
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

"This is not the end.

It is not even
the beginning of the end.
But it is, perhaps,
the end of the beginning."
(Sir Winston Churchill, Nov. 10, 1942)

I would like to express my sincere appreciation to my two advisors, Professor

Robert I. Carr and Professor Photios G. Ioannou, for their kind guidance and
encouragement throughout the doctoral program and their painstaking editing in the
preparation of this dissertation. Their valuable lectures have formed a firm foundation
for formulating and analyzing problems through research. It has been a real pleasure and
privilege to work with them. I would also like to give thanks to Professors Iris D.
Tommelein and Robert E. Johnson for their helpful comments and suggestions.
My special thanks go to the Korean Science and Engineering Foundation (KOSEF)
for providing financial support during the first three years of my graduate studies.
I would like to express my sincere gratitude to Professor Moon-Han Kim at Seoul
National University in Korea and Professor Chang-Keun Choi at Korean Advanced
Institute of Technology (KAIST), because without them I would never have been able to
come to The University of Michigan for my graduate study. They taught me what a true
professional is, and set an example I have tried to follow in my own professional life.
I also want to thank a special group of people whose work many times is not
appreciated enough and who were always there for me, when I needed their help: first, all
doctoral students in the Construction Management program, who spent many hours
discussing and reviewing my work at every stage of the Ph.D. study; second, all Korean
colleagues in the Civil and Environmental Engineering Department, who exemplified the
meanings of care, generosity, and true friendship; and third. Teaching Assistants in the
Technical Communication Department for their editing assistance.
I also wish to express my special thanks to my parents and parents-in-law for their
love, support, and confidence in me throughout my graduate study.
Finally, but most importantly, I am grateful to my wife, Jong-Ae (Vivian), and my
son, Min-Hong (Daniel) for their sustained patience, loving encouragement and gentle
understanding in the completion of the doctoral program.
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

DEDICATION .................................................................................................................. ii
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS .............................................................................................. iii
LIST OF FIGURES ........................................................................................................ viii
LIST OF TABLES .......................................................................................................... x
LIST OF APPENDICES ................................................................................................ xi
CHAPTER
I. IN T R O D U C T IO N ......................................................................................... 1
1.1 Construction Cost Estimating
1.2 Problem Statement
1.3 Research Objective and Scope
1.4 Dissertation Outline
II. BA C K G RO U N D ............................................................................................ 9
2.1 Cost Estimating Practice
2.1.1 Approximate Esti matin g
2.1.2 Detailed Estimating
2.2 Previous Efforts for Developing Estimating System
2.2.1 Statistical Approaches
2.2.2 Computerized Approaches
2.3 Summary
i n . CONCEPTUAL SYSTEM FR A M E W O R K ............................................. 20
3.1 System Structure
3.2 Reinforced Concrete Building Design
3.2.1 Reinforced Concrete Buildings
3.2.2 Design Process
3.2.3 Design Variables
3.3 Concrete Construction Estimating
3.3.1 Overview
3.3.2 Estimating Process
3.4 Assumptions for AICES implementation
3.4.1 Design Assumptions
3.4.2 Estimating Assumptions

v
 3.5 Project Databases
3.5.1 Project-Independent Database
3.5.2 Project-Dependent Database
3.6 Summary
IV. DESIGN M O D IFICA TIO N ........................................................................ 49
4.1 Overview
4.2 Design Modification Procedures
4.2.1 Schematic Design Modification (Level 1)
4.2.2 Preliminary Design Modification (Level 2)
4.2.3 Detailed Design Modification (Level 3)
4.3 Data Processing
4.3.1 Building Parameter Adjustment
4.3.2 Slab Default Design
4.3.3 Column Default Design
4.4 Summary
V. DETAILED COST ESTIM ATING ........................................................... 82
5.1 Overview
5.2 Quantity Takeoff
5.3 Unit Cost Calculation
5.3.1 Material Unit Cost
5.3.2 Labor Unit Cost
5.4 Unit Cost Modification
5.4.1 Material Price Update
5.4.2 Construction Method Change
5.5 Duration Estimating
5.6 Summary
VI. CONSTRUCTION M ETHOD SELECTIO N ......................................... 104
6.1 Introduction to Knowledge-Based Systems
6.2 Construction Knowledge Base Establishment
6.3 Concrete Placing Method Selection
6.3.1 Concrete Placing Methods
6.3.2 Influencing Factors
6.3.3 Consultation Process
6.4 Formwork Type Selection
6.4.1 Formwork Types
6.4.2 Influencing Factors
6.4.3 Consultation Process
6.5 Summary
VIL CASE STUDY ................................................................................................. 122
7.1 Case Study Scope
7.2 Sensitivity Analysis
7.2.1 Slab Hiickness vs. Cost
7.2.2 Column Spacing vs. Cost

vi
 7.2.3 Duration vs. Cost
7.3 S ystem Evaluation
VIU. CONCLUSIONS ........................................................................................... 143
8.1 Research Results
8.2 Research Contributions
8.3 Future Research
APPENDICES .................................................................................................................. 148
BIBLIOGRAPHY ............................................................................................................. 214

vii
 LIST OF FIGURES

Figure
3.1 AICES Structure............................................................................................... 21
3.2 Hierarchical Building Design P ro cess........................................................... 23
3.3 Reinforced Concrete Slab System s................................................................. 27
3.4 Economical Column Spacings for Each Slab System .................................. 29
3.5 Influence Diagram of Design V ariables........................................................ 32
3.6 Project Database Structures and Relations..................................................... 47
4.1 Design Modification Level Relationships...................................................... 49
4.2 Design Modification Level Description ........................................................ 52
4.3 Design Variable Relationships and Progression.......................................... 54
4.4 Schematic Design Modification Flow............................................................. 55
4.5 Building Parameter Input Tem plate................................................................ 56
4.6 Adjusted Building Parameters and Building Layout..................................... 58
4.7 Preliminary Design Modification Flow.......................................................... 60
4.8 Preliminary Design Modification Template................................................... 61
4.9 Design and Cost Estimating O utput................................................................ 62
4.10 Design and Cost Comparison C hart................................................................ 63
4.11 Detailed Design Modification Template ........................................... 65
4.12 Detailed Column Design Tem plate................................................................. 66
4.13 Effective Slab Area for Column Design L o ad .............................................. 78
5.1 Detailed Cost Estimating Process................................................................... 84
5.2 Quantity Takeoff Process................................................................................. 85

viii
5.3 Unit Cost Calculation Process......................................................................... 90
5.4 Formwork Material Unit Cost Calculation P rocess...................................... 94
5.5 Formwork Labor Unit Cost Calculation Process.......................................... 98
5.6 Concrete Placing Method Selection Tem plate............................................... 101
5.7 Concrete Construction C y cle........................................................................... 102
5.8 Concrete Construction Duration C h a rt.......................................................... 103
6.1 Influencing Factors on Concrete Placing M ethods....................................... I l l
6.2 Consultation Flow for Concrete Placing Method Selection ........................ 113
6.3 Influence Diagram for Formwork Selection.................................................. 117
7.1 Slab Cost for Different Thicknesses for Constant Column Spacing 124
7.2 Available Slab Thicknesses for Different Column Spacings....................... 125
7.3 Formwork Cost for Different Slab Thicknesses and Column Spacings 127
7.4 Reinforcing Cost for Different Slab Thicknesses and Column Spacings 128
7.5 Concrete Cost for Different Slab Thicknesses and Column Spacings 128
7.6 Total Slab Cost for Different Slab Thicknesses and Column Spacings 129
7.7 Slab Cost for Different Column Spacings...................................................... 131
7.8 Column Sizes of Each Column Stack for Different Column Spacings 132
7.9 Column Cost for Different Column Spacings............................................... 133
7.10 Total Cost for Different Column Spacings................................... ................. 134
7.11 Formwork Cost for Different Form Types for Different Durations............ 136
7.12 Total Cost for Different Forms vs. Duration (Overhead: $200/day)......... 139
7.13 Total Cost for Different Forms vs. Duration (Overhead: $500/day)........... 139
 LIST OF TABLES

Building Parameters Combination T able........................................... 69

Building Parameter P riority................................................................ 70
Building Parameter C ode..................................................................... 71
Default Building Information D ata..................................................... 72
Default Detailed Slab Design D a ta ..................................................... 76
Detailed Slab Design D a ta ............. ..................................................... 76
Default Detailed Column Design D a ta .............................................. 80
Column Gravity Loads and M om ents................................................ 81
Detailed Slab Cost Estimating Results............................................... 86
Slab Formwork Estimating E xam ple ....................................... 95
Concrete Construction Labor Wage L is t........................................... 97
Slab Quantity and Cost of Each Element for Different Thicknesses 124
Quantity of Each Element per Square Foot of Gross Floor Area .... 130
Durations and Forms Fabricated for Different M odules................... 136
Cost Comparison for Different Formwork Types.............................. 137
Comparison of AICES and Manual Calculation ............................... 141

x
 LIST OF APPENDICES

Appendix
A. Notations............................................................................................................ 149
B. AICES Implementation Tools.......................................................................... 151
C. AICES Database Structures............................................................................. 156
D. AICES Implementation Exam ple.................................................................... 167
E. AICES Screen Menu and Templates............................................................... 172
F. Design Modification Programs........................................................................ 190
G. Detailed Cost Estimating Programs................................................................. 203
H. Concrete Placing Method SelectionPrograms .................................................209

xi
 CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Construction Cost Estimating

The purpose of construction is to provide users with a facility or environment

which has acceptable quality and serviceability within a feasible project budget. The
needed project budget is determined through a cost estimating process. Cost estimating,
which has been defined as the process of predicting the project costs and resource
requirements [Halpin 1985], plays the major role in the decision-making process that
leads from design to construction of a project. Cost estimates are used by all key parties
involved in building construction: by the owner to check the feasibility of the project, by
the designer to evaluate possible design alternatives, and by the constructor for bidding
and budgeting.
Traditionally, cost estimating has been performed manually. The manual process,
however, has many limitations, such as waste o f specialized skill and lack of accuracy
and uniformity. Lack of accuracy is attributed to possible technical errors in
calculations; lack of uniformity results from the manual work performed by different
people. In order to overcome these limitations, there have been many attempts to
automate the cost estimating process, and currently there are numerous cost estimating
systems available in the construction industry. However, there is no system that can
provide the designers with detailed estimates of construction cost and duration during the
design process.

1
 2

Therefore, this research identifies the problems in existing cost estimating systems
and describes an Automated Interactive Cost Estimating System (AICES) that provides
structural designers with detailed estimates of cost and duration during structural design.
AICES allows the users to modify design information to check the cost variations among
their design alternatives.

1.2 Problem Statement

Existing cost estimating systems exhibit three major problems for which proper
solutions must be explored. The first problem is the lack of linkage between the cost
estimating process and the design process. The second problem is the lack of
incorporation of construction decision processes into a cost estimating system. The third
problem is the lack of application of the construction process in the duration estimating.

(1) Lack of linkage between the cost estimating process and the design process

By definition, detailed cost estimates require detailed designs as their input. Such
designs are typically represented in project plans and specifications, which are the final
outputs of design. As a result, it is impossible to get an accurate detailed cost estimate
before the design is complete and to compare alternative designs on that basis during the
design process. During the design process, the designers create several design
alternatives based on design regulations and project budget requirements by modifying
the design parameters. They compare their design alternatives and select that which best
satisfies all design constraints, including regulations and budget. After a design is
completed, the plans and specifications go out for bids. Review of bids received may
show project costs that exceed the budget. Then, the designers have to go back through
the whole process to develop a new design that satisfies the budget requirements. Even
 3

at this stage, designers do not usually have a breakdown of costs that allows good
tradeoffs among redesign alternatives.
Usually, the designers apply a rough cost estimating method to calculate the cost
during the design process. For example, a proposed increase in the square footage of a
building can be assumed to increase the cost roughly proportionally. However, this
method is inaccurate and cannot check how alternative values of each design parameter
affect construction cost.
If a cost estimating process which provides detailed cost estimating were linked
with the design process, the designers could find the cost impact of each design
parameter change quickly and accurately during the design process. Therefore, it is
desirable to link the detailed cost estimating process with the design process, so that
designers can check costs immediately during the design process and with greater
accuracy.

(2) Lack of incorporation of a construction decision process into a cost estimating

system

Ideally, cost estimating should be performed through both a construction decision

process and an algorithmic (procedural) process, but many existing cost estimating
systems do not consider the decision process. This is particularly true of cost estimating
systems that designers can access during design. As a result, the users, who normally do
not have much construction knowledge, rely exclusively on the procedural process. Hie
algorithmic process involves the quantification of construction resources (such as
material, labor, and equipment) for the project, followed by systematic recording of all
details and performing basic mathematical calculations [Ahuja 1988]. Disregard of
decision-making may cause large inaccuracies in cost estimating.
 4

Construction decision-making during cost estimating is very important, because it

affects the unit cost of each cost element. For instance, there are several methods for
placing concrete in a building structure. Each method has its own cost and capability,
and the cost must be balanced with the capability. Ideally, the cost should be kept low
and the capability high, but under some circumstances, capability constraints may require
the higher cost. In construction method selection, capability constraints govern cost
constraints. The required construction method can be selected through a construction
decision process. Construction decision-making during the estimating process is based
on application o f an estimator's judgment to available information.
Traditionally, cost estimating has been dependent on an extremely time-consuming
manual process. These manual tasks are magnified as project size and complexity
increase. The estimators spend a large part o f their time in performing some tasks that do
not require any of their specialized knowledge. In addition to this, the large amount of
manual work, such as the quantity takeoff, may be performed by different people,
resulting not only in a lack of accuracy but also a lack of uniformity in cost estimating.
Based on these problems, there have been many attempts to automate the cost estimating
process, and there are currently many computerized cost estimating packages available in
the construction industry. However, most of these software packages are too restrictive
or not compatible with the manual estimating procedure, because they do not involve the
construction decision process in their systems.
If a cost estimating system included a construction decision process, the system
would perform cost estimating efficiently even if the users do not have much
construction knowledge. Therefore, it is desirable to incorporate a good construction
decision process into the cost estimating process in order to automate the manual
procedure and to help users make correct decisions during cost estimating.
 5

(3) Lack of application of the construction process in the duration estimating

Generally, construction cost estimating provides both cost and duration for
construction, but existing cost estimating systems do not reflect the construction process
in duration estimating. They consider only the duration of the individual cost element
when calculating the labor or equipment cost. As a result, the total duration, which
should be based on the overall construction process and the relationships among all
construction activities, cannot be obtained.
The duration estimating process involves the identification of all activities to be
performed, and the determination of the sequential relationships among the activities.
For instance, concrete construction includes five main activities: form erecting, steel
reinforcing, concrete placing, concrete curing, and form stripping. These activities are
sequentially connected. Based on the number of form uses during the construction
process, the amount of required forms will be determined and the duration which reflects
the repetitive construction process will be estimated.
A cost estimating system that includes a duration estimating process which
considers the construction process, would provide more accurate duration estimates, and
the designers could readily compare the construction duration as well as the construction
cost for their design alternatives. Therefore, it is desirable to reflect a construction
process for duration estimating in a cost estimating system.

1 3 Research Objective and Scope

The major objective of this research is to develop the Automated Interactive Cost
Estimating System (AICES), that provides the designers with accurate cost information
during the design process, which is sensitive to their design alternatives. AICES will
allow the users to modify design information to check cost variation among design
 6

alternatives at each design stage. This research focuses on structural design and detailed
cost estimating for reinforced concrete building structures.
The proposed system will provide detailed estimates of the quantity, cost, and
duration automatically, based on the available information at different stages of design.
The research is limited to developing a prototype cost estimating system that deals with
reinforced concrete building design and its detailed cost estimating. The system contains
default structural design data, including building information and structural member
configuration, which can be modified by the user. The default data enables the system to
provide a detailed design and cost estimate at any stage of design.
The research models the information flow between design and cost estimating.
That is, it focuses on how to reflect the design modification at each design level, how to
relate the design process to the detailed cost estimating process, how to formulate
databases for both processes, how to link the databases with each other to perform
detailed design and cost estimating, and how to estimate the construction duration to
reflect the construction process. These tasks constitute the main part of the proposed
research.
Cost estimating should provide a statement in which the required construction
resources are quantified. This statement should be organized in a readable manner [Carr
1989]. Therefore, this research is also concerned with establishing a cost estimating
output format which can be easily read and used by designers in selecting design
alternatives.

1.4 Dissertation Outline

Chapter II, Background, describes cost estimating practices and reviews previous
efforts to develop cost estimating systems. More specifically, it examines computerized
 7

cost estimating approaches in the construction industry and discusses their capabilities
and limitations in providing timely, accurate information to designers.
Chapter III, Conceptual System Framework, introduces the modeling concepts and
framework of AICES. First, it explains the overall system structure. Next, it reviews
reinforced concrete building design, explains the design process, and identifies the design
variables. Then, the chapter reviews reinforced concrete construction estimating and
explains the estimating process. Then, it presents design and estimating assumptions for
AICES implementation. Finally, it describes project databases and their relationships in
AICES.
Chapter IV, Design Modification, describes design modification in AICES. First,
an overview of the design modification process is given. Then, the schematic,
preliminary, and detailed design modification hierarchies are explained. Finally, the data
processing for building parameter adjustment and detailed member designs during design
modification is described.
Chapter V, Detailed Cost Estimating, describes detailed cost estimating in AICES.
First, an overview o f the detailed cost estimating process is given. Then, the quantity
takeoff, unit cost calculation and, unit cost modification processes are described. Finally,
the duration estimating process in AICES is explained.
Chapter VI, Construction Method Selection, describes construction method
selection in AICES. First, it briefly introduces knowledge-based systems in general.
Then, it explains the procedure of the construction knowledge base establishment.
Finally, it describes the consultation processes for the selection o f construction methods.
Chapter VII, Case Study, demonstrates the capabilities and limitations of AICES
through a case study. First, it defines the scope of the case study. Then, it performs
design and cost estimating for an example project and analyzes the sensitivity of design
and cost. Finally, it evaluates AICES by comparing the system output with manual
calculations.
 8

Chapter VIII, Conclusion, summarizes the research results, describes the research
contributions to knowledge, and suggests future extension and direction of the research.
Appendices include the notations used in this dissertation, the selection of
implementation tools, the description of project database structures and excerpt data, and
AICES implementation including example building description, computer screen views,
and excerpt programs for design modification and detailed cost estimating at each level
and for construction method selection.
 CHAPTER n

BACKGROUND

Three main problems in existing cost estimating systems have been identified in the
previous chapter: the lack of linkage between the cost estimating process and the design
process, the lack of incorporation of the construction decision process into a cost
estimating system, and the lack of application of the construction process to the duration
estimating process in a cost estimating system. In order to establish the nature of these
problems, this chapter explains cost estimating practices and reviews previous efforts to
develop cost estimating systems. More specifically, it examines computerized cost
estimating approaches in the construction industry and discusses their capabilities and
limitations, particularly with regard to their application to the design process.

2.1 Cost Estimating Practices

Cost estimating has been defined as the process of looking into the future and
trying to predict project costs and resource requirements [Halpin 1985]. Its purpose is to
provide cost and quantity information to make the decisions for a project [Carr 1989].
Cost estimates are prepared at various project stages through numerous methods, each
with appropriate applications and limitations. These methods can be categorized into at
least two different types, depending on the function of the estimate, the amount of
information, and the level of detail in design: approximate estimating, and detailed
estimating [Peurifoy 1989].

9
 10

2.1.1 Approximate Estimating

Approximate estimating is sometimes called conceptual, preliminary, or budget

estimating, because it is normally prepared at the feasibility study stage, the schematic
design stage, or the design development stage where design details are not available and
accuracy is not considered as important as in later stages. As the name suggests,
approximate estimating provides approximate values for an expected project for making
preliminary studies prior to detailed design and construction. Preliminary studies include
the establishment of the project budget and the economic feasibility of alternate projects.
Approximate estimating is based on available information from previous similar projects
and is dependent on the judgment, skill, and experience of the estimator because the
plans and specifications of the project are not yet available [Bulkley 1987].
Approximate estimating is achieved through several methods including cost
indexes, cost capacity, factor estimating, parameter estimating, and base unit price. Each
method is briefly introduced below.

(1) Cost Indexes

The cost index method is used to adjust the cost information in different times and
locations. It is based on the ratio between the values of the cost index at two different
times and places. The cost at one time and place is calculated by multiplying the ratio by
the cost at the other. Two types of cost indexes are used in this method: input indexes
and output indexes. An input index is the cost of a set of materials and labor that have
been selected to produce a good indicator of changing costs of completed projects. An
output index is the cost of a complete project.
The cost index method may be applied to update known historical costs for new
estimates and to estimate replacement costs for specific assets.
 11

(2) Cost Capacity

The cost capacity method is based on a relationship between the output of a process
and its necessary resources. For a construction project, the output of the construction
process is the volume of construction, and the resources needed to complete construction
are material, labor and equipment. The relationship between the volume of construction
and the resources is represented as a cost. Some examples of construction volume are the
total floor area for a building, the number of beds in a hospital, and the number of miles
of a highway. This method gives a order of magnitude estimate for the new project and
it should only be used for preliminary planning.

(3) Factor Estimating

In factor estimating, a factor, or coefficient, is estimated for each cost component,

which is the ratio between the cost of that component and the cost of the predominant
cost component in a project. The cost of the predominant component is estimated. Then,
the cost of each component is calculated by multiplying the cost of the predominant
component by each component's factor. The total cost of a project is obtained by
summing the costs of all components. Assuming that good historical data are available
for developing the individual factors for each cost item, and that the components have the
same cost relationship to the basic cost item as in previous projects, this method may
provide a fairly reliable estimate.

(4) Parameter Estimating

Parameter estimating is based on design parameters that reflect the size or scope of
a project. The cost of each system in a project is computed by multiplying the quantity
of a design parameter by the estimated system cost per unit of the parameter. The total
 12

cost of a project is obtained by summing the costs of all systems. This method requires
at least schematic drawings sufficient for computing the values of the parameters. This is
used to estimate costs of alternative systems to aid a designer in selecting among the
systems at early stages of design.

(5) Base Unit Price

The base unit price method estimates the cost based on the cost data per base unit of
a project, such as per square foot of floor area or per cubic foot of volume of a building.
The cost per base unit is calculated through a cost function that is normally derived from
the cost data of previous similar projects. The cost per base unit can be adjusted by
factors or indexes for project characteristics such as time and location.
A cost function may be developed by statistical inference based on a few relevant
attributes to find a relatively accurate base unit cost for the proposed project. In this
case, statistical techniques such as regression analysis are used to determine the most
important parameters and their effect on cost. A couple of cost functions have been
derived to estimate the construction cost of a building project. These are discussed in
Section 2.2.1.

2.1.2 Detailed Estim ating

Detailed estimating is sometimes called final, definitive, or bid estimating because

it is normally prepared at the end of design stage or during the construction bidding or
planning stages. It determines the quantities and costs of all elements, including
materials, labor, and equipment, based on a relatively complete set of plans and
specifications which is the output of detailed design. It may be prepared by engineers for
 13

securing appropriations for proposed work in the detailed design stage or by contractors
for submitting bids and for planning construction with their unique operations.
One method for achieving detailed cost estimating is the unit cost method, which
determines the project cost based on specific work items, their quantities, and unit costs.
A project is broken into a set of tasks or activities, each having an identifiable quantity of
work that must be performed for that task to be considered completed. In addition, each
task has a unit cost associated with it. The cost of a work item is obtained by multiplying
its quantity with its unit cost. Thus, the total cost of a project is obtained by summing
up the cost of all work items.

2.2 Previous Efforts for Developing Estimating System

2.2.1 Statistical Approaches

One of the base unit price methods used in preliminary cost estimating for building
construction projects is the square-foot method. This method uses historical building
cost data or cost reference books to get an estimate of the cost per square foot of the type
of building under construction. The estimated unit cost is then multiplied by the gross
floor area of the proposed building after being adjusted for factors such as geographical
location, size, and the expected construction quality of the proposed building. The gross
area may be used to calculate the cost of a one or two-story building; however, it alone
cannot adequately represent the cost of a multistory building, which is a function of both
floor area and building height [Karshenas 1983].
The cost functions for the preliminary estimating of a multistory building have been
obtained by two approaches, both of which use historical building data to derive a
mathematical relationship among cost, building height, and typical floor area
[Kouskoulas 1974] [Karshenas 1983]. The first approach expresses the square-foot cost
 14

of the building in terms of several variables including the building height. By using
historical building costs, it develops a linear equation that defines the square-foot cost of
a building in terms of six variables: height, type, location, construction year, quality, and
the building technology. It arbitrarily selects a linear equation of all possible functional
forms for the cost equation, which is not necessarily the most appropriate form for the
cost equation. The second approach uses the method of least squares to find a cost
function that describes the variations in cost data. This cost function provides a rough
order of magnitude of the cost estimate for new projects.
These two approaches are applicable to multistory buildings for which the square-
foot method may not be as accurate in estimating the cost. However, both approaches
are limited because the cost function based on historical building data must be rederived
periodically for consistency in the assignment of the variables which are used to identify
the relationship between unit costs and project size or type. Even more important,
neither approach relates costs to basic variations among building design alternatives, and
they are therefore not useful in evaluating detailed design alternatives.

2.2.2 C om puterized A pproaches

Numerous computerized approaches have been developed for cost estimating to

improve the efficiency o f quantity takeoff and cost calculation. Because of their ability
to store large amounts of data, perform high speed calculations, and be accurate,
computers are very useful for cost estimating. Their first major use in this area was to
calculate the total cost of a project once the quantities and unit costs were known. These
attempts include COBESTCO, a Computer Based Estimating Technique for Contractors
[Kramer 1965], and the CESL Estimating Program [Boyer 1972]. These primitive
systems have been the basis of other computerized estimating systems. Through the
literature review, some of those systems are investigated and described below.
 15

(1) INES

One of the early systems using databases in cost estimating is INES (Interactive
Estimating System) [Herbsman 1984] which uses three storage files. The first file
comprises a library of standard items, which constitutes an estimate. Each item has a
code number and description by which INES may retrieve data. The second file contains
a cost analysis of standard items listed in the first file. Each item has a unit cost which is
obtained through a set of questions that pertain to the unit cost value of that item. These
questions allow the users to partially introduce their expertise in determining an estimate.
The third file contains the initial cost data for each item. This initial cost is modified
where needed, and is multiplied by the quantity of the cost item.

(2) ESTA

Another cost estimating system involving databases is ESTA [Au 1986] which was
developed to compute final design cost estimates for building projects. ESTA uses a
relational database system to store and request the data for estimating. It provides the
output of a cost estimate based on the input data. The input to ESTA consists of final
design data files specifying the type and quantities of items in the project design. The
output from ESTA is the final design cost estimate for the building project based on the
information loaded into the database. For each design item, ESTA searches the database
for the item's material and installation unit costs and finds the material and installation
cost indexes corresponding to the project location.
Although INES and ESTA have been strong models for current estimating
programs, they have some limitations. First, they do not provide an interface between
design and cost estimating, so they cannot respond quickly to design changes. Second,
they cannot compute quantities directly, so the user of systems must input the quantities
manually from a final design output. This limitation has been addressed by two database
 16

systems that can take off the quantities of materials: RETCOST and HICOST. The
capabilities and limitations of both systems are explained below.

(3) RETCOST

RETCOST [Ciarico 1989] is the cost estimating module of the knowledge-based

design system called RETAIN. RETCOST was developed to provide the cost
information for a variety of retaining wall rehabilitation strategies. It performs
preliminary estimating through a three-step process involving interaction with a variety
of database relations: generating and filling activity cost relations in databases, estimating
quantities for each strategy, and calculating the final costs.
In the first step, RETCOST generates and fills cost relations in databases, recording
the costs of activities, strategies, and solutions. In the second step, it evaluates
technology choice and quantity of work for each activity through the information
generated in the RETAIN site identification and design synthesis modules. The quantity
is calculated by using wall dimensions from RETAIN. In the third step, RETCOST
computes activity costs with the quantities of work and technology choices obtained in
the second step. It retrieves unit cost from relations including the latest unit cost defined
by activity and technology.
RETCOST may be used to check alternative rehabilitation strategies for a retaining
wall at an early stage of design. However, it does not allow the user to directly modify
the retaining wall strategies to check the cost variation during the design process, because
alternative strategies are obtained separately from RETAIN. RETCOST enables the user
to select or change the unit cost stored in the database, but it does not calculate the unit
cost of each element in the system.
 17

(4) HICOST

HICOST [Howard 1989] is a knowledge-based cost estimator for structural systems

in buildings. It provides construction cost estimating expertise by accessing a knowledge
base of construction expertise and databases of cost data. It is composed o f four major
components: a knowledge base of construction estimating expertise, a building design
database, a project management database, and a unit cost database. The knowledge base
consists of frames and rules. Frames are used to represent the descriptive information
associated with structural components and construction quantities. Rules are used to take
off the required quantities o f materials and labor. The building design database stores the
structural design data. The project management database stores the material quantities.
The unit cost database stores the unit costs directly obtained from the cost data reference.
Communication between the knowledge base and the databases is handled by the
network data access manager of Knowledge Aided Database (KADBASE).
HICOST has a couple o f limitations. First, it does not include the detailed
estimating tasks such as the unit cost calculation of the work items in the system. For
example, the unit cost of labor is taken directly from the building cost data, so the crew
types and productivity are not applied to calculate labor cost. Second, it does not provide
any summary data about the generated material quantities. This means that it cannot
perform aggregations representing material and cost tables per component and per
quantity. When the component descriptions or the unit cost are changed or added,
HICOST must re-estimate the entire design.
Both RETCOST and HICOST have the capability to take off the quantity and to
calculate the cost based on the design output. However, they are not directly linked with
the design process, so they do not have the capability of creating design alternatives as an
input to the cost estimating and o f modifying the design variables during the process.
 18

Therefore, it is impossible to check the cost variation in design changes during the design
process.

(5) CADLink

Digitized drawings in the correct electronic format may interface directly with an
estimating system to eliminate the laborious measuring and computing steps for material
quantity takeoff [Stewart 1991].
An integrated program, CADLink [Timberline 1989], has been developed to
provide the users with a design and cost estimating environment. It is an interface
between a computer-aided drafting system and a cost estimating system. CADLink
allows the designer to provide various alternatives depending on the needs and
preferences of the owner, and it also allows the estimator to update estimating to reflect
design changes in the CAD drawing file. Therefore, this system can be used by both the
designer and the owner's estimator to perform their work efficiently.
CADLink may be used to check the cost of the design alternatives. However, this
system cannot immediately check the cost variation when the value of each design
variable is modified during the design process, because it performs the cost estimating
only after the completion of each design alternative. The system does not involve
decision processes for design and cost estimating. Therefore, the users have to use their
own knowledge to make the design and construction decisions.

2 3 Summary

This chapter has described the types and methods of cost estimating, examined the
existing cost estimating systems, and reviewed the previous efforts to computerize the
cost estimating process.
 19

Approximate estimating provides cost information for making preliminary decision

prior to design and construction. Most methods for approximate estimating are useful to
check the construction cost at the beginning stage of design, but they are not applicable
to analyze the cost sensitivity for alternative values of design variables during the design
process.
Attempts to use databases provide examples for future cost estimating system
development. Some approaches such as RETCOST, HICOST, and CADlink can directly
compute the quantity and cost based on the database management. However, none of
these systems can provide detailed estimate until detailed design is complete. They can
only compare detailed design alternatives and cannot provide detailed cost estimates
earlier in design because they do not themselves generate default detailed designs. They
do not have the capability of creating or modifying the design during the design process,
because they do not involve the design decision process. Therefore, they cannot quickly
check the cost impact of each design variable change at the different stages of design.
They are not compatible with the cost estimating performed by estimators who use their
knowledge to make a decision, because they do not involve construction decision
processes to calculate the unit co st In addition, they do not provide the duration
estimate, which may be valuable information for making decisions during the design
process.
These problems are addressed in the development of AICES which links the design
process with the detailed cost estimating process, and involves the construction decision
process and the duration estimating process.
 CHAPTER HI

CONCEPTUAL SYSTEM FRAMEWORK

This chapter describes the modeling concepts and framework of AICES. First, it
explains the overall system structure. Next, it reviews reinforced concrete building
design, explains the design process, and identifies the design variables. Then, the chapter
reviews reinforced concrete construction estimating and explains the estimating process.
Then, it presents design and estimating assumptions for AICES implementation. Finally,
it describes project databases and their relationships in AICES.

3.1 System Structure

The purpose of AICES is to provide detailed cost estimates at all stages of the
design process for reinforced concrete building structures. AICES allows the
architectural or structural engineers to analyze the sensitivity of cost to the variation in
design parameters and to check the construction duration of their design alternatives.
Thus, AICES has two main functions:

(1) The design modification function allows a designer to input alternative designs
at each stage of structural design.

(2) The detailed estimating function calculates construction cost u. provide cost
feedback for each design alternative that is input.

20
 21

The system structure is depicted in Figure 3.1. It is composed of the design

modification process, the cost estimating process, the project databases, the interrelated
knowledge bases, the user interface, and the output process. Each system component has
its own role and works with the others to achieve a common objective.

ri USER INTERFACE

4.
J— i

DESIGN COST
OUTPUT
MODIFICATION ESTIMATING
- -

fi
DATABASES
Project Project KNOWLEDGE
Independent Dependent < T -*
Database Database

Figure 3.1 AICES Structure

In AICES, design is developed through three hierarchical modification levels:

schematic, preliminary, and detailed design. Detailed cost estimating is performed
through two processes: quantity takeoff and unit cost calculation. The databases consist
of a project-independent database and a project-dependent database. The knowledge
base consists of rules that represent construction method selection, such as selection of
concrete placing method. The user interface allows the user to input and update data, and
control the output report. The user can interact with the system during the design
modification and cost estimating processes at each design stage.
 22

Design and estimating functions in general and their representation in the AICES
databases are described below. A detailed description of the implementation of design
modification and detailed cost estimating is given in Chapters IV and V respectively.

3.2 Reinforced Concrete Building Design

3 .2.1 Reinforced Concrete Buildings

A reinforced concrete building is a building whose structural frame is constructed

o f reinforced concrete. Reinforced concrete is a logical union of two materials: plain
concrete, which possesses high compressive strength but little tensile strength, and
reinforcing steel rods embedded in the concrete, which provide the needed strength in
tension. Plain concrete is made by mixing cement, fine aggregate, coarse aggregate,
water, and, frequently, admixtures. When reinforcing steel is placed in the forms and
wet concrete mix is placed around it, the final solidified mass becomes reinforced
concrete.
The design of reinforced concrete members must incorporate both building
requirements and the structural analysis. An efficiently designed structure is one in
which the members are arranged in such a way that the weight, loads, and forces are
consistent with the intended use o f the structure and the nature o f the site [Reynolds
1988]. Reinforced concrete behavior is still not completely understood. Building codes
and specifications that give design procedures are continually changing to reflect the
latest knowledge. While a detailed explanation of the structural design process is beyond
the scope of this research, the basic concepts are briefly reviewed here to describe the
information regarding design variables which may affect the estimating variables.
 23

3.2.2 Design Process

3.2.2.1 Hierarchical Building Design Process

A building design is created through a hierarchical design process. Figure 3.2

illustrates the hierarchical building design process at schematic, preliminary, and detailed
design levels.

Degree of focus on total space-form properties

Max Min
i r
Feedback » 4 Feedback
<^D> 2-D
Leads to
Leads to

S c h e m a tic ^ P relim in ary D etailed

Overall analysis of t ------------------- ! \

building form options to
explore total system
load-resistance
implications and to
anticipate options for
interaction of basic
^ structural sub-systems j
Overall design of basic
horizontal and vertical
sub-systems to establish
key components and
interaction properties
Specific design of all
sub-system components
and construction details

Figure 3.2 Hierarchical Building Design Process

(adapted from [Lin 1988])

At the schematic level, the designers are concerned with establishing a total-system
understanding o f the three-dimensional implications o f architectural space-form options.
At the preliminary level, they extend this understanding to include the basic requirements
for the design of major two-dimensional subsystems. At the detailed level, the designers
elaborate and refine the more generalized decisions made at other levels in terms of
 24

individual components and connection details [Lin 1988]. Decisions made at this level
may produce feedback to other levels to refine or change the design, so design is not only
a hierarchical process; it is also an iterative process.
The concept o f hierarchical and iterative design is applied to develop a detailed
structural design in AICES. AICES utilizes default design data with which the designer
can create a usable reinforced concrete structural design at each level. The default design
data can be modified or adjusted to create a new design through the hierarchical and
iterative design process at schematic, preliminary, and detailed design levels.

3.2.2.2 Structural Design Process

Structural design consists of several interacting design aspects: decision making or

conceptual design, structural analysis, proportioning members, and subsequent detailed
design [Fraser 1981]. It starts with a need to transmit loads in space to a structural
frame, subject to constraints on cost, geometry, and other criteria. In building design, the
need to transmit loads is specified by architectural drawings which represent functional
and spatial requirements. These architectural drawings are the primary project input to
the structural design process.
Structural design can be performed at any stage of building design. However,
detailed design is usually postponed until architectural design produces final building
layouts. The final product of the structural design process provides the detailed
specification of a structural configuration capable of transmitting these loads with the
appropriate levels of safety and serviceability. This detailed structural design is
represented in structural drawings, which join the architectural drawings as part of the
building's detailed design.
 25

The design process may be viewed as a sequence of three stages [Fraser 1981]
[Maher 1987], as described below. This is typical of the structural design process that is
applied to the architectural design that is already described in architectural drawings.

(1) Conceptual design, to select or synthesize a potential structural configuration

satisfying a few key constraints.
(2) Analysis, to model the selected structural configuration and determine its
response to external effects.
(3) Detailed design, to select and proportion the structural components to satisfy
all applicable constraints.

If there are significant deviations between the properties of components selected in

conceptual design as input to the analysis stage and those determined at the detailed
design stage, reanalysis is required using the new properties. This iterative process
continues until a satisfactory design is obtained. At this point an evaluation is normally
performed to determine the feasibility of the design in terms of function and cost.
However, the cost analysis is typically too crude to accurately calculate cost differences
between alternative detailed designs unless the designer requests contractor(s) to submit
bids for alternative detailed designs. The output of structural design is structural
drawings that show the layout and details of structural components.

3.2.3 Design Variables

Design variables are classified into building parameters and other variables to be
applied to each design modification level. Building parameters is simply a convenient
way to identify basic building variables whose values affect many different building
systems, including the structural system. Building parameters which affect the structural
system include the type of structural floor system, occupancy, building area, number of
 26

floors, column spacing, floor height, and number of bays in each direction. Other design
variables applied to the preliminary and detailed structural design levels include
structural member sizes and reinforcing.

3.23.1 Building Parameters

(1) Type of Floor Systems

Various types of structural floor systems for reinforced concrete buildings are in
use at the present time [Figure 3.3]. A typical slab system in a reinforced concrete
building is a solid slab supported on beams on all four sides [Figure 3.3 (a)]. If the ratio
of the long to the short side of a slab panel is two or more, load transfer is by bending in
the short direction and the panel is called a one-way slab. If the ratio of the sides of a
slab panel is less than two, load transfer is by bending in both orthogonal directions and
the panel is called a two-way slab. The flat plate [Figure 3.3 (b)] is a slab directly
supported on columns, without any interior column-line beams, and with steel
reinforcing in two orthogonal directions. The flat plate has the advantage of low forming
costs and a flat ceiling, which reduces ceiling finishing costs. The flat slab [Figure 3.3
(c)] is similar to the flat plate, but has locally thickened portions, which consist of drop
panels and/or column capitals around the columns to accommodate high punching shear
stresses caused by long slab spans and/or heavy loads on the slab. The drop panels and
column capitals increase formwork costs but provide a relatively shallow slab system in
situations where the shear stresses preclude the use o f a flat plate. The waffle slab (two-
way joist slab) [Figure 3.3 (d)) consists of rows of concrete joists at right angles to each
other with solid heads at the columns. This slab is considered a flat slab with the solid
heads acting as drop panels. The waffle slab allows a considerable reduction in dead
load as compared to a conventional flat slab.
 27

(a ) Two-way S la b

(b) Flat Plato

(c) Flat Slab

(d) Wafflo Slab (Two-Way Joist Slab)

Figure 3.3 Reinforced Concrete Slab Systems [Neville 1984]

 28

(2) Occupancy

The type of occupancy for which the building is designed affects many features of a
building, such as the space requirements and the facility requirements. The type of
occupancy determines design loads for structural design.
Design loads consist of dead loads and live loads. Design dead loads include
member self-weight, weight of fixed service equipment (plumbing, electrical, etc.) and,
where applicable, weight of built-in partitions. The latter may be accounted for by an
equivalent uniform load of not less than 20 psf, although this is not specifically defined
in the ANSI Code.
Design live loads depend on the intended use and occupancy applicable to the
portion or portions of the building being designed. For instance, uniformly distributed
live loads range from 40 psf for residential use to 2S0 psf for heavy manufacturing and
warehouse storage. Live loads include loads due to movable objects and movable
partitions temporarily supported by the building during maintenance. Portions of
buildings, such as library stacks and file rooms, may produce substantially heavier live
loads than other portions. Live loads on a roof include maintenance equipment, workers,
and materials. Also, any snow loads, water pond, and special uses, such as landscaping,
must be included in the design loads.

(3) Building Area

Building area is described in two ways: net area and gross area. The owner's needs
for space are programmed in terms of net area. However, the scope of construction is
programmed and budgeted in terms of gross area. Gross area is the sum of the
construction areas o f a building, in which floors are measured to the outside finished
surface o f permanent exterior building walls. Gross area includes all enclosed floors of
building basements, mechanical equipment floors, and penthouses.
 29

(4) Number o f Floors

Number of floors is an important factor in structural design, since it determines the

loads which will be transferred through the columns o f a building. The column size and
reinforcing are based on the magnitude of transferred loads.

(5) Column Spacing

Column spacing is based on the architectural and functional requirements of the

building. Column spacing affects the design of a slab panel in a floor, because the span
length of each direction in a panel is determined by subtracting the width of a column
from the column spacing. The possible ranges of column spacing are restricted by the
type of floor systems [Domel 1990]. Figure 3.4 shows the range of economic column
spacings for each type o f floor system.

Rat Plate

R a tS lab

Two-Way
un and Slab
Beam Slat

Two-Way Joist

15 2 0 2 5 3 0 3 5 4 0 4 5 5 0 f t
Column Spacing

Figure 3.4 Economic Column Spacings for Each Slab System

 30

(6) Floor Height

Floor height is determined by the occupancy type and vertical space requirements.
It influences the design o f vertical structures such as columns and walls. It also
influences the type of mechanical systems that may be installed in the ceiling of a floor.

(7) Number of Bays

A bay in a floor is the area surrounded by column lines in four directions, so bay
size is related to column spacing. Smaller sizes may reduce structural cost but influence
layout flexibility [Parker 1991]. Number of bays is determined by column spacing and
floor area. The total load on a column is a function of floor bay size, as well as
magnitude o f design loads.

3.23.2 Other Design Variables

(1) Member Sizes

Structural members for a reinforced concrete building include slab, column, beam,
girder, footing, and wall. The size of each member is related to structural design and
cost estimating. For instance, reducing the thickness of a member by an inch may result
in increasing the amount of reinforcing it requires. As a matter o f fact, the use of more
material in the building construction may sometimes enable an engineer to simplify
construction features and thereby effectively reduce the overall cost of the building.
Designs that seek to simplify concrete formwork will probably result in more
economical construction than those that seek to optimize the use o f reinforcing steel and
concrete, since forming represents a significant part of the total frame costs. Often, the
extra time needed to prepare the most efficient designs with respect to structural
materials is not justified by building cost or performance improvements during
 31

construction. Therefore, an effort should be made to provide for expediency of

construction as well as efficiency of structural design.

(2) Reinforcement

Reinforcement in concrete structural design is based on design loads and resulting

moments. Moments are often calculated by using simplified methods which assume a
partial redistribution of moments. For instance, in slab design, moments determined in
this way are divided into strips (column strip, middle strip) proportionally to the entire
moments present in the sections. Reinforcement is proportioned within these strips
according to the value of the average moments and is evenly distributed over the whole
width of the strip. However, for practical reasons, reinforcement cannot be absolutely
proportioned to the distribution of moments. Thus the reinforcement is usually placed at
regular intervals, and this does not significantly influence the behavior of the structure
[Ajdukiewicz 1990].
Reinforcement may be represented either by the percentage of steel or the area of
steel in a cross section of a concrete structural member. However, this percentage or area
of steel must be converted to the number of reinforcing steel bars (rebars), whose total
section area must be greater than or equal to the area of steel designed, because the size
and number of rebars will be used to calculate the tonnage of rebars for reinforcement
cost estimating.
Design variables described above are related to each other through all the design
stages. Figure 3.5 is an influence diagram that shows the dependency relationships
among design variables. It illustrates an example o f forward design progression for the
selected building parameters. Design may start with the selection of a type of structural
slab system, gross floor area, number of floors, aspect ratio, and occupancy type. Each
variable affects other design variables in the design progression. For example, the type
 Structural
slab system

Number of
bays(x)
Gross floor Building
area length Formwork
Column Member quantity
spacing Ox) depth

Number of Building Reinforcing

floors area quantity

Column Column
spacing (ly) size Concrete
Aspect Building quantity
ratio width

Design Number of Column

load bays (y) reinforcing

Occupancy
type

Floor
heigjht

Figure 3.5 Influence Diagram of Design Variables

 33

of structural slab system influences the column spacing in each direction, because each
slab system has feasible ranges of span length. Building area is the product of the gross
floor area and the number of floors. Building area and aspect ratio influence floor
dimensions, including building length and width. The number of bays in each direction
are determined by the floor dimensions and the column spacing. Occupancy type
determines the design load and the floor height which affect detailed member design.
The detailed member design, including member size and reinforcing, are also influenced
by the column spacing. Design variables illustrated in the figure affect detailed
estimating by providing structural dimensions for calculating quantities of formwork,
reinforcing, and concrete.
Because design is an iterative process, design variables at one level may influence
those in other level. For example, a change in column spacing may require a change in
the structural slab system.

3 3 Concrete Construction Estimating

33.1 Overview

Construction estimating is performed through two main processes: quantity takeoff

and costing. In a construction project, quantity takeoff is defined as the process of taking
measurements from architectural and engineering drawings and specifications and
converting them mathematically into useful and meaningful quantities for cost estimating
[Cook 1989]. Accomplishing this requires a clear understanding of what is needed and
how it should be presented. Quantity takeoff, therefore, includes the investigation of the
project through a study of the plans and specifications; the determination of the physical
extent of the work and the basis for productive time; and the preliminary progress
schedule to show the interdependence of major activities and resources in time.
 34

In a construction project, costing is defined as a process of determining the cost of

the project based on quantity, cost data, and productivity. Quantity is a product of the
takeoff process. Cost data are the basis of the unit cost calculation for material, labor,
and equipment of each estimating element. These include material price, labor hourly
wages, and equipment rental prices.
In order to determine the time and cost required to perform a given quantity of
work, it is necessary to estimate the probable rate of production of the labor or
equipment. A production rate (productivity) is the number of units of work produced by
a unit of a labor or a piece of equipment in a specified unit of time [Peurifoy 1989]. It is
expressed in units per labor hour, units per equipment hour, or units per crew-hour or
crew-day. This production rate is subject to considerable variation, depending on the
difficulty of the work, job and management conditions, and the condition of the
equipment. It also varies in different building components, materials, and construction
methods. For example, the production rate of slab concrete placing is higher than that of
column concrete placing even if both use the same construction methods and crews.
Production rates in different conditions may be obtained from historical data of previous
similar work.
The production rate is applied to calculate the unit cost of labor or equipment based
on this equation:

Cost per Uni, = C° S tPe r H ° Ur = - ^ = $/U (3.1)

Units per Hour U/Hr

where Hour = labor-hour, crew-hour, or equipment-hour, and Unit = the quantity unit of
any cost element, such as square foot contact area (sfca) for formwork, cubic yard (cy)
for concrete placing, and tonnage (ton) for reinforcing. Cost per Hour, hourly cost, is
 35

based on the applicable hourly wage rates of labor or crew, or on the rental price of
equipment. The cost is calculated by multiplying quantities by unit costs.

3.3.2 Estimating Process

3.3.2.1 Quantity Takeoff

The estimating elements for reinforced concrete construction include formwork,

reinforcing, concrete, finishing (if required), and curing. The quantity takeoff of each
element is based on its own measurement. For example, formwork is taken off by
contact area, and reinforcing is taken off by steel weight, concrete is taken off by volume.
These three major elements and their measurement are explained below.

(1) Formwork

Formwork is the molds which receive concrete in its plastic state, shape it to the
design and dimensions of the structure, and retain it during the process of hardening
through hydration. It is taken off by formed area, or contact area, for the various
components of a structure. Contact area is a representation of all forms to be erected.
For example, a wall form may be represented with a contact area of two sides, and a
column or spread footing may be represented with a contact area of four sides.
An incorrect contact area will yield an incorrect concrete cost; every surface to be
formed must be calculated. However, it is not necessary that the contact area be
calculated with an extremely high degree of accuracy. If the estimator uses dimensions
rounded up to the nearest even foot in calculating each area and then rounds the total of
the computed areas up to the nearest even ten square feet, the accuracy will be sufficient.
 36

(2) Reinforcing

Reinforcing steel is of two general classes: reinforcing bars (rebars) and welded-
wire fabric. The unit of measure for rebars is the ton or pound; welded-wire fabric is
measured by square foot or square yard. Rebars may be placed in any structural
component, such as footings, walls, columns, beams and slabs; welded-wire fabric is
usually limited to slabs.
The amount o f reinforcing is computed from the plans and specifications, and it is
summarized to give me total length and weight of each size of rebar. The total weight of
each grade of steel is kept separate, because some grades o f steel take a grade extra in
material price. Each rebar also carries a size extra (a price differential added to the base
price), and the size extra increases as the bar size decreases. The quantity takeoff of
rebars should include the amount for laps, bends, hooks, and cranks.

(3) Concrete

The amount of concrete for each structural component is generally computed with
two purposes in mind: first, to partition the overall volume of concrete by structure
components and, second, to calculate the quantities for each component as provided by
the plans and specifications.
The unit of measure for concrete volume is usually the cubic yard. Slabs may be
figured on a square foot or a square yard basis. Curbs and gutters may be computed on a
linear foot basis. To calculate the volume, it is necessary to have dimensions of length,
width, and thickness. H ie calculation of the concrete volume for estimating purposes
does not warrant an extremely high degree of accuracy. Generally, the necessary
accuracy will be established if the estimator uses dimensions to the nearest inch and
records the concrete quantities to the nearest one-tenth of a cubic yard. This approach
usually yields a one to two percent accuracy. The quantity can be rounded up to the
 37

nearest even cubic yard in summarizing the concrete volume for each structural
component. Each structural component should be considered individually in quantity
takeoff, because each may have a different placing method or productivity which yields
different costs.
In addition, the concrete volumes of different categories o f concrete should be
summarized separately. For instance, if 3000 psi concrete is used in some parts of the
structure and 4000 psi concrete in others, both of these categories must be identified and
measured separately, because they have different material costs.

3.3.2.2 Costing

The cost for reinforced concrete construction is a function of the material, labor,
and equipment required to complete all work including formwork, reinforcing, concrete,
finishing, and curing. Material cost can be easily computed from material unit price and
work quantity. Labor cost is influenced by construction methods and associated crew
productivity. Equipment cost is influenced by construction methods and equipment type
and productivity. The costing procedures of each element are described below.

(1) Formwork

Formwork is the most significant cost element in concrete construction, because its
cost is as much as 60 percent of the total concrete construction cost in a project [Hurd
1984], The material cost is dependent on the type o f formwork and the methods of form
procurement (rent, purchase, or site fabrication). The labor cost is computed with the
formwork quantity and productivity.
A formwork type can be selected by examining several factors including structural
floor system, building shape (uniformity and regularity of floor plan), design load,
aesthetics and exposure, equipment availability, and budget. There are several types of
 38

formwork, such as wood forms, metal forms, flying forms, column-shoring forms, and
tunnel forms. A brief explanation of each formwork type is given in Chapter VI.
Chapter VI illustrates the factors that influence the selection of formwork type. It also
describes a knowledge-based formwork selection system and provides an example of
what a consultation could look like if the system were implemented.
Formwork consists of sequential activities, including form fabricating, erecting,
stripping, cleaning and moving. The productivity of each activity is dependent on site
conditions, on the height of the work, on the formwork type, and on the relationships
with other activities, such as concrete curing. For example, the productivity of form
stripping is affected by the amount of time the concrete has been allowed to set before
form removal begins. Form stripping at a very early stage may expose the concrete to
structural and thermal shocks. The productivity of formwork may decrease when special
finishes are required or when there is an increase in the complexity of the form geometry.
It is often possible to reuse forms several times. In that case, the cost to erect, strip,
clean, and move will not change in each reuse; however, the cost for replacement and
repair should be included in the total formwork cost.

(2) Reinforcing

The material cost of reinforcing steel is dependent on the reinforcing steel type,
grade and size. Reinforcing steel may be purchased in standard lengths and then cut and
bent on the job site, or it may be purchased already cut and bent. Purchasing steel
already cut and bent takes advantage of controlled conditions in the shop and use of
industrialized shop fabrication methods and equipment.
The labor cost is dependent on the productivity o f reinforcing. The productivity is
influenced by special connections and splices, as well as complex forms, field bends, and
installation in restricted work areas. Installation includes the sorting, lifting, and placing
 39

of final elements. Installation is more difficult and results in a cost increase when special
forms are used or when the placement and dimension of the reinforcement are out of the
ordinary.

(3) Concrete

The material cost of concrete is dependent on concrete mixing types and concrete
strength. Concrete may be mixed at the site or be procured directly from a ready-mix
manufacturer. Presently, most concrete building are built with ready-mixed concrete
except for isolated locations and some larger jobs requiring over 10,000 cy where site
space is readily available for setting up a temporary batch plant [Means 1990]. Ready-
mixed concrete is more economical than site-mixed concrete where working space is
limited and when small quantities of concrete are needed at various times during
construction [Peurifoy 1989]. If concrete is mixed at the site, the cost of concrete
includes the cost of aggregate, cement, water, equipment, and of labor mixing,
transporting, and placing the concrete.
The labor cost o f concrete placing is dependent on concrete placing methods and
their productivity. Concrete can be placed through several methods including direct
chute, crane with bucket, concrete pump, conveyor belt, and wheelbarrow and buggy. A
concrete placing method can be selected by considering several factors including site
characteristics, equipment availability, concrete mix type, building size, and weather
conditions. For example, a direct chute may be used only when the concrete mix truck
can access the placing area and the chute can be positioned above the forms. If it is not
possible to use a direct chute, alternate concrete placement methods must be investigated
ahead of time. If special methods of delivery such as hoppers are required, there may be
a loss of productivity.
 40

A concrete placing method may be selected through the consultation with a

concrete placing expert. Chapter VI illustrates the factors that influence the selection of
concrete placing method and describes the consultation process using a knowledge-based
system.

3.4 Assumptions for AICES Implementation

This section describes design and estimating assumptions that simplify AICES
implementation.

3.4.1 Design Assumptions

(1) Structural Slab System

AICES is implemented only for a two-way flat plate system with rectangular floor
plan. The two-way flat plate is one of the most economical structural systems. It can be
constructed in minimum time with minimum field labor, because it utilizes the simplest
possible formwork and reinforcing steel layout. A flat plate system results in minimum
floor height and provides for much flexibility in layout of columns and partitions.

(2) Design Load

AICES applies only vertical loads due to gravity in design load calculation. It is
assumed that loads are uniformly distributed over the entire span. Dead load only varies
with slab thickness. Live load is influenced by occupancy type. AICES assumes a
default live load of 100 psi.
 41

(3) Member Design

Detailed member designs are selected for slabs and columns based on default
detailed design data from the AICES database. Default design data are obtained from the
design tables in [CRSI 1984] and from the design charts in [Neville 1984]. Slabs and
columns are classified into three types: interior, exterior, and comer slabs or columns.
Slab thickness is the same for all floors. Column sizes and reinforcing are a function of
number of floors they support, as well as design load on floors. AICES uses only square
columns in the implementation.

(4) Column Spacing

Column spacing in each direction has a uniform length through the entire floor.
Bay size is determined by column spacing. Number o f bays is based on column spacing
and initial floor area. Then, floor area is adjusted by column spacing and number of
bays.

(5) Material Strength

AICES uses normal weight concrete with 4,000 psi strength and grade 60 deformed
reinforcing bars with 60,000 psi strength as they are applied to the design calculation in
[CRSI 1984] and [Neville 1984].

3.4.2 Estimating Assumptions

(1) Structural Components

AICES is implemented for detailed estimating of elevated slabs and columns only.
It does not includes any footings or foundation systems, walls, and stairs.
 42

(2) Estimating Elements

AICES performs detailed estimating for three main elements in reinforced concrete
construction: formwork, reinforcing, and concrete. Each element has three cost items:
material, labor, and equipment.

(3) Formwork Estimating

AICES applies wood forms as a default formwork method for formwork cost
calculation. Other formwork types, including metal framed forms, may be directly
selected by the user from the AICES databases to compare formwork costs. AICES adds
10 percent material wastage for each reuse of wood forms.

(4) Reinforcing Estimating

AICES applies ready-mixed 4,000 psi concrete to calculate concrete material cost.
Grade 60 rebars are used to calculate reinforcing material cost.

(3) Duration Estimating

Default module size is half floor and default duration is one week per module (See
Section 3.4 in Chapter V). Number of modules per floor may be changed by the user to
calculate different project durations and their impact on costs.

3.5 Project Databases

Design and cost estimating require databases that store large amounts of related
data. The data consist of project-independent and project-dependent information. These
different types o f information need to be stored separately to reduce redundancy and
 43

increase consistency of the databases. Thus, the databases are classified into the project-
independent and project-dependent databases. The project-independent databases are not
affected by changing the project type and scope, whereas the project-dependent databases
are.
The structures of databases are established by identifying project information
required from the system and considering the relationships among the types of
information. Each project database is explained below, and the individual database
structures and excerpted data are shown in Appendix C.

3.5.1 Project-Independent Databases

The project-independent databases comprise default building information database,

default member detailed design database, material price database, labor wage database,
construction methods database, and formwork type database. These databases are
applied to create or modify a default detailed design and to calculate the unit cost of each
estimating element.

(1) Default Building Information Database

The default building information database contains the default data for building
parameters, including building area, number of floors, column spacing, and number of
bays in each direction. The default data provides default values of basic building
parameters when the user does not input values o f the parameters at the beginning of
design modification.

(2) Default Member Detailed Design Database

The default member design database stores detailed design data for each structural
member, and it is used to create a default detailed design. For example, the default slab
 44

detailed design database contains slab thickness, moment, minimum required column
size, and reinforcing data for different column spacings. The default column detailed
design database contains column dimensions and reinforcing data for different gravity
loads and moments.

(3) Material Price Database

The material price database stores material data, including material name, type,
size, quantity unit, and price. The material price was acquired from the reference section
in [Means 1990]. For example, the price of each material is taken from the major city
lumber prices for formwork, from the major city reinforcing key prices for reinforcing
steel, and from the major city concrete net prices for concrete. These material data are
used to calculate material unit cost.

(4) Labor Wage Database

The labor wage database contains the wage data, including base wage and fringe
benefit fen: each craft. The labor wages are acquired from the designated area labor
trades wage chart [AGC 1990]. These labor wages are used to calculate the labor unit
cost.

(3) Construction Methods Database

The construction method database contains crew data and production rates for each
element for each structural component. These data are obtained from [Means 1990],
[Kenny 1975], and [Peurifoy 1989]. This database is applied to calculate the labor and
equipment unit cost.
 45

(6) Formwork Type Database

The formwork type database contains form material quantity and cost per square
foot for each formwork design. These data are obtained from separate formwork designs
and material unit costs for different member sizes that are calculated in a spreadsheet.
This database is applied to calculate formwork material cost and labor cost for a
particular project.

3.5.2 Project-Dependent Databases

The project-dependent databases comprise building information database, member

design configuration database, and quantity and cost database for a particular project.
These databases contain the project-dependent data which are applied to take off the
quantity and calculate the cost of the project. A brief description of each database
follows.

(1) Building Information Database

The structure of this database is the same as that of the default building information
database, but this database stores the adjusted values of building parameters. This
database also contains project name and location. This database is related to the member
design configuration database to calculate the quantities o f elements for each structural
component.

(2) Member Design Configuration Databases

The member design configuration database stores design configuration data for
each structural member that are updated through the design modification process. It also
contains the code numbers that designate construction methods. For example, the slab
 46

design configuration database stores number of slab panels, slab thickness and size,
reinforcing data, and code numbers for each slab type in a particular project. The
column design configuration database contains column size, reinforcing data, and code
numbers for each column type at each floor. These databases are used in calculating the
quantities of elements for each structural component.

(3) Quantity and Unit Cost Database

This database stores the estimating results, including the quantities and unit costs of
elements fen' each structural component. The quantity is calculated in the takeoff process
and the unit cost is computed in the costing process. Hiis database is used for cost
comparisons among design alternatives and for the preparation of a final cost report.

3 i 3 Database Relationships

The project databases described above are structured in a relational database

management system to store the data required and to establish the relationships within the
data. They are related through specific key items, such as structural component
identifiers and construction method codes assigned for each element for each structural
component. Figure 3.6 is a database linkage diagram that shows the relationships among
the databases. Each database structure and excerpt data are presented in Appendix C.
As shown in the figure, for example, both the member design configuration
database [Figure 3.6 (2)] and the construction method database [Figure 3.6 (3)] use the
same field, CM_CODE to represent a construction method. The records in both
databases are related through the code number in CM_CODE field. Through this
relationship the system can retrieve the designated construction method for a specific
structural component during the estimating process. Appendix B introduces the
relational database software that was selected to implement the AICES databases.
 47

| DESIGN#|CLM_SP_X|CLM_SP_Y| BAY_X | BAY_Y | FLOORS |

SLABJD | NUM | LENGTH WIDTH | DEPTH | REINFORCE | CM_CODE|

| CM_CODE | QESCRIpTION 1/CREW/TYPE | PRODUCTIVITY |

| CREW_TYPE ftCRAFfrl EQUIP! I EQUIP2 I

BASE \FRINGE I EQUIP DALY ONTHLY WEEKLY

MATERIAL Zp r i c e |

) ELEMENT | QUANTITY MATERIAL | LABOR | EQUIPMENT!

(1) Building Information DB (5) Labor W age DB

(2) Member Design Config. DB (6) Equipment Type DB

(3) Construction Methods DB (7) Material Price DB

(4) Crew Type DB (8) Quantity & C ost DB

Figure 3.6 Project Database Structures and Relations

 48

3.6 Summary

AICES' two main functions are design modification and detailed cost estimating.
Design is developed through a hierarchical design modification process at schematic,
preliminary, and detailed levels. Detailed cost estimating includes quantity takeoff, unit
cost calculation, and duration estimating. Design variables have been identified for each
design level. The AICES databases consists of the project-independent databases and the
project-dependent databases. Hie relationships between both databases support design
modification and detailed estimating during the process. Design and estimating functions
of AICES are described in Chapter IV and V, respectively.
 CHAPTER IV

DESIGN MODIFICATION

This chapter describes design modification in AICES. First, an overview of the

design modification process is given. Then, the schematic, preliminary, and detailed
design modification hierarchies are explained. Finally, the data processing for building
parameter adjustment and detailed member designs during design modification is
described.

4.1 Overview

Design modification is performed through three hierarchical processes at the

schematic, preliminary, and detailed design modification levels shown in Figure 4.1.

'fpp^^Level jr Level 2 \ Level

Schematic Design Preliminary Design] tailed Desi,
^M odificatio n !^ ModificationfP' Codification

Figure 4.1 Design Modification Level Relationships

49
 50

Design modification in each level is based on specific design variables. Basic

building parameters applied to schematic design modification include gross floor area,
number of floors, and column spacing and number of bays in each direction. Design
variables applied to preliminary design modification include column spacing, member
depth, and percentage of reinforcing. Detailed design variables applied to detailed design
modification include the size of each member and the detailed reinforcing variables, such
as rebar sizes, the number of rebars of each size, and the spacing of the rebars if required.
Level 1 creates a default detailed design based upon basic building parameters.
Level 2 adjusts basic structural design variables of the default design created at level 1.
Level 3 customizes any detailed design variables based on the default design created at
level 1 or adjusted at level 2.
In Figure 4.1, links A, B, and C indicate forward design modification flow, while
links D, E, and F indicate backward design modification flow. Schematic designs are
created at level 1 as default detailed designs. Output is carried from level 1 to level 2 by
link A. The design modification at level 2 produces an adjusted default design. Repeated
design modifications at level 2 may be based on default detailed designs from level 1 and
on default designs previously adjusted at level 2. Adjusted default design(s) is carried
from level 2 to level 3 by link B. Link C carries default detailed design(s) from level 1 to
level 3, which indicates that the user may choose to bypass level 2. The design
modification at level 3 produces a customized detailed design. Therefore, repeated
design modifications at level 3 may be based on default detailed designs from level 1,
adjusted default designs from level 2, and detailed designs previously customized from
level 3.
Links D, E and F describe a return to an upper level to select a higher-level design
alternative. A new default detailed design can be created at level 1 using links D and F.
In the same manner, the default design or one of the default designs previously adjusted
at level 1 or level 2 can be adjusted again at level 2 using link E.
 51

As a result, the system allows the user to have easy access to any level during the
design modification process. At each modification level, the system provides detailed
designs and detailed cost estimates to analyze the cost sensitivity among the design
alternatives at that level. Figure 4.2 summarizes the outline of each design modification
level, including objectives, input variables, procedures, and outputs. The procedures and
data processing of design modification are described in Section 4.2 and 4.3, respectively.

4.2 Design Modification Procedures

This section describes the design modification procedures at each level based on the
design of an example building. This example will also be used in the chapters that
follow. The building description including default building data, plan, and section is
presented in Appendix D.

4.2.1 Schematic Design Modification (Level 1)

The purpose of schematic design is to create a default detailed design based on

basic building parameters. Basic building parameters are type of structural floor system,
gross floor area or building area, number of floors, building length, building width,
column spacing in each direction o f a slab panel, number of bays in each building
direction, building occupancy type or loads, and building aspect ratio. The information
for these building parameters may be provided through user interaction. AICES allows
the user to input the information for six building parameters: gross floor area, number of
floors, column spacing in each direction, and number of bays in each direction. It is not
necessary to input all these parameters, because the system provides default values for
some parameters when the information is not provided by the user. However, the more
information the user provides, the fewer default values the system uses.
^ " '''" ^ L e v e l s Level 1
Items Schematic Design Modifiction
Objective To create the default detailed
design based upon basic building
parameters.
To check the cost sensitivity
Input Information Basic Building Parameters
Structural system/Design loads
Gross floor area
Number of floors
Column spacing
Number of bays
Procedure (1) Select building parameters to
input the values.
(2) Retrieve default values for the
unselected parameters.
(3) Calculate required values.
(4) Set up new default detailed
design table based upon the
obtained values.
(5) Perform cost estimating.
(6) Repeat process.
Output Default detailed design
Detailed cost estimate
Figure 4.2 Design Modification Level Description
Level 2
Preliminary Design Modification
To adjust basic structural design
variables of the default detailed
design created at level 1.
To check the cost sensitivity
Basic Design Variables
Column spacing
Number of bays
Member depth
Member reinforcing (9E> steel)
(1) Load default design table.
(2) Adjust column spacings in both
directions.
(3) Adjust slab thickness.
(4) Update other design variables
affected by the adjusted values.
(5) Perform cost estimating.
(6) Repeat process.
Adusted default design
Detailed cost estimate
Cost comparison table
Level 3
Detailed Design Modification
To customize any design
variables of the default detailed
design adjusted at level 2.
To check the cost sensitivity
Detailed Design Variables
Member size
Member reinforcing (detailed)
Rebar size
Rebar number
Rebar spacing
(1) Load adjusted default detailed
design table.
(2) Customize any detailed design
variables.
(Other variables remain the
same.)
(3) Perform cost estimating.
(4) Repeat process.
Customized detailed design
Detailed cost estimate
Cost comparison table
 53

Figure 4.3 is an example influence diagram that shows the relationships between
design variables and the progression of design calculations by AICES during the design
process. As shown in the figure, some variables can be changed at two levels. For
example, column spacing can be modified at level 1 to explore interaction with level 1
parameters, such as gross floor area and number of floors. Column spacing can also be
modified at level 2 to analyze interaction with level 2 variables, such as member depth
and percentage of reinforcing. Figure 4.4 shows the schematic design modification
process in a flow chart, and the procedure of design modification at this level is as
follows.

(1) Select the structural floor system from the list.

Different types o f cast-in-place concrete floor systems, such as the flat plate, flat
slab, two-way joist and one-way joist systems described in Chapter III, have different
structural costs and economical span lengths. At this time, AICES is implemented only
for two-way flat plate systems.

(2) Select occupancy type from the list.

The dead load of a building structure is determined by the structural type and its
member sizes, and the live load is determined by the occupancy type. The current
AICES implementation uses a factored live load of 100 psf (actual live load times 1.7).

(3) Select the basic building parameters in any combination.

The user can specify any combination of gross floor area, number of floors, and
column spacing and number of bays in each building direction. These determine the size
of the building, the size of structural members, and the amount of reinforcing o f each
member.
 Schematic Level

W m w m tw w
Structural
floor system
Number of Member
bays (x) reinforcing
Building *
Gross floor
area length Formwork
Column Member quantity }
spacing 0x) depth
Number of Building ' >
Reinforcing
floors area quantity J
Column Column
spacing (ly) 7 >
\ - Concrete
- \ Y >
Aspect Building y 1
quantity ,
ratio J \ " ^ width j
v * >k t
: ■>
Number of Column
bays(y) reinforcing
Occupancy
type 7
Floor
height
(* : Basic input parameters in AICES implementation)
Figure 4.3 Design Variable Relationships and Progression
 55

Itart

PIDB Select structural floor system

A occupancy type.
d efau lt building
inform ation
DB Select building parameters.
Input the value of parameters.
building param eter
com bination code
DB
Assign default values to
other parameters. (See Section 4.3)
PDDB

Calculate values based on

building input A default values. (See Section 4.3)
inform ation
DB
m em ber design Display schematic building (See Figure 4.6)
configuration frame A adjusted values.
DB

Change input? Yes

No
Cost Estimating
No
Check cost? Yes quantity
unit cost
total cost
(See Cl apter V)
Display design and cost,
(comparison table)

No
Save results?

Yes

Save the design and cost data.

Go to
preliminary design
modification
level.

PIDB: Project-Independent Database

PDDB: Project-Dependent Database

Figure 4.4 Schematic Design Modification Flow

 56

(4) Input the values of the selected building parameters.

Figure 4.5 is a computer screen dump that shows the input template for building
parameters in AICES. This template includes the menu from which the user can select
the structural slab system (though only two-way flat plate is now implemented). The
user navigates from field to field by using the arrow keys and inputs or modifies each
value as the user desires.

Building Parameters Input Table

Plcaat input avtiltbl* information
for aaeh building parameter. DESCRIPTION UNIT INPUT ADJUSTED
<Skip input for no information)
Structure system
Design losds psf
Gross floor ares ft
Structure System Total floors fls
One_Way Flat Plate Clm spacing Lx ft
Two_Way Flat Plate
One_way Flat Slab Clm spacing by ft
TwojWay Flat Slab
One_Way Traditional Number of x bays ea
Two_Way Traditional
One_Way Joiet Number of y beys ea
T w o j u y Joist
Not Known Building area sf
Building length sf
Building width ft
aspect ratio

Figure 4.5 Building Parameter Input Template

(5) Retrieve the default values for the parameters not selected by the user.
If the input information is insufficient to create a default detailed design, the system
retrieves default data from the default building information database. This data may
subsequently be modified by the user. The processing for retrieving the default data is
explained in Section 4.3.1.
 57

(6) Adjust the design values based on the input and default values.
The system adjusts the design parameter to provide compatible values, where the
input values conflict. Figure 4.6 is a computer screen dump that shows input values in
the INPUT column and adjusted values in the ADJUSTED column of the table on the
screen. It also shows the building layout of section and floor plan on the left side of
screen for the default design. The user can review the values and building layout, and
can decide whether these are acceptable. Unsatisfactory values can be modified by the
user and adjusted by the system again.
In this example, the input values were gross floor area, number of floors, and
column spacing and number of bays in x-direction. AICES retrieved column spacing in
y-direction from the default design database and calculated number of bays in y-direction.
Then, it calculated floor area based on column spacings and number o f bays in both
directions. Finally, AICES adjusted gross floor area based on the calculated floor area
and number of floors, and it calculated other values including building width, building
length, and aspect ratio as shown in the right column of the table on the screen.

(7) Set up a default detailed design table based on the obtained values.
Detailed member design data are retrieved from the default member detailed design
database based on the adjusted building information. For instance, column spacing in x-
direction is used to retrieve slab design data including slab thickness and detailed
reinforcing. Slab thickness is used to calculate the design load. Detailed column design
data of each floor, including column sizes and detailed reinforcing, are retrieved from the
default column detailed design database based on the calculated load.
The process of retrieving detailed member design data is the same as that done at
preliminary design modification level, and it is explained in Section 4.3.2. Adjusted
default building information and detailed member design data are stored in the project
dependent database, which will be the basis for design modification at lower levels.
 58

* Schematic Building Layout * Building Parameters Input Tabla

5P T T T DESCRIPTION UNIT INPUT ADJUSTED

« n Structure lystaa (Two .Hay Flat Plate)

3f [ Design loads paf 225
2F Gross floor area ft 50000 48000
IF T T Total floors f Is 5 5
<<Bullding Saction>> Cln spacing Lx ft 20 20
C1m spacing Ly ft 0 20
Number of x bays ea 6 6
1 2 3 4 5 6
Number of y bays ea 0 4
7 8 9 10 11 12
Building area sf 9600
13 14 15 16 17 18
Building length sf 120
19 20 21 22 23 24
Building width ft 80
<<Floor Plan>>
Aspect ratio 1.5

Plaaaa review tha adjusted valuaa.

Do you want to change your input?
[Y] yaa,(N] no:

Figure 4.6 Adjusted Building Parameters and Building Layout

(8) Perform detailed cost estimating.

The system estimates the detailed cost for the default detailed design. The cost
information is displayed on the screen to be reviewed by the user. The process of
detailed cost estimating in AICES is described in Chapter V.

(9) Repeat process until the user determines the best balance among basic design
parameters.
The process may be repeated to find a satisfactory default design and cost. Output
of this level includes a default detailed design and cost estimate. Schematic design
 59

modification only considers basic building parameters in creating a default detailed

designs. Other design variables can be reviewed and modified at lower levels.

4.2.2 Preliminary Design Modification (Level 2)

The purpose of the preliminary design modification is to adjust basic design

variables of default detailed designs created at level 1. The user can change some design
variables, such as column spacing in each direction, member depth, and percentage of
reinforcing. These changes affect other design variables, which are automatically
updated. Figure 4.7 shows the preliminary design modification process in a flow chart.
The level 2 procedure is as follows.

(1) Load the default detailed design database.

When level 2 is active, the system asks the user to choose a detailed design from a
list that contains default designs generated at level 1, and from level 2 if any are available
from prior level 2 modifications.

(2) Change the values of design variables.

The user may change the value of each available design variable, such as column
spacing and slab thickness. The changed values update other related variables
automatically. For example, an increase in column spacing increases slab thickness and
the amount of reinforcing.

(3) Update other design variables and set up an adjusted detailed design table based on
the updated design values.
The system updates other design variables by retrieving the values from the default
member configuration database that correspond to the changed values. Design variable
updating is described in Section 4.3.2. The changed values establish an adjusted detailed
 60

PDDB
ZL 13 Retrieve building information
building building area/# of floors
information column spacing*/# o f bays
DB________
member design Retrieve design information,
configuration member dimensions
DB member reinforcing

ge
column spacing
or # o f bays
?
Ye*
Design
PDDB Input new design values. Validation

building Update default design I 2 < -T r« sib ler''> £!2

information
DB (See Section 4.3)
member design Display adjusted default
configuration design information
DB

Design
Input new design values
Validation

Update default design. feasible?

member design (See Section 4.3)
configuration
DB Display adjusted default
design information

Cost P a t i m w t i n g
<---------
Quantity
Cost
Duration ify design
in?

Go to
Save the design and cost data detailed design
modification level

Figure 4.7 Preliminary Design Modification Flow

 61

design table that is stored in the database to be used to calculate the cost. This design
will be used as the basis for the detailed design modification at level 3.
Figure 4.8 is a computer screen dump that shows the design modification input
template. It can display three designs at one time: the default design and two alternative
designs (new and old). H ie new design in this figure displays the updated information
for slab and reinforcing based on the modified column spacing. When the old design is
not available, the corresponding column in the figure remains blank. It also shows, on
the left, the building layout of section and floor plan for the new design.

• Schematic Building Layout * Design Modification Input Table

5F | i i n t 1 DESCRIPTION UNT DFT NEW OLD

4F | i i i I 1 1 Oross fir area sf 48000 48000
Adjusted sf 45360
3F | i i i 1 1 1 Bldg footprint sf 9600 9600
Adjusted sf 9072
2F | ! ! 1 Total floors fl 5 5
Aspect ratio 1.5 1.8
!f | 1 1 1 ! 1 I Bldg length ft 120 120
Adjusted ft 126
< <Building Section)> Bldg width ft 80 80
Adjusted ft 72
Clm spacing Lx ft 20 18
Total x bays ea 6 7
Clm spacing Ly ft 20 18
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Total y bays ea 4 4
8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Slab thickness in 7.0 6.0
IS 16 17 18 19 20 21
22 23 24 25 26 27 28
<<Floor Plan>>

Do you want to check cost?[Y/N]:

Figure 4.8 Preliminary Design Modification Template

 62

In this figure, the user modified column spacings in both directions from 20 feet to
18 feet, and AICES automatically adjusted slab thickness from 7 inches to 6 inches.

(4) Perform detailed cost estimating.

The system provides detailed cost and duration estimates for the adjusted default
detailed design. Figure 4.9 is a computer screen dump that shows the results of detailed
cost estimating for three design alternatives. Cost estimates include quantity, unit cost,
and total cost of each estimating element. Project duration for the new design is also
shown at the lower right side of the screen.

* Cost Estinatlna Results Table • Design Modification Input Table

DESCRIPTION DPT HEW OLD DESCRIPTION UNT DPT NEW OLD
QTY <sf) 4B000 48400 45360 Gross fir area sf 48000 48000 45360
y Adjusted sf 48400
O M uc 0.62 0.62 0.60 Bldg footprint sf 9600 9600 9072
R TC 29659 29906 27189 Adjusted sf 9680
M L UC 2.52 2.52 2.46 Total floors fl 5 5 5
W TC 121163 122173 111579 Aspect ratio 1.5 1.3 1.8
o E UC 0.06 0.06 0.06 Bldg length ft 120 120 126
R TC 2721 2744 2506 Adjusted ft 110
K Bldg width ft 80 80 72
FW TOT 153544 154823 141273 Adjusted ft 88
Cln spacing Lx ft 20 22 18
R QTY(ton) 49.20 55.77 43.67 Total x bays ea 6 5 7
B Cls spacing Ly ft 20 22 18
I M UC 604.61 604.61 604.61 Total y bays ea 4 4 4
N TC 29746 33720 26403
P L UC 373.68 373.68 373.68 Slab thickness in 7.0 7 .5 6.0
O TC 18385 20841 16319
R E UC 0.00 0.00 0.00
C TC 0 0 0
B ** Notation **
RF TOT 48131 54561 42722
DPT: Default Design PW : Porswork
QTY (ey) 1037 1120 840 NBW: New Design Rr : Reinforcing
c OLD: Old Design CON: Concrete
o M UC 62.63 62.63 62.63
N TC 64952 70172 52611 QTY: Quantity UC : Unit Cost
C L uc 13.79 13.79 13.79 M Material TC : Total Cost
R TC 14304 15453 11586 L : Labor TOT: Eleaent Total
E B UC 4.24 4.24 4.24 E Eguipnent
T TC 4395 4749 3560
■
CON TOT 83651 90373 67758
••«< Project Duration: 70 Days>>**
Total Cost 285326 299758 251753 • •<< Press any key to continue.))**

Figure 4.9 Design and Cost Estimating Output

 63

(5) Repeat the process until a satisfactory design is obtained.

The process may be repeated to find a satisfactory design which balances the
function and cost. The outputs o f this level are adjusted default detailed designs, detailed
cost estimates, and cost comparison tables or charts for design alternatives. Figure 4.10
shows a cost comparison chart that enables the user to quickly compare two design
alternatives and the default design in terms of construction cost.

* Cost Comparison Chart (S20K/grid] * Design Modification Input Table

i—n —i—i—i—i— i— i—i—i—i—i—r
Md DESCRIPTION UNT DFT NBW OLD
Mn
Mo
Ld
I Cross fir area
Adjusted
sf
sf
48000 48000
48400
45360
FW Ln Bldg footprint sf 9600 9600 9072
Lo M r Adjusted sf 9680
■d Total floors fl 5 5 S
Bn Aspect ratio 1.5 1.3 1.8
Bo Bldg length ft 120 120 126
Adjusted ft 110
Md Bldg width ft 80 80 72
Mn Adjusted ft 88
Mo Clm spacing Lx ft 20 22 18
Ld Total x bays ea 6 5 7
RF Ln Clm spacing Ly ft 20 22 18
Lo Total y bays ea 4 4 4
Bd
Bn Slab thickness in 7.0 7.5 6.0
Bo
Md
Mn
Mo
mm* •* Notation *•
Ld DFT: Default Design FW : Forswork
CON Ln NBW: New Design RF : Reinforcing
Lo OLD: Old Design CON: Concrete
Bd
Bn QTY: Quantity UC : Unit Cost
Bo M : Material TC : Total Cost
L : Labor TOT: Element Total
B Equipment
TOT
iL-lr - 1r,~ i f t r !. .
d :Default design cost will you modify design again?[V/N]
n :New design cost
o tOld design cost

Figure 4.10 Design and Cost Comparison Chart

 64

4.2.3 Detailed Design Modification (Level 3)

The purpose o f detailed design modification is to allow the user to customize any or
all detailed design variables, which are the dimensions and reinforcing o f the structural
components. Thus, the user can modify slab thickness, slab reinforcing, column sizes,
and column reinforcing. Design modification at this level starts with a detailed design
for the structural components, such as slab panels and columns, from the adjusted
detailed design at level 2 or the default detailed design at level 1. At this level, the basic
building parameters, such as building area, number of floors, column spacing, and
number of bays, cannot be changed, because they have already been fixed at higher
design modification levels. If the user wishes to adjust a basic building parameter, the
user must return to level 1 or level 2. The design modification procedure at level 3 is as
follows.

(1) Load a default detailed design.

When level 3 is active, the system asks the user to select a default design from a list
that contains modified designs from level 1, level 2, or level 3. The system retrieves
design data for the selected design and displays it on the screen.

(2) Change the values of any detailed design variables.

The user may change the value o f any detailed design variables, including slab
thickness, slab reinforcing, column size, and column reinforcing. Each changed value is
stored in the database to replace the prior value. Figure 4.11 is a computer screen dump
that shows the detailed design modification template for 2 designs that are identical
except for slab thickness.
Default design algorithms are not active in level 3 design modification. The user is
completely responsible for design modification at level 3 to ensure they provide
structural integrity. Therefore, change in a detailed design variable at level 3 does not
 65

affect other variables. That means that a design created at this level may violate the
design codes or regulations. For example, in the OLD column of the table on the screen,
slab thickness has been changed from 7 inches to 6 inches, but slab reinforcing remains
the same as that in the DFT column. Reinforcing data including rebar sizes and spacings
at each strip in each slab direction may also be modified by the user without affecting
slab thickness (See Appendix D.5 for slab strips). For example, in the NBW column of
the table on the screen, slab reinforcing has been changed, but slab thickness remains the
same as that in the OLD column.

• S c h t u t i c Building Layout * Design Modification Input Tabla

5F j I 1 DESCRIPTION UNT DFT NEW OLD

4F Groaa fir araa sf 48000 48000 48000

AdjUBttd sf 48000 48000
3F | Bldg footprint sf 9600 9600 9600
AdjuBttd sf 9600 9600
2* Total floora fl 5 5 5
Aspect ratio 1.5 1.5 1.5
IP | Bldg length ft 120 120 120
Adjusted ft 120 120 120
< <Building Section>> Bldg width ft 80 80 80
Adjusted ft 80 80 80
Clm spacing Lx ft 20 20 20
Total x bays ea 6 6 6
Clm spacing Ly ft 20 20 20
1 2 3 4 5 6 Total y bays ea 4 4 4
7 8 9 10 11 12 Slab thickness in 7.0 6.0 6.0
13 14 15 16 17 18 X-Direction
Clm strip top « 5 4 5
19 20 21 22 23 24 Bar spacing in 9.0 8.0 9.0
Clm strip btm « 3 4 3
< <Floor Plan>> Bar spacing in 8.0 10.0 8.0
Mid strip top # 4 4 4
Bar spacing in 12.0 10.0 12.0
Mid strip btm • 3 4 3
Bar spacing in 9.0 10.0 9.0
Y-Directlon
Clm strip top * 5 4 5
Bar spacing in 9.0 10.0 9.0
Clm strip btm • 3 4 3
Bar spacing in 8.0 10.0 8.0
Mid strip top • 4 4 4
Bar spacing in 12.0 10.0 12.0
Mid strip btm • 3 3 3
Bar spacing in 9.0 10.0 9.0

Figure 4.11 Detailed Design Modification Template

 66

Column design at this level can be modified floor by floor. The user should select
a floor number to retrieve the default data for the columns in a specific floor. Figure
4.12 is a computer screen dump that shows the detailed column design modification
template in which the default detailed column data are retrieved from the database.
Values are shown for the default design (DFT) and one alternative (ALT1). The user
navigates from field to field using arrow keys, modifying each column size and
reinforcing as desired.

• S e h n a t i e Building Layout * Design Modification Input Tabla

5F DESCRIPTION UNT DFT ALT1 ALT 2

«r Column Type S S

rrr
3F I X Dimension in 16.0 14.0

»m M
T
B
R
Y Dimonaion
Total Clma
Main Bar
in
ea
•
16.0
15
6
14.0
15
7
I Nuatoera ea 4 4
<<Building Saetion>> O Stirrup Bar • 3 3
R Spacing in 12.0 10.0
E X Dlmansion in 22.0 20.0
X Y Dimension in 22.0 20.0
1 2 3 4 5 6 T Total Clma ea 16 16
p
7 8 9 10 11 12 R Main Bar • 7 8
I Numbers aa 4 4
13 14 15 16 17 18 O Stirrup Bar • 3 3
R Spacing in 12.0 10.0
19 20 21 22 23 24
X Dimension in 22.0 20.0
<<Floor Flan>> C Y Dimension in 22.0 20.0
O Total Clma ea 4 4
f
M Main Bar • 7 8
Plaasa aalact column location. E Numbers ea 4 4
Floor Nunbar $ 0 R Stirrup Bar * 3 3
Spacing in 12.0 10.0

Figure 4.12 Detailed Column Design Template

(3) Perform detailed cost estimating.

The designer at this level may determine the cost of any detailed design
alternative, but the designer has full responsibility for its strength. Regardless of the
 67

correctness of the changed design values, AICES performs detailed cost estimating in the
same manner as at levels 1 and 2. There are no limitations to take off quantities for any
member configuration. However, AICES cannot estimate costs when the estimating data
converted from the design data are beyond the feasible range of the default estimating
data. For example, if the designer inputs two feet of slab thickness, AICES can calculate
the quantity and cost for slab concrete, but it cannot calculate the cost of slab forms,
because the current database in AICES does not have the formwork design for a two-foot
slab. Calculation of formwork cost for designs that are beyond default data limits
requires extension of the default formwork design data through separate formwork
design. The detailed cost estimating process is described in Chapter V.

(4) Repeat the process with alternative values until a satisfactory design is obtained.
The outputs from this level are customized detailed designs, detailed cost estimates,
construction duration, and a cost comparison table or chart for design alternatives in the
same format as at level 2.

4 3 Data Processing During Design Modification

As described above, the structural design for a reinforced concrete building is

developed through three hierarchical design modification processes, each of which is
based on specific design variables. This section explains AICES data processing during
design modification.

4.3.1 Building Parameter Adjustment

At the schematic design modification level, a default detailed design is obtained for
the values of basic building parameters provided by the designer. It is assumed that the
designer may not have the information for all parameters at the beginning stage of the
 68

design. Regardless o f the amount o f the available information, AICES suggests a default
detailed design by utilizing the default values stored in the default design database. For
example, if the designer inputs only gross floor area, number of floors, and column
spacing and number of bays in one direction, column spacing in other direction is
retrieved from the default design database. Number of bays in other direction is
calculated by the system based on the input values and the retrieved default values. This
is but one of many alternative combinations of input design parameters that the designer
might choose. Another could be gross floor area, and column spacing and number of
bays in each direction. For this, the system would calculate number of floors.

(1) Building Parameter Combination

The possible combinations of input variables for six building parameters are shown
in Table 4.1. The total number o f parameter combinations is calculated by this equation.

n
y . n C i —n C l + nC2H h n C n -l+ n C n (4.1)
i= l

where n = thenumber of building parameters, i = the number o f inputavailable

parameters, nC i - the number of combinations o f n items taken i at a time. For six

building parameters, the total number of input categories is computed as follows.

6
^ 6 C i = 6 C l + 6 C 2 + - + 6C 5 + 6 C 6 = 64 (4.2)
i= l

Table 4.1 also shows three value categories for each combination o f parameters:
input values, default values, and calculated values. This table is the basis o f assigning a
parameter code that links the input values to the default values for the implementation of
AICES. Each parameter in a combination must have a value through either input,
default, or calculation. The value code 1 for an input parameter denotes that a value of
the parameter was input by the user, and the value code 0 denotes that a value was not
 69

Table 4.1 Building Param eters Com bination Table (64 combinations for 6 parameters)
I n o u t V a lu e D e f a u lt V a lu e C a l c u l a t e d V a lu e
A gf Nf Lx Nx A gf NT Lx Nx A gf NT Lx Nx Ny
r i i L/ t 1 ff 0 0 A 0 6 ff 0 0 0
” T “
1 0 1 1 b 6 b 0 0 b b d b 1 0 b
1 1 0 1 0 6 0 b 0 b 0 b 0 0 1 0
1 i i 0 0 b 6 b 0 0 0 b b 0 b 1
1 0 0 1 b b 6 1 0 o 0 b b 0 i 0
1 o f 0 o 0 ~0 i 0 o 0 jy- 0 0 0 1
1 1 6 b b 0 0 b 0 1 0 b 0 b i 0
1 0 6 0 0 b 0 1 1 b 0 0 0 b 0 1
6 1 1 i b 0 0 0 b b b 0 t 0 b 0
0 0 1 1 0 0 i 0 b b b 0 0 i 0 0
0 1 0 1 0 0 i 0 b 0 0 b b 0 i 0
0 1 1 b 0 b 1 0 b 6 0 0 0 0 1
0 1 6 0 b b 1 0 i 0 b b 0 b 0 1
0 0 b 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 b <T H b i 0
0 0 1 6 0 0 1 1 6 b 0 0 0 0 1
0 0 0 0 b 0 1 1 i 0 0 b b 0 0 1
0 1 1 1 b 0 0 0 b b b i 0 0 b 0
0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 <r i 0 0 0 0
0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 i 0 0 i 0 0 b 0
0 1 1 0 0 0 b 0 0 t 0 i b b 0 0
0 1 0 0 0 b b 0 i 1 0 i 0 0 0 0
0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 i 0 i 0 b 0 0
0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 i 0 0 i 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 i 1 0 i b b 0 0
0 0 1 1 1 0 0 i b 0 b 0 i b b 0 0
0 0 1 1 0 0 0 i b 0 1 0 i 0 0 0 0
0 0 1 0 0 0 i 0 i 0 0 i b b 0 0
0 0 0 1 1 0 b i 1 0 0 0 i 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 1 0 0 i 1 i 0 0 i 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 1 b 0 0 i 1 b 1 0 i b 0 0 0
0 0 1 0 b 0 0 i 0 i 1 0 i 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 b i 1 i 1 0 i 0 0 0 0
0 1 1 1 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 b 0 0 0
0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 b b 0 b 6 0 0
0 1 0 1 b 0 0 0 i 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 1 1 b b 0 b 0 0 i 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 1 b 0 0 1 1 0 b b 0 b b
0 6 1 0 0 0 0 i b i 0 0 0 0 0
0 1 6 b 0 0 0 b 1 i b 6 0 0 0
0 0 0 b 0 0 0 i 1 i 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 1 1 i 0 b 1 0 b 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 1 i 0 0 1 i 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 1 0 i 0 b 1 0 i b 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 i i 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 i 0 1 b 0 0 0 0
0 0 1 6 0 0 0 1 0 i 1 b 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 6 0 0 0 1 i 1 1 b 0 b 0 0
0 0 1 1 1 0 1 b 0 0 b b b 0 0 0
0 0 0 1 1 0 1 b i 0 b b 0 0 0 0
0 0 1 b 1 b i b d 1 0 “b 0 b 0 b
0 0 1 1 0 b i 0 b b i 0 b 0 0 0
0 0 0 b 1 0 r i b i 1 0 b b b 0 0
0 0 0 1 b 0 i 0 i 0 i b 0 0 0 0
0 0 1 0 0 b i 0 0 1 i 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 b 0 0 0 1 0 i i i 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 1 1 i 0 1 1 b 0 0 0 b b 0 0
0 0 0 0 1 i 0 1 1 i b 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 1 b i 0 1 i 0 i 0 6 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 i 0 0 1 b b 0 0 r 0
0 0 0 0 b i 0 1 i i i 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 1 b 0 1 i i 0 1 0 0 b 0 0
0 0 0 1 b 0 0 1 i 0 i 1 0 b b b 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 o i i f l i 0 0 0 0 0

A g f: G r o s s f lo o r a r e a N f: N u m b e r o f f lo o r s 1 : E n tr y a t v a l u e c a t e g o r y
L x: C o lu m n s p a c i n g In x d ir e c tio n N x: N u m b e r o f x b a y s 0 : N o e n try a t v a lu e c a te g o ry
L y: C o lu m n s p a c i n g In y d ir e c tio n N y: N u m b e r o f y b a y s • : L in e e n t r y d i s c u s s e d In t h e e x a m p l e
 70

input. The marked line (+) in Table 4.1 shows, for example, that if the values of gross
floor area, number o f floors, and column spacing and number of bays in x-direction are
input, the values of column spacing in y-direction will be selected by default, and the
value of number of bays in y-diiection will be calculated by AICES.
H ie values are assigned to the parameters whose values are not input. This is done
either through default value table lookup or calculation. AICES' choice between these
two methods depends on the building parameter priority defined in Table 4.2 in which 1
is the highest priority and 6 is the lowest. The value of a parameter that is not given as
the input and that has the lowest priority in an input parameter combination is calculated
from the input values and the default values o f the higher priority parameters.

Table 4.2 Building Parameter Priority

Notation Buildina Param eter Priority

Aof G ross Floor Area 5
Nf Number of Floors 6
Lx Column Spacina Lx 1
Ly Column Soacina Lv 2
Nxb Number of x Bays 3
Nyb Number of v Bays 4

The purpose of assigning priorities to parameters is to resolve conflicts between

different parameters. First, AICES computes user input. For example, if the user
provides gross floor area, number of floors, and column spacing and number of bays in
x-direction, a consistent value for column spacing and number o f bays in y-diiection can
be determined by the system. Because column spacing is higher priority than number of
bays, column spacing is retrieved from the default design database and number of bays is
calculated. Second, AICES verifies the consistency of user input. If a user had provided
 71

input for gross floor area inconsistent with the other input values, AICES would
recompute and adjust this area to a consistent value.
If the resulting values are unsatisfactory to the user, the values can be adjusted in
multiple cycles and new values are obtained by AICES. As a result, AICES creates a
default detailed design based on the adjusted values from the input values, the default
values, and the calculated values. These values are stored in the related databases. This
default detailed design will be the basis of the design modification at other levels.

(2) Default Design Value Assignment

The building parameter code and default building information databases are related
to each other to assign the default design values and to calculate other values. The
building parameter code database contains the code numbers for input value, default
value, and calculated value which are obtained from building parameter combinations
(Table 4.1). Table 4.3 shows building parameter code stored in this database. Each code
consists o f the value code 0 or 1 in six digits.

Table 4.3 Building Parameter Code

Input value Default value Calculated

code code value code
111111 000000 000000
111011 000000 000100
• -

* 111010 000100 000001

111100 000001 000010
; ;
(*: Record used in the example)
 72

The default building information database stores the default data for the basic
building parameters including building area, number of floors, and column spacing and
number of bays in each direction. Table 4.4 shows an example record stored in this
database.

Table 4.4 Default Building Information Data

Building Number of Column Column Number of Number of

Area Roots Spacing Lx Spacing Ly x bays v bays
9600 5 20 20 6 4

The input value of each parameter is stored in a memory variable. Based on input
values, the input value code is assigned by combining the value code 0 or 1 for each
parameter. For example, in Figure 4.6, the input values are SO,OCX) sf for gross floor
area, 7 for number o f floors, 20 ft for column spacing Lx, and 6 for number of x bays.
Thus, the input value code, '*111010'* is assigned by combining the value code 1 for gross
area, 1 for number of floors, 1 for column spacing L*, 0 for column spacing Ly, 1 for
number of x bays, and 0 for number of y bays. The system locates the record whose
input value code is equivalent to ”111010" and retrieves the default value code and the
calculated value code in the same record. In this example, the default value code,
"000100", and the calculated value code, "000001" are retrieved. Thus, based on the
default value code "000100", 20 ft for column spacing Ly is retrieved from the default
building information database. Based on the calculated value code, ”000001", number of
y bays is calculated by following equation.

Agf s Nf •Lx •Ly 'N ^ - N y j, (4.3)

N yb = RO U N D(A gf/(N f - L , L y N xb)> (4.4)

= ROUND(50000/(5 •20 *20 6)) = 4

 73

where Agf = gross floor area; Nf = number of floors; L* = column spacing in x-direction;
Ly = column spacing in y-direction; Nxb = number of x bays; and Nyb = number of y
bays. Thus, the calculated value o f number of y bays is 4. Gross floor area is adjusted
by the input, default, and calculated values.

Agfe = N r Lx ■L y •N xb •N yb (4.5)

= 5 20 20-6-4 = 48000

where Agfa= the adjusted gross floor area. Other values includingbuilding area (Ab),
building length (Lb), building width (Wb), and aspect ratio (Ra) are calculated as
follows.

Ab = L x •Nxb L y Nyb = 2 0 20-6-4 = 9600 (4.6)

Lb = Lx Nyb = 2 0 -6 = 120 (4.7)

Wb = L X N xb = 20-4 = 80 (4.8)

R,=-tfc- = — = 1.5 (4.9)

* W„ 80

The adjusted values are displayed on the screen, to be reviewed by the user as
shown in Figure 4.6, and are saved in the building information database. Based on
building information data, slab and column default designs are automatically created.
Data processing to create member default designs at level 1 is basically the same as the
processing to update member default designs at level 2. Section 4.3.2 and 4.3.3 explain
data processing for detailed slab and column designs, respectively.
 74

(3) Building Information Update

At the preliminary design modification level, some basic design variables can be
modified by the user. The user can change column spacing and member depth to adjust
the default detailed design. If column spacing is modified, number of bays may be
adjusted to keep the building area. Other detailed design data, including the member
depth and reinforcing and the column size and reinforcing, are automatically updated.
For example, if column spacing increases, member depth must increase to carry the
increased load. At the same design load, if member depth decreases, member reinforcing
increases to make up for the decrease in moment arm from the decreased member depth.
Before AICES updates design data, it validates whether the new input value is
within the feasible range, as denoted by their being an equivalent value in the default
design database. The AICES default design database stores the data in discrete intervals
between minimum and maximum values.
When the user changes column spacing, the system updates the related building
information. For example, in Figure 4.8, as column spacing is changed from 20 ft to 18
ft, the number of x bays increases from 6 to 7; building area is adjusted from 9600 sf to
9072 sf; building length and width are adjusted from 120 ft and 80 ft to 126 ft and 72 ft,
respectively; aspect ratio is updated from 1.5 to 1.8. The calculation procedure of each
variable is as follows.

Nxb = ROUND(L b/L x ) = ROUND(120/18) = 7 (4.10)

Nyb = ROUNDfWb/ L y ) = ROUND(80 /18) = 4 (4.11)

Ab = L x Nx b L y *Nyb = 18-7 18-4 = 9072 (4.12)

Lba = L * - N xb = 18-7 = 126 (4.13)

 75

Wba = L y N yb = 18 -4 = 72 (4.14)

Ra = = — = 1.75 = 1.8 (4.15)

72

where Nxb and Nyb = the number of bays in x- and y-dircctions, respectively; Lx and Ly
- column spacing in x- and y-directions, respectively; Lb and Wb = building length and
width o f default design, respectively; = the adjusted building area; and =
the adjusted building length and width, respectively; Ra = the adjusted aspectratio. The
updated values are displayed on the screen to be reviewed by theuser asshown in Figure
4.8.

4.32 Slab Default Design

The AICES database contains default design data for each slab type (interior,
exterior, comer), including slab size, thickness, and reinforcing. Reinforcing data consist
of rebar sizes and number of rebars for each strip in each slab direction. Appendix D.5
illustrates slab types, strips and rebar arrangement. Default slab design data for 100 psf
design live load (actual live load times 1.7) are obtained from the design tables in [CRSI
1984], and they are stored in the default slab detailed design database. Appendix C.1.2
shows default detailed slab design data. Appendix D.4 shows a sample design table in
[CRSI 1984].
Based on column spacings determined through building parameter adjustment,
AICES creates a slab default design. AICES looks up the default detailed slab design
database, locates the equivalent column spacing in the database, and retrieves detailed
design data including slab thickness, and reinforcing data for each strip for each slab
direction. Table 4.5 shows example default detailed slab design data in the database. For
the example building with 20 ft of column spacing in both directions (square bay), the
detailed slab design data for the equivalent column spacing are retrieved from the default
Table 4.5 Default Detailed Slab Design Data

Comer Column Exterior Column Interior Column

Clm Slab Column Strip Middle Strip Colu mn Strip MiddleStrip Column Strip Middle Strip
span t Top BOHorn Top BOttom Top BOttom Top BOttom Top Bottom T<°P Bolttom
(in) size rtum size num size num size num
(ft) size num size num size num size num size num size num size num size num
16 5.5 4 12 3 12 4 9 3 9 4 13 3 12 4 9 3 9 4 12 3 9 4 9 3 9
17 6.0 4 12 3 14 4 9 3 11 4 14 3 14 4 9 3 11 4 14 3 10 4 9 3 11
18 6.0 4 13 4 9 4 9 3 11 4 17 4 9 4 9 3 11 4 16 3 12 4 9 3 11
19 6.5 4 14 4 10 4 10 3 13 5 12 4 10 4 10 3 13 5 12 3 14 4 10 3 13
* 20 7.0 4 15 4 11 4 10 3 14 5 14 4 11 4 10 3 14 5 13 3 15 4 10 3 14
21 7.0 4 19 4 12 4 11 3 14 5 16 4 12 4 11 3 14 5 15 4 10 4 11 3 15
22 7.5 4 20 4 13 4 11 4 9 6 12 4 13 4 11 4 9 6 12 4 11 4 11 4 9
23 8.0 4 22 5 10 4 12 4 10 6 14 5 40 4 12 4 10 6 13 4 12 4 12 4 10
24 8.5 5 16 4 16 4 12 4 12 5 20 4 16 4 12 4 12 5 20 4 13 4 12 4 12
25 9.0 5 17 5 12 4 13 4 13 7 12 5 12 4 13 4 13 7 12 5 9 4 13 4 13
26 9.5 5 19 6 9 5 9 5 9 5 24 6 9 5 9 5 9 7 13 5 10 5 9 5 9
27 10.0 6 15 6 10 5 10 5 10 7 14 6 10 5 10 5 10 7 14 5 11 5 10 5 10
2B 10.0 6 17 6 11 5 10 5 10 7 16 6 11 5 10 5 10 7 13 5 10 5 10 5 10
♦: Reccrd u s sd in the example

Table 4.6 Detailed Slab Design Data

Slab X-Direction Y-Direction

Slab Slab Dimension Column Strip Middle Strip Column Snip Middle Strip
Type num Lx Ly t Top Bolttom Top BOttom Top Bottom Top Bottom
(ft) J2L (in) see num size num size num size num size num size num size num size num
— 5 Interior
8 20 20 7.0 5 13 3 15 4 10 3 14 5 13 3 15 4 10 3 14
— > Exterior 12 20 20 7.0 5 14 4 11 4 10 3 14 5 14 4 11 4 10 3 14
— > Comer 4 20 20 7.0 4 15 4 11 4 10 3 14 4 15 4 11 4 10 3 14
Lx* Column spacing in x-direction Ly = column spacing in y-direction t - slab thickness
 77

slab design database and stored in the slab design configuration database. One record in
the detailed slab design database is transformed into three records to separately store the
data for each slab type, because the number of slab panels for each slab type is different.
The number of slab panels is calculated by following equations.

N i m = ( N xb- 2 ) ( N yb —2) = ( 6 - 2 ) < 4 —2) = 8 (4.16)

Ncxt = 2(Nxb- 2 ) + 2(Nyb- 2 ) = 2 -4 + 2-2 = 12 (4.17)

Ncnr = N xb •Nyb - ( N ^ + Ncxt) = 6 -4 - (8 +12) = 4 (4.18)

where Njnt, Next, and Ncnr - the number of panels (bays) of interior, exterior, and comer
slabs, respectively. These are also stored in the same database. Table 4.6 shows the slab
design data stored in the slab design configuration database. The data stored in this
database are used to take off quantities during the detailed estimating process. The
quantity takeoff process is described in Chapter V.
H ie default design data retrieval process described above is for squareslab panels.
For rectangular slab panels, the system retrieves the default data for bothcolumn
spacings (Lx and Ly). The system retrieves the size, spacing, and length of rebars for
slab span Lx to be placed at that spacing across the y-direction during the quantity takeoff
process. It also retrieves the size, spacing, and length of rebars for slab span Ly to be
placed at that spacing across the x-direction. Thus, the size, spacing, and length of rebars
spanning L , are determined by L*, but the number is determined by Ly

4.3J Column Default Design

The column design is based on gravity loads (axial loads) and moments transferred
from the slab. The columns of a building are classified into three types based on their
location: interior, exterior, and comer columns. The load carried by each column type in
 78

a floor is determined by slab thickness, the effective slab area of a column, and the
number of floors above the floor [Lin 1988]. The moment is determined by the span
length and gravity load. Figure 4.13 shows the effective slab area fen* each column type
in a building floor whose column spacing is uniform in each direction. The gravity load
carried by the exterior column is half of the load carried by an interior column, and the
gravity load carried by the comer column is a quarter of the load carried by an interior
column.

■- - - - - - ■ .......... - ■ ............................. - - - - ■

: 1/4 1 /2 1 /2 1 /2 1 /2 1 /2 ! 1/4 ;
•

* 1 /2 ■ 1 ■ 1 ■ 1 : ■ 1 ■ 1 : 1 /2 *

■ 1 /2 ■ 1 ■ 1 ■ ■ 1 ■ 1 ■ 1 ■1 / 2 *
i

* 1 /2 ■ 1 ■ 1 ■ 1 ■ 1 ■ 1 : 1 /2 *
L _ , ,

: 1/4 1 /2 1 /2 1 /2 1 /2 1 /2 ; 1/4 •
■ - - - - - - - - - - - - - ■ ----- -- - - m- - - - - • a

Figure 4.13 Effective Slab Area for Column Design Load

The gravity load for an interior column in the top floor of a building is obtained by

Pu = 1.4(D L L X L y) + 1.7(LL LX L y) (4.19)

where Pu=total factored load; DL = dead load, psf ; LL = live load, psf; and Ly =
span lengths, ft in x- and y-direction, respectively. 1.4 and 1.7 are the factors of dead
load and live load, respectively [Neville 1984] [CRSI 1984]. Total load for an interior
column in the k-th floor o f n-story building is computed as follows:

Pu(k, int) = ( n - k+ l)[l. 4(DL- Lx • L y ) +1.7(LL- L x •L y )] (4.20)

 79

Total load for an exterior column in the k-th floor is computed as follows:

Pu(k,e«) = ^ (n - k + l)[ L 4 (D L -L I . l 7 )+1.7(L L -L I L y)] (4.21)

Total load for a comer column in the k-th floor is computed as follows:

p u (k ,cn r) = i ( n - k + l ) [ l . 4 ( D L L x-L y ) + 1 . 7 ( L L L , L y )] (4.22)

AICES calculates gravity loads for each column type for each floor based on
building information provided by the user. The calculated gravity loads are used to
locate default column data with the transfer moment and minimum required column size.
Based on the assumption o f uniform column spacing, the transfer moment is applied only
to exterior and comer columns. AICES directly uses the negative exterior moment for
each slab stored in the default slab detailed design database. Column size is based on the
minimum required column sizes for each column type stored in the same database.
The default column design database in AICES is comprised o f column sizes and
reinforcing data for different gravity loads and moments. Detailed column design data
are obtained from the column design charts in [Neville 1984]. Each column design chart
illustrates the feasible range for each reinforcing (e.g., 4-#6, 4-#8) by polygonal area,
where the ordinate depicts the gravity loads and the abscissa is the moment. Appendix
D.6 shows a sample design chart in [Neville 1984]. AICES default column detailed
design database represents the column design charts by designating three polar
coordinates with gravity loads and moments on the perimeter o f each polygonal for each
column size as shown in Table 4.7 (See the chart in Appendix D.6 for the position of
three polar coordinates on a polygon).
AICES locates a default column design data for the corresponding column size,
gravity loads, and moment in the default column detailed design database, and retrieves
 80

column reinforcing data. The moment is applied only for exterior (the half moment due
to one direction) and comer (the combined moment due to two directions) columns.
First, AICES filters the records for the gravity loads which are greater than or equal to
the calculated gravity load, and it retrieves the first record for interior columns. Then, it
compares the moment with the interpolated moment (between M l and M2, or between
M2 and M3 in Table 4.7) on the slanted line of the corresponding polygon in the design
chart. If the moment is less than or equal to the interpolated moment, the reinforcing
data in the record is retrieved for exterior or comer columns. If the moment is greater
than the interpolated moment, the system locates the next record and continues the
moment comparison in the same manner until it finds a feasible reinforcing data. The
system iterates the process for each column type in a floor through the entire building.

Table 4.7 Default Detailed Column Design Data

Column Polar Coordinates Main Bar Stirrup Bar

Size M1 P1 M2 P2 M3 P3 Size Number Size Spacing
(in) (ft-kips) (kips) (ft-kips) (kips) (ft-kips) fkiDS) of Bars (in)
; ; ; • . . ■ .

16 30 395 100 175 42 0 4 6 3 12.0

16 40 535 135 235 60 0 4 7 3 12.0
; ; ; ; ; ; ; . .

22 60 540 190 240 80 0 4 7 3 12.0

22 80 700 250 320 100 0 4 8 3 12.0
; : : ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;

For the example building with 3 floors, for 20 ft column spacing, the gravity loads
for each column type in each floor are calculated, and the moment and minimum
required column size are retrieved from the default slab detailed design database. Table
4.8 shows column size, moment, and gravity loads to be carried by each column for each
floor. The data in this table are compared with the data in Table 4.7. For example, the
 81

minimum required column size for interior columns in the first floor is 16 inches, and the
gravity loads are 400 kips. H ie system filters the records in Table 4.7 for the 16 inch
columns and the gravity loads which are greater than or equal to 400 kips, and it retrieves
the first record. Thus, 4-#7 bars for interior columns in the first floor are obtained. The
minimum required column size for exterior and comer columns in the first floor is 22
inches, the moment is 70 ft-kips, and the gravity loads are 200 and 100 kips, respectively.
H ie applied moments are 35 ft-kips (the half moment) for exterior columns and 49 ft-kips
(the combined moment in both directions) for comer columns. The system filters the
records in Table 4.7 as the same manner, and compares the moments with interpolated
moment. Because both moments for exterior and interior columns are in the feasible
range of the reinforcing in the first record, 4-#7 bars are obtained for exterior and comer
columns in the first floor. Reinforcing data for the columns in other floors are obtained
by the same method applied for the columns in the first floor.

Table 4.8 Column Gravity Loads and Moments

Column Size (inch) Moment Gravity Loads (kips)

Floor Exterior Exterior
Interior (ft-kips) Interior Comer
1 16 22 70 400 200 100
2 16 22 70 320 160 80
3 16 22 70 240 120 60
4 16 22 70 160 80 40
5 16 22 70 80 40 20

Detailed column design data for each type in each floor are stored in the column
design configuration database to be used for detailed cost estimating. The number of
columns for each type is calculated in a similar manner as slab panels. Appendix C.2.3
shows the detailed column design data for the example building.
 82

4.4 Summary

In AICES, a design is developed through hierarchical design modification levels:

schematic (level 1), preliminary (level 2), and detailed (level 3) design. Level 1 creates a
default detailed design based on basic building parameters. Level 2 adjusts basic design
variables o f the default detailed design created at level 1. Level 3 customizes detailed
design variables of the default detailed design created at level 1 or 2. Design input at
each level produces a usable reinforced concrete design that is input to detailed cost
*
estimating. The user interacts with the system by input of alternative values for design
variables. AICES checks the feasibility of the input values and updates related variables
if required. Once AICES accepts the input value, it automatically performs detailed cost
estimating for the modified design and outputs the construction cost and duration, as is
explained in the next chapter. AICES screen menus and design modification templates
are arranged in Appendix E, and implementation programs for design modification are
presented in Appendix F.
 CHAPTER V

DETAILED COST ESTIMATING

This chapter describes detailed cost estimating in AICES. First, an overview of the
detailed cost estimating process is given. Then, the quantity takeoff, unit cost calculation
and unit cost modification processes are described. Finally, the duration estimating
process is explained.

5.1 Overview

Detailed cost estimating in AICES is performed through two main processes in

sequence: quantity takeoff (Section 5.2) and unit cost calculation (Section 5.3), acting
on each component of a two-way flat plate system; for each reinforced concrete
construction element: formwork, reinforcing, and concrete placing. Figure 5.1 shows
the overall process o f detailed cost estimating.
Components are estimated separately, because they have different designs,
construction methods and productivity. Elements are estimated separately, because they
have different quantity units, different crews, different methods, and different material
costs. It is assumed that AICES uses wood forms for formwork, and ready-mixed
concrete for concrete placing.
AICES allows the user to update material price and modify unit cost by selecting an
alternative method from the construction methods database (Section 5.4).
AICES estimates construction duration based on the duration of a module and the
total number of modules in a building (Section 5.5).

83
 84

Start

PDDB Retrieve building data.

inf< Retrieve detailed design data

DB for each component

DB
Quantity Takeoff
(See Section 5.2)
PDDB
Store quantity o f each element
for each com ponent
quantity an
unit coat
DB PIDB
Unit Cost Calculation
(See Section 5.3)
Calculate cost of each element
for each component
Ubar wage
DB
Display quantity, unit cost method
and total co st DB
crew type
DB
No lify costing

Ye*
formwork type
DB
Unit Cost Modification
(See Section 5.4)

Save cost estimating results.

End

PDDB: Project Dependent Database

PIDB: Project Independent Database

Figure 5.1 Detailed Cost Estimating Process

 85

5.2 Quantity Takeoff

In AICES, formwork is taken off by contact area, reinforcing steel is taken off by
tonnage, and concrete is taken off by volume, for each structural component Figure 5.2
shows the process of quantity takeoff in AICES.

PDDB Retrieve building data.

building
information Retrieve detailed design data
DB for each component.
member design
configuration
DB i= i+ l

number o f

number o f

Calculate quantity based on

takeoff formula.

Summarize the total quantity

for each estimating element.

PDDB
Store quantity o f each element

quantity and
J for each component.

unit coat
DB Display quantity o f each
estimating element.

End

Figure 5.2 Quantity Takeoff Process

 86

The system retrieves detailed design data including member dimensions and
reinforcing data from the member design configuration database. The system calculates
the quantity of each estimating element for each structural component based on a
mathematical formula. The calculation is iterated until the last data of the last
component is retrieved as depicted in Figure 5.2, where i denotes i-th component in a
building structure and j denotes j-th instance of i-th component. For example, a slab
component has three instances (types): interior, exterior, and comer slabs shown in Table
4.6 in Chapter IV (Appendix D.5 illustrates slab types in a floor).
The quantity of each element is automatically calculated and summarized by the
AICES quantity takeoff program. The quantity takeoff process and formula for each
element for slabs are explained below. The process and formula for columns are not
explained because the basic calculation procedures are the same as that for slab
component. Appendix G shows a portion of the quantity takeoff program, including the
mathematical formula. The quantities summarized are stored in the quantity and unit
cost database. The unit cost calculation process is described in Section 5.3.
Table 5.1 shows the summary of slab cost estimating results including the quantity
and unit cost for each estimating element of the slab component of the example building.

Table 5.1 Detailed Slab Cost Estimating Results

Estimating Unit Quantity Maierial Laibor Eaui|pment Total

Element Total Unit Total Unit Total Cost
Unit
Formwork sfca Of 48000 0.62 C9DD9 2.52 121163 0.06 2721 153543
Reinforcina ton Qi 49.2 604.61 29746 373.68 18385 0.00 0 48131
Concrete cy On 1037 62.63 64952 13.79 14304 4.24 4395 83651
Total 124357 153582 7116 285325
 87

(1) Form work

Formwork quantity (in square feet of contact area (sfca), which is the area of
formwork in contact with concrete), Qf, equals to gross floor area by assuming that there
are no openings in floors. Qf is calculated by this equation.

Q f = L x -Ly N xb.N y b N f (5.1)

= 20-20-6*4 5 = 48000

where Lx and Ly = column spacings (ft) in x- and y-direction, respectively; Nxb =

number of x bays; Nyb = number of y bays; and Nf is number of floors. The values of all
variables are retrieved from the building information database (See Table 4.4).

(2) Reinforcing

The system calculates reinforcing quantity by steel weight (ton). Reinforcing

quantity, Qr, of slab component is calculated by the following sequential equations.

n m
Q r = Z S ( Q x r + Q y r > * N b N f /2000 (5.2)
i=lj=l

Qxr = Qxct + Qxcb + Qxmt + Qxmb (5.3)

Qyr “ Qyct Qycb "*■Qymt **"Qymb (5.4)

(5.5)

(12LX+ 6) + (1 - 2 •0.125) •12L

(5.6)

Qxmt = (2 •0.22 *12Ln + Sc ) - • (5.7)

 88

(5.8)

(5.9)

(12LV+ 6) + (1 - 2 •0.125) • 12L

(5.10)

(5.11)

Qymb “ (5.12)

where Q „ and Qyj- = reinforcing quantities (lb) in x- and y-direction, respectively. Each
is the sum of reinforcing quantities in column and middle strips in each direction. For
example, Qxct. Qxcb* Qxmt* “ d Qxmb = reinforcing quantities (lb) in both strips in x-
direction where the subscripts denote the location of rebars (i.e., c and m = column and
middle strips; t and b = top and bottom bars). Nb and Nf = number of bays and floors,
respectively. Ln= clear span length (ft). Sc = column size (in). Lx and Ly = column
spacings (ft) in x- and y-direction, respectively. Nxct and Sxct = the number and size o f
rebars in column strip in x-direction in a slab panel. (The size o f a rebar is designated by
the number o f eights of an inch in the diameter, for example, No. 5 bar is 5/8 inch in
diameter.)
Number o f bays, column spacings, and the size and number of rebars are retrieved
from the slab design configuration database (See Table 4.6). Number of floors is
retrieved from the building information database. The length o f rebars in each strip is
based on the recommended bar details for two-way flat plate in [ACI 1989]. Appendix
D.5 illustrates slab strips and reinforcing bar arrangement. Reinforcing quantity is
 89

converted to weight by Wr (steel weight in lh/in3). H ie calculation in the system is

performed by do-loop function based on above equations. In this example, 49.2 tons of
reinforcing steel are taken off as shown in Table 5.1.

(3) Concrete

Concrete volume of slabs is based on the length, width, and thickness o f each slab
panel. Because AJCES assumes that slabs are designed with the same thickness on all
floors, concrete volume is calculated by multiplying gross floor area by slab thickness.
The system calculates concrete volume by this equaaon.

Qc = L X-L y -Nxb -Nyb -Nf t/12/27 (5.13)

= 20 20 6 4 5-7/12/27 = 1037

where Qc = concrete quantity (cy); t — slab thickness (in). The system retrieves the
values of all variables except slab thickness from the building information database (See
Table 4.4). Slab thickness is retrieved from the slab design configuration database.

5 3 Unit Cost Calculation

AICES calculates the unit cost of material, labor, and equipment for each element of
reinforced concrete construction. The overall process o f unit cost calculation in AICES
is shown in Figure 5.3. Cost calculation for reinforcing and concrete placing is quite
straight forward. However, cost calculation for formwork is more complicated because
(1) it requires design of formwork and (2) forms are usually reused several times.
The implementation of AICES uses wood forms, so this section mainly describes the
unit cost calculation for wood forms. The unit costs of material and labor per sfca of
formwork are calculated to be multiplied by the formwork quantity.
 90

PIDB (^StarQ

price Locate construction methods

DB baaed on the assigned code.
labor wage*
DB
Store the values for each item
DB
to memory variables.
crew ty p e/iix e
DB __ * Estimating element
equipo&eel type * Crew ft Equipment types
DB * Productivity
form w ort type/cot * Waste factor
DB _

Locate record for Locate record for Locate record for

the material. the crew. the equipment.

Store material price Store crew data Store equipment data

to memory variable. to memory variable. to memory variable.

Locate record for

labor wages.

Store wage items

to memory variable.

i=i+l
number of

Calculate wages per day.

(wages=baset-fringe benefit)
I
Calculate unit cost for each element
Material [ Labor ] Equipment

PDDB Store the calculated unit cost

to the database.
quantity and
unit cost Display unit cost data
DB for each estimating element.

Figure 5.3 Unit Cost Calculation Process

 91

5.3.1 M aterial Unit Cost

The material cost of formwork is dependent on the forms which are procured or
fabricated for a project The quantity of a form to be procured or fabricated depends on
the number of times the form is used. The number o f form uses may be determined by
the form material property and the shape of a building, including the uniformity and
regularity in a floor or floors. If a building has a uniform plan from floor to floor, the
forms may be reused at many places.
Wood forms can be stripped, and slabs reshored, to allow the same forms to be used
from floor to floor. If one floor is placed at a time, then the amount of floor forms need
not be greater than the total contact area of a floor. Moreover, depending on the form
material selected, the forms should be replaced with new ones after the certain number of
uses to keep the same work quality.
In general, wood forms consist o f (1) sheathing to retain the concrete and (2)
supporting members necessary to hold the sheathing firmly in place. Direct support for
the sheathing is provided by studs in vertical forms for walls and by joists in
horizontal forms for slabs. Studs are usually supported by cross members called wales,
and joists are usually supported by cross members called stringers. Wales are supported
by tension in tie rods through the concrete, and stringers are supported by compression in
shores.
There can be many alternative combinations of material sizes for a wood form.
Wood forms in AICES are based on only two sizes of plywood and two sizes o f lumber
that are most commonly used in formwork. With two alternative sizes of plywood for
sheathing and two alternative sizes of lumber for supporting members, six alternative
designs can be obtained for different material combinations. For example, one design is
5/8 inch plywood sheathing, 2x4 S4S joists, and 2x6 S4S stringers.
 92

A formwork design is based on design loads (form and concrete weight plus live
load on concrete during placement), structural member dimensions, and the properties of
form materials. Design loads and member dimensions are obtained from the AICES
database. The properties of form materials are found in the literature [Hurd 1984]
[Peurifoy 1976]. Formwork design calculations were performed in a spreadsheet by
following formwork design procedures in [Hurd 1984]. The formwork design results are
presented in the table in Table S.2 (6) which shows the size, quantity, and the material
unit cost. The material quantity and unit cost for the selected formwork design are stored
in the formwork type database in AICES to be used for the unit cost calculation.
If the forms are reused, the material unit cost must be adjusted by adding the cost of
materials replaced and spreading the total cost over the number of form uses. AICES
assumes 10 % of material replacement per each reuse. Usually, the material unit cost is
computed by the following equation [Means 1990]:

Cost = C i + (Nu —1)-Rf -Ci

(5.14)

where, Cl = the unit cost of first use forms; Nu = the number of form uses; and Rf = the
rate of material replacement which reflects the cost of repairing forms to be reused.
For example, if forms are used four tunes, the average material unit cost will be
calculated as follows:

C l + 3-0.1-C l 1.3CI
Cost = 0.325C1 (5.15)
4 4

However, formwork in AICES is based on a module. A module is defined as the

work area for which a set of forms is applied to be erected without interruption. The
required form sets are determined by the total number of modules in a project and the
 93

number of form uses. Therefore, the material cost of formwork in AICES reflects the
cost of the total required form sets and the replacement cost for form reuses.
Figure 5.4 shows the formwork material unit cost calculation process in AICES.
The number of modules per floor is retrieved from the building information database.
The total number of modules are calculated by multiplying the number of modules per
floor by the number of floors.
The number of form sets, Ns is calculated by this equation.

Ns =CEILING(Nin/ N u ) (5.16)

where Nm = the total number of modules in a project Ns is determined by taking the

smallest integer value that is greater than or equal to the calculated value.
CEILING(<numeric expression:*) is a mathematical function to return the smallest
integer that is greater than or equal to the value of the numeric expression. For the
example building with 5 floors, for 4 uses per farm, and for 2 modules per floor, Ns is
calculated by

Ns = CEILING(10/4) = CEILING(2.5) = 3 (5.17)

The material unit cost of formwork is calculated by this equation.

CoJ, _ C l- < N ,+ ( N m - N , ) - R f )
(5.18)
Nm
m

Therefore, for the example building, the material unit cost is

_ 4 C l ( 3 + 7-0.1) 3.7CI
Cost = -----1----------- - ---------- —0.37C1 (5.19)
10 10
 94

Stut

PDDB
Retrieve number of
modules per floor.
building
jnfoimmnon
DB Calculate total number of
modules in a project.

Calculate number of
required form sets.
(Equation 5.16)
PIDB
Retrieve material cost
o f the new forms.
form woik type/co it
DB
Calculate material unit cost
_______ persfca.________
(Equation 5.18)
PDDB
Store material unit cost
to the database..
quantity
cost
DB
Display material unit cost.

End

Figure S.4 Formwork Material Unit Cost Calculation Process

Table 5.2 shows a slab formwork estimating example based on the selected formwork
design. As shown in Table 5.2 (2), the material cost of the new forms applied to a 7 inch
slab is $1.67 per square foot o f the forms. Thus, the material unit cost of the project is

„ 1.67-(3 +7-0.1) _
Cost = ----------------------- 0.62 ($/sfca) (5.20)
10

This material unit cost is saved in the database to be used for calculating the total
material cost.
Table 52 Slab Formwoik Estimating Example

(11 Initial information (2) Material Data (6) SwMcna E uhmmmIi V

romnrom i eelgn
Description Amount Uni Slab Thickness fbm/sf Ifef m Items Size Q/Sf $/*fca
Stab Thickness 7 in t<*6* 1.91 1.62 6* Sheathing 5/8* PW 1.03 0.67
Number of Floors 5 floors 6"<t<-8" 1.96 1.67 Joists 2*4 S4S 120 0.46
Floor Area 9600 sf 8"<i<«10* 220 1.80 Stringers 2*6 S4S 0.71 028
Module Size 4600 sf 10Vt<»12" 225 1.86 Sub Total 1.91 1.41
Number of Modules 10 Shores 0.06 021
Form Uses 4 times -^ | Required Form Sate Total 1.62
8’ Sheathing 5/8" PW 1.03 0.67
(31 Labor4tour Calculation (41 Crest Data Joists 2*4 S4S 120 0.46
First Use Reuse Craft Amount $/Hr Total Stringers 2*6 S4S 0.76 0.30
ActMty Labor-Hr Total Labor-Hr Total Carp. F 1 30.84 30.84 Sub Total 1.96 1.42
/lOOfbm Labor-Hr /lOOfbm Labor-Hr Carpenter 4 29.34 117.35 Shores 0.07 024
Form Fabricating 2.00 0.04 0.50 0.01 Laborer 1 25.46 25.46 Total 1.67
Form Erecting 2.50 0.05 2.50 0.05 PWTools 3.90 3.90 10" Sheathing 5/B" PW 1.03 0.67
Form Stripping 0.50 0.01 0.50 0.01 Total 6 173.65 Joists 2*4 S4S 1.44 0.55
Form Clean &Move 0.50 0.01 0.50 0.01 Hourty Labor Cost 28.94 Stringers 2*6 SIS 0.76 0.30
Total Labor-Hours 5.50 0.11 4.00 0.08 * Carp. F: Carpenter Foreman Sub Total 220 1.52
Combined Total Labor-Hours 0.09 Hr/sfca * PW: Power Shores 0.08 028
Total 1.80
(51 Cost Estimating Reeults Assumption____________ 12" Sheathing 5/0’ PW 1.03 0.67
Items Uni Quantly Uni Cost Total Cost * Repurchase for every 4 ueee. Joists 2*4 S4S 1.44 0.55
Material Cost sfca 48000 $0.62 $29,600 * Refabrlcate for every repurchase. Stringers 2*6 S4S 0.81 0.32
Labor Cost efca 48000 $2.52 $120,978 Sub Total 225 1.54
Equipment Cost sfca 48000 $0.06 $2,717 Shores 0.10 0.32
Total Cost $3.20 $153295 Total 1.86
 96

5.3.2 Labor Unit Cost

Construction labor is the greatest cost o f American concrete construction. Labor

unit cost is a function of labor wage rate and production rate. Labor wage rates consist
of base payment, fringe benefits, and indirect costs. Table 5.3 lists concrete construction
labor wage rates with base payment and fringe benefits per hour for each craft. Indirect
costs includes social security taxes, unemployment taxes and workers’ compensation
insurance, which are paid on base payment, vacation and holiday, and dues. Labor cost
is calculated by the following equations.

Labor cost = base pay + fringes + indirect cost (5.21)

Indirect cost = (% Insurance and Taxes)

(5.22)
x (base pay + vacation & holiday + dues)
% Insurance and Taxes = % SS+ %Unemp + % WC (5.23)

where SS = social security taxes; Unemp = unemployment taxes; and WC = workers'

compensation insurance. AICES applies a 7.56% social security tax rate, 7.5%
unemployment tax rate, and 12.71% workers' compensation insurance rate for concrete
work [Means 1990].
A production rate is the number of units of work produced by a person or crew in a
specified time, usually an hour or a day. Production rate may also specify the time in
labor-hours or labor-days required to produce a specified number o f units of work. The
time that a worker consumes in performing a unit of work will vary among workers,
projects and with climatic conditions, job supervision, complexities of the operation, and
other factors. For example, it requires more time per sfca to fabricate and erect lumber
forms for concrete columns than for supported slabs. Therefore, the different operations
should be estimated separately.
 97

Table S.3 Concrete Construction Labor Wage List [AGC 1990]

_________ [U nit: $/hrl
Craft B— H aw Vacation Pandon Appran ULF. 8.U.B. B.TJS. Duaa
HoMav -Boa
Carpenter 19.87 1.80 0.00 2.00 0.05 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.00
Carpenter F. 21.12 1.80 0.00 2.00 0.05 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.00
Rod men 16.09 2.90 3.06 5.31 0.18 0.08 0.50 0.00 0.00
Rod men F. 17.09 2.90 3.06 5.31 0.18 0.08 0.50 0.00 0.00
Trowel 23.35 0.00 0.00 2.50 0.15 0.10 0.15 0.00 0.72
Laborer 16.13 1.65 1.55 1.05 0.00 0.10 0.00 0.07 0.00
Laborer F. 17.13 1.65 1.55 1.05 0.00 0.10 0.00 0.07 0.00
Operator 18.75 2.45 2.44 3.00 0.15 0.08 0.03 0.00 0.20

h « w : Health and Welfare ulf .: Industry Advancement Fund

8.U.B.: Supplemental Unemployment Benefit B.T.F.: Basic Training Fund
F.: Foreman

The labor unit cost of formwork is calculated by multiplying the total labor hours
per sfca by the hourly labor cost. Figure S.S shows the labor unit cost calculation process
for formwork. The total labor hours are obtained by combining the labor hours for first
use and reuses of forms based on the number of required form sets, the total number of
modules, and the material quantity per square foot of the new forms.
Formwork may be broken down into the work items of fabricating, erecting,
stripping, and cleaning and moving. Each work item can be performed in a specific time,
with a specific crew, which can be estimated. From historical data, one might find it
requires 2 labor-hours to fabricate new slab forms that require 100 fbm (feet board
measure) for joists and stringers, 2.5 labor-hours to erect them, 0.5 labor-hour to strip
them, and 0.5 labor-hour to clean and move them. The labor hours of the reused forms
are equal to those of the new forms except form fabricating. It requires 0.5 labor-hour to
fabricate the reused forms. Therefore, the total labor hours per 100 fbm are 5.5 hours for
first use and 4 hours for every reuse.
 98

Sun

PIDB
Retrieve material quantity
o f new fonns.
formwork type/ocxt
DB PIDB
Calculate total labor hours
for first uae and reuse.
(Equation 3.24
labor wages
Retriew labor wages and DB
crew data for formwork. conruucuon method
DB

Calculate hourly labor cost.

(Equation 5.26

Calculate labor unit cost.

(Equation 5.27
PDDB
Store labor unit cost
to the database.

DB
Display labor unit cost.

End

Figure 5.5 Formwork Labor Unit Cost Calculation Process

The material quantity (fbm per sf) of new forms is obtained from the formwork
design table (Table 5.2 (6». Based on the labor hours and material quantity, the combined
total labor hours per sfca (CTLH) for first use and reuses are calculated by the following
equation (Table 5.2 (3».

CTLH _ Qfbm ' (L H f • N , + L H r •(N m - N s )}

100-N m

1.96 (5.5-3+ 4 (10-3)} _ ^

10010 ~ '
 99

where LHf and LH,. = the labor hours per fbm for first use and reuse, respectively; and
Qfbm = material quantity (fbm per sf) of new forms.
A formwork crew can consist o f carpenters, a carpenter foreman, common laborers,
and power tools. For example, a crew for the slab formwork may be composed o f four
carpenters, one carpenter foreman, one common laborer, and power tools. The cost per
crew-hour is calculated by summing hourly wages of all crafts in a crew (Table 5.2 (4)).

Hourly Crew Cost = Y,(Hourly Wages o f All Crafts in a Crew) (5.25)

= 1 HWcf + 4 HWc + l HWi
= 1-30.65 + 4 29.51 + 1-25.6 = 174.29

where HWcf, HWC and HW| denote hourly labor wages o f a carpenter foreman, a
carpenter, and a building laborer, respectively, which are calculated through equations
5.21, 5.22, and 5.23. The hourly crew cost is divided by the total number of craftsmen in
the crew to obtain the cost per a labor-hour (Table 5.2 (4».

Hourly Crew Cost

Hourly Labor Cost (5.26)
Number of Crafts

This hourly labor cost is multiplied by the total labor hours per sfca to calculate the labor
unit cost of formwork (Table 5.2 (5)).

Labor Unit Cost = CTLH •Hourly Labor Cost (5.27)

= 0.09-29.05 = 2.53

The cost of power tools is considered as an equipment cost. Because the demand
on power tools is a function o f number o f carpenters, the total hourly equipment cost is
calculated by multiplying the hourly cost by the number of carpenters in a crew. This is
 100

divided by the total number of workers in the crew to obtain the equipment cost per a
labor-hour (Table 5.2 (4». This hourly equipment cost is applied to calculate the
equipment unit cost of formwork.

5.4 Unit Cost Modification

5.4.1 M ateria) Price Update

Material price varies in different time and location. AICES contains material price
that is obtained from [Means 1990]. The material price can be added or updated by the
user. AICES recalculates the unit cost for the related element based on the changed
material price.

5.4.2 Construction M ethod Change

An alternative construction method can be selected by the user from the AICES
construction method database to check the cost variation. The construction method
database contains different concrete placing methods and different formwork types. For
example, AICES applies pumping method for concrete placing in unit cost calculation.
The user may select another method, such as crane with bucket from the lookup table.
Figure 5.6 is a computer screen dump which shows the concrete placing method lookup
table. AICES recalculates the unit cost for the selected method, displays the cost data on
the screen. If the changed unit cost is accepted by the user, AICES updates the unit cost
in the quantity and unit cost database. The selection of concrete placing method may be
consulted with a knowledge-based method selection system described in Chapter VI.
An alternative formwork type can be selected in the same manner with concrete
placing method selection.
 101

|Introduction Project Modify Design Modify Costing Report Kxlt |

■Construction Method

(concrotl^Tlncinigr slsctlon
Typo
Soloet Fron blot
Consult
I
CODS COMP CLAM CUM UNIT PRODUCT MANHOUR MNTNOD
cs0410 slab 4000psl c_l 165.00 0.390 DirectChuta
CS0430 slab 4000psi c_a cy 130.00 0.493 Pumped
cs0430 slab 4000psi c_3 «y 110.00 0.581 CraneVlthBucket

Unit Cost of Selected Concrete Placing Method

Code Number: cs0430
Construction Method:Crane*
Quantity Unit CuYd
Material Unit Coat : 59.65
Labor Unit Cost 16.30
Equipment Unit Cost: 7.00
Total Unit Cost 83.95
Mill you accept the selected netbod? [Y/M]:

L._ . 1 1
------------ ---------------------1------------------------------ ----------------------------------------i—

Figure 5.6 Concrete Placing Method Selection Template

5.5 Duration Estimating

The construction duration of a multi-story building in which each floor consists of

repeating modules may be determined by multiplying the number of modules with the
duration of a module. In a module, repeating groups of construction activities are
connected in a sequence. The activities in a group are sequentially linked according to a
precedence relationship.
 102

The number of modules is based on the size o f a module and the total floor area.
The selection o f the module size is dependent on several factors, such as the building
shape, form uses, and c o st Information for selecting the size of a module may be
obtained through the estimating database, the user's in p u t or consultation with an expert
by considering the tradeoff between the cost and the duration. It is assumed that the
module size cannot exceed the area o f a floor.
The duration of a module, with its repeating groups of sequential activities, can be
calculated by estimating the duration of each group o f activity, under the assumption that
the activities have a finish to start relationship. The duration of an activity depends upon
the method to be used for performance as well as upon the quantity o f the work involved.
Concrete construction is performed through the five basic activities of form
erecting, rebar placing, concrete placing, curing, and form stripping, which are linked in
the sequential order shown in Figure 5.7. Other related activities are also connected with
these basic activities in the figure.

Form Rebar Concrete Concrete Form

Erecting 15 _Placinj_ Placing Curing j&btgglng^

Rebar Concrete Concrete

Fabricating Delivery Finishing
(if required)
Form Cleaning &
Fabricating M oving

Figure 5.7 Concrete Construction Cycle

The duration of a module depends on the module size and the number of crews.
However, if the number of crews is completely flexible, then the duration of a module
depends on efficient use o f labor and minimum required lengths of activities. The total
 103

duration o f concrete construction is calculated by multiplying the module duration with

the number o f modules in a building. AICES assumes the number o f crews is flexible.
The default module duration in AICES is assumed to be one-week (7 days) cycle per
module regardless o f the module size: three days far forms erection, one day for rebar
placing, one day for concrete placing, three days for concrete curing, and one day for
forms stripping. Form erecting in a module can start after the second day of concrete
curing in the previous module. Form erecting includes the erecting o f slab and column
forms. Column forms can be erected before the stripping o f slab forms. Figure 5.8
shows an example duration chart for concrete construction.

U n it

ZM
L egend

a: Form Erecting
b: Rebar Placing
c: Concrete Placing
d: Concrete Curing
e: Form Stripping

2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 Day

Figure 5.8 Concrete Construction Duration Chart

For the example building with 5 floors and for 2 modules per floor, the total
concrete duration is easily obtained by

Tt = Tm •Nm = 7 *10 = 70 (5.28)

where Tt = the total duration of project, days; Tm = the duration of a module, days per
module; Nm - the total number of modules in a project.
 104

5.6 Summary

AICES performs detailed cost estimating through quantity takeoff and unit cost
calculation. The quantity is taken off and summarized for each estimating element of
each structural component and stored in the quantity and unit cost database.
The unit cost is calculated for material, labor, and equipment (if required) for each
estimating element and stored in the same database to compute the total cost. Material
unit cost is adjusted by the designated waste factor of each material. Labor unit cost is
calculated by the production rate of each crew and converted to the cost per quantity unit.
Formwork unit cost is based on formwork design and considers the number of form uses.
AICES estimates the duration of concrete construction based on the default
duration of a module and the total number of modules in a project.
Implementation programs for detailed cost estimating are presented in Appendix G.
 CHAPTER VI

CONSTRUCTION METHOD SELECTION

AICES contains a consultation function for the selection of construction methods

based on built-in construction knowledge. This chapter describes this process. First, it
briefly introduces knowledge-based systems in general. Then, it explains the procedure
of the construction knowledge base establishment. Finally, it describes the consultation
process for the selection of construction methods.
Currently, AICES consultation is implemented only for the selection of concrete
placing methods described in Section 6.3. Section 6.4 describes the selection of
formwork types and a consultation example o f what it could look like if it were
implemented.

6.1 Introduction to Knowledge-Based Systems

A knowledge-based (expert) system is an interactive computer program that

incorporates human expertise and performs a task normally done by an expert to provide
knowledgeable advice on a variety o f topics [Dym 1991] [Harmon 1985]. It is developed
by creating knowledge bases which contain information collected from all possible
sources, mainly with the help of an expert practitioner in the domain. It functions as a
consultant in the given area of knowledge and provides explanations of reasoning. Even
though a knowledge-based system is not a total substitute for experts, it helps to conserve
expertise and it is used to make expertise more widely, easily, and quickly available to
assist the decision-making process.

105
 106

Because o f their ability to combine construction knowledge with judgment, handle

incomplete and uncertain data, and interact with the users, such systems have a special
appeal to the construction profession. Some knowledge-based systems and their
applications to construction have been described in [Adeli 1988], [Ashley 1987], [Fisher
1989], and [ Zozaya-Gorostiza 1989].
To reduce complexity in decision-making, a knowledge-based technique is applied
to develop the consultation process for construction method selection in AICES. A
prototype knowledge-based system is implemented for the selection o f construction
methods based on combining heuristic and mathematical techniques. The construction
knowledge is acquired from the domain experts and represented in the AICES knowledge
base. This knowledge base is linked to the AICES databases for obtaining the additional
information, including building dimensions and quantity.

6.2 Construction Knowledge Base Establishment

In order to build a knowledge base, the knowledge should be acquired and

explicitly analyzed [Harmon 1985]. One must encode the facts and relationships that
constitute knowledge. The construction knowledge base in AICES represents knowledge
about construction methods, specifically for concrete placing and formwork types. The
procedure for establishing a construction knowledge base is as follows:

(1) Knowledge Acquisition

(a) Review literature regarding reinforced concrete construction process.

(b) Identify construction knowledge for concrete placing and formwork types.
(c) Gather required information describing construction knowledge.
 107

Construction knowledge has been acquired from associated references, including

[Clark 1983], [Cooke 1990], [Hurd 1984], [Kenny 1975], [Love 1973], and [Pfcurifoy
1976]. The construction knowledge for concrete placing methods and formwork type is
described in Section 6.3 and 6.4, respectively.

(2) Knowledge Representation.

There are several ways to encode the facts and relationships that constitute
knowledge. These are usually classified as either declarative or procedural methods.
Declarative methods, such as semantic networks, frames, and logical expressions, are
used to represent facts or assertions. Procedural methods, such as rules, are used to
represent actions or procedures. The explanation of each representation method can be
found in [Davis 1982], [Hannon 1985], and [Pigford 1990].
This research adopted rules to represent the knowledge for construction method
selection. Its rules consist of two parts, an IF and a THEN that establish a relationship,
such as situation-action or premise-conclusion. For example, the action or conclusion in
the THEN part is performed or concluded if the situation or premise in the IF part is true
or meets certain specified criteria.

(3) Prototype Knowledge-Based Program

A prototype knowledge-based program is encoded on an expert system shell.

Appendix B introduces a rule-based expert system package that was selected to
implement the construction knowledge base o f AICES. The reasoning in the system is
based on backward chaining which is one of several control strategies that regulate the
order in which inferences are drawn. In a rule-based system, backward chaining is
initiated by a goal rule. The system attempts to determine if the goal rule is correct. It
backs up to the IF clauses of the rule and tries to determine if they are correct. This, in
 108

turn, leads the system to consider other rules that would confirm the IF clauses.
Eventually, the backward chaining process ends when a question is asked or a previously
stored result is found [Harmon 1985].

6 3 Concrete Placing Method Selection

63.1 Concrete Placing Methods

Concrete placing in a construction project is commonly performed through one of

three basic methods: direct chute, pump, or crane with bucket Careful selection of a
concrete placing method is essential to the concrete placing process. Each concrete
placing method is explained below in more detail.

(1) Direct Chute Method

Direct placement o f concrete mix from transit mix truck into the forms is possible
for footings, slabs on grade, or low walls. Conditions must be such that the concrete mix
truck can be moved close to and above the forms to allow the gravity flow of concrete
mix from the discharge via chute into the forms. The maximum horizontal distance that
a mix can usually be transferred in this manner is 25 to 30 feet, with the average rate of
discharge being 0.75 to 1.5 cubic yards per minute, depending on mix consistency, rate
of compaction, and many other possible constraints. Productivity of this method is
usually high [Clark 1983].

(2) Crane with Bucket Method

Placing concrete mix with a crane and concrete bucket is commonly applied in
concrete construction, because cranes can lift heavy loads to great heights and can reach
long distances. Generally, as long as the concrete pour lies within the reach and lifting
 109

capacity of a crane, this method can be used. However, this method is not always the
most practical or cost effective choice, because it is dependent on site conditions, such as
the available site area to locate the crane and the relationship with other work.
The economy o f using cranes in placing concrete is a function of the crane's ability
to lift and transfer concrete mix at a satisfactory rate. The average rate of lifting concrete
with a crane is 40 to 60 cubic yards per hour, depending on the crane and the bucket
sizes. For instance, a 35 ton crane may reach and place concrete mix using a half cubic
yard bucket, but economically, an 80 ton crane with a 2 cubic yard bucket should be
used, thereby saving considerably in crew and equipment time through increased
productivity [Clark 1983].
Cranes most commonly used for placing concrete mix in concrete construction are
truck cranes, crawler cranes, and hydraulic cranes. Any of these three types has lifting
and reaching capabilities that handle the expected concrete placing. With any given
crane capacity, each crane has advantages and disadvantages, depending on job
conditions.

(3) Pump Method

A concrete pump can convey and place pumpable concrete. Concrete is defined as
being pumpable if it can be pushed through a pipeline irrespective of the concrete pump
model used. The application of a concrete pump in placing concrete depends on the
dimensions of the building that determine horizontal and vertical placing distances, on
the concrete quantity of the individual sections to be placed, and on the quality of the
concrete to be placed (cement content, grading o f aggregates, consistency, maximum size
aggregate, etc.). For instance, concrete containing crushed material with a low ratio of
sand, concrete of a stiff consistency, or concrete with aggregates as large as 3 inches
cannot be pumped through pipelines by every kind o f machine.
 110

Although concrete pumping may not always be the most favorable placing method,
it offers certain advantages over other methods. The concrete pump provides a flexibility
in overcoming access problems, which is a distinct advantage. The quality of the
concrete is also maintained in adverse weather conditions, as the material is protected in
the pipeline. However, pumping is highly vulnerable when subjected to improperly
mixed concrete or concrete that has stiffened because of too slow delivery or too many
trucks waiting [Clark 1983] [Cooke 1990].
The information described above is analyzed and organized to form a concrete
placing knowledge base, which is suitable for implementation by an expert system
package.

6.3.2 Influencing Factors

The decision for selecting a concrete placing method is influenced by many factors
shown in Figure 6.1, and the AICES knowledge base considers them as the selection
variables. Those influencing factors are identified as follows:

(1) Site Characteristics

Site characteristics include boundary conditions, equipment maneuvering space and

clearance, provision of temporary roads, and the forms of access, noise limitations, and
any other restrictions imposed by site surroundings.
Distribution methods using wheeled equipment require adequate roads or surfaces
if they are to operate efficiently. Consideration of site conditions will show, for example,
if trucks and dumpers can use existing surfaces or if suitable temporary ones need to be
prepared.
 Ill

Site Characteristics Concrete Specification

Loading area Ready mixed
Haul roads Site mixed
Dump area Size of aggregate
Equipment locating
Influencing F acto rs
Equipment Availability Weather Conditions
Site characteristics
Pum p car Equipment availability Dry
Truck mixer Continuity of operation Fair
Mobile crane W eather conditions Wet
Tower crane Concrete specifications
Building size
Continuity of Operation Building Size
Concrete Volume Height (Vertical)
Uniformity Length (Horizontal)
Regularity

Figure 6.1 Influencing Factors on Concrete Placing Methods

(2) Equipment Availability

The equipment must be available at the site. It would not be practical to select the
cheapest equipment, because the capacity constraint normally governs over the cost
constraint in construction. Multiple use o f equipment is also considered. For example, a
crane may be used to lift forms or reinforcing steel as well as concrete mix in a project.
In AICES, it is assumed that the required equipment for placing concrete is always
available to be brought to the site. Thus, during the consultation with AICES, the user is
not asked whether equipment is available at the site.

(3) Continuity of Operation

Concrete placing for the integrated structural components should be performed

without interruption. For example, concrete placement in a floor should not be stopped
 112

at the middle of a slab panel, because it may result in the decrease of designed strength.
Therefore, the selected concrete placing method should be capable o f ensuring continuity
o f operation and of operating within the restrictions imposed by the structural design.

(4) Concrete Specifications

Concrete specifications include the type of concrete mix, such as ready-mixed or

site-mixed, and the size of aggregates in the mix. AICES assumes that the concrete
applied in construction is ready-mixed.

(5) Weather Conditions

Weather conditions may be an influencing factor in selecting a concrete placing

method, especially where the conditions vary rapidly during the year. Equipment, for
example, can be idle in winter, thus increasing standing costs. In such a case, a
reasonable alternative could have been sought had weather conditions been taken into
consideration. AICES assumes that concrete placing task is not interrupted by weather
conditions.

(6) Building Size

Building size influences vertical and horizontal distances o f concreting. Vertical

distance is the total height o f building, which is determined by number o f floors and each
floor height. The default floor height applied in AICES is 12 feet. Horizontal distance is
based on floor dimensions and the location of equipment. Building data including
number o f floors and floor dimensions are directly obtained from the building
information database in AICES databases.
 113

6 3 3 Consultation Process

Consultation is performed through a series of questions linked by IF-THEN rules.

Rules are established by relating the influencing factors with each other. They are
arranged to reflect the reasoning of the expert's decision-making procedure. In order to
fire the rules, the values of the variables in IF parts of the rules should be captured.
These values may be obtained through interaction with the user or from the AICES
database. Figure 6.2 is a sample decision flow that illustrates the database linkage to
obtain building dimensions and the questions asked by AICES to arrive at the selection
of particular concrete placing method.

AICES User Truck mixers accessible

concrete placing area?
Yes
< Select direct chute method
in lower floors.

Check building height.

Building h<« 150ft Select crane with bucket
Information method.
Database d>200ft.
->( Check horizontal distanced )
d<-200ft (If crane locating space is
not available,
Large size of aggregate Yes consider tower crane.)
desired in concrete mix?
No

c Select pumped method.

J
Figure 6.2 Consultation Flow for Concrete Placing Method Selection

A consultation begins by the user responding to questions posed by AICES. As

in most forms of selection, a simple "Yes" or "No" response allows progression through
the rules. Other information such as the vertical and horizontal distances are
automatically calculated by the system based on the data retrieved from the building
information database. After the questions have been answered, the system locates the
 114

applicable rules by comparing the answers with the knowledge base and produces a
decision. For example, the program would suggest using the crane with bucket method
for placing concrete when the following simplified rules are satisfied:

IF truck mixers are not accessible to the site

AND building height is above 150 feet
OR vertical distance is above 200 feet
OR maximum aggregate size is larger than 3 inch
THEN use CRANE with Bucket Method.

Other choices, such as direct chute or pumped method, would be examined on a

similar basis. The system displays the results of consultation including the explanation
of decision criteria. Appendix H shows a portion of the consultation program coded in a
rule-based expert system package. During the consultation, the user may change the
values of certain variables through the What-IF function of the expert system package.
This function enables the user to check alternative methods. The selected method is
stored in the AICES database if it is accepted by the user, and it is used for calculating
concrete placing cost.
On many projects, several concrete placing methods can carry out the same tasks.
For example, both a concrete pump and a crane with a bucket can perform similar
concreting tasks. In this case, two alternative methods can be compared in terms of the
cost and duration calculated by the system.

6.4 Formwork Type Selection

In multi-story reinforced concrete building construction, selection of formwork

type is based on maximum economy, consistent with safety and the quality required in
the finished concrete surface. Several formwork types are available in the construction
 115

industry. This section reviews the characteristics and capability of each formwork type,
identifies the influencing factors to select an appropriate formwork type for a project, and
describes the consultation example o f formwork type selection.

6.4.1 Formwork Types

(1) Wood Forms

Wood forms are the most common type used in reinforced concrete building
construction, because they have the advantages of economy, ease in handling, ease of
production, and adaptability to many desired shapes [Love 1973]. Wood forms consist
of plain plywood sheathing supported by wood joists (for slabs) or studs (for walls).
Stringers, wales, and shores can be of wood or steel. Wood sheathing and joists can also
be supported by scaffolds or adjustable shores.
Wood forms can normally be used only three or four times to provide an acceptable
quality of the hardened concrete surface unless it is covered with other coating materials.

(2) Metal Forms

Metal forms, which are usually prefabricated, consist of steel or aluminum flames
supporting plywood sheathing. Metal forms are often used where added strength is
required or where the construction is duplicated at another location. Metal forms are
more expensive to fabricate than wood forms, but they may be more economical, because
they can be used many times if a building is limited to a number of module sizes.

(3) Flying Forms

Flying forms consist of large sheathing supported by steel or aluminum trusses that
rest on screw jacks that allow the forms to be adjusted to the right level. The forms are
 116

assembled into large construction units that may be located and used to form concrete
into the desired shapes for a structure, then removed with no disassembly of the parts,
moved by crane into a new location and used again to form other concrete into the
desired shape [Feurifoy 1976].

(4) Column-Mounted Sharing Forms

Column-mounted shoring forms consist of long span form panels supported by

adjustable brackets attached to columns of the building itself. Plywood decking of the
forms can be assembled on the ground or in place once the form has been flown and set
on the columns.

(5) Tunnel Forms

Tunnel forms are U-shaped or L-shaped prefabricated steel forms that allow slab
and supporting walls to be placed simultaneously. After the concrete is cured, the forms
are removed and moved to the next level. Standard modular panels of the forms offer a
wide range of flexibility in bay size. Tunnel forms are useful for placing concrete in a
building whose bays are designed to permit repetitive use o f the form sections [Hurd
1984].
The characteristics o f each formwork type should be analyzed to construct a
knowledge base for formwork type selection, by considering the influencing factors
below.

6.4.2 Influencing Factors

There are several factors that affect formwork type selection. Figure 6.3 is an
influence diagram that shows the relationships among the form selection criteria for
several form types.
f \ f \
Structural S Slab ^ J Wood Forms *\ Material
, System j A Type J ^ J ^Availability J

Occupancy
Type J
Design
Load
Slab
Thickness
C Metal Forms
Labor
Force
‘Skilled a
Inexpensive

Building Uniformity Potential Equipment

Flying Forms
Shape Regularity Reuse Availability
‘Column spacing
& Floor height
r a /
j f Cycle ]
r Weather T
V
Conditions 1
J
i Placing
* L Rate j
^ Duration J
‘Construction
Sequence
J\
Column-Mounted’
Shoring Forms
✓ Available
V Budget ]
Estheties & Tunnel Forms Site
Exposure Space
• A veiatte storage
&make-up spaces

Figure 6.3 Influence Diagram for Formwork Selection

 118

(1) Structural Slab System

Formwork type selection can depend on selection of structural slab system. These
include flat plate, flat slab, one way joist, and two way joist (waffle) slabs. Wood forms
and metal forms are applicable for all slab systems. Tunnel forms may be a good choice
for one way slabs supported by walls.

(2) Building Shape

H ie feasibility of using a formwork type is influenced by several design features

such as variation of size, shape, and location for various structural elements, existence of
openings for windows and doors, and HVAC requirements.
A structural building layout is either uniform modular or irregular. Uniform
modular design is characterized by regular spacing between columns and equal story
heights. Irregular design is characterized by irregular positions of the different structural
elements or irregular curves in architectural plans.

(3) Labor Force

Labor force is an influencing factor to select a formwork type. For example, where
the labor force is inexpensive and skilled, the use of wood forms may be an economical
alternative even if building features permit the use of other preassembled formwork
types.

(4) Site Characteristics

The building site influences the selection of a suitable formwork type because of
site limitations and accessibility for construction operations. For instance, the feasibility
 119

of using flying forms is influenced by such site characteristics as accessibility,

surrounding area restrictions, and available site area for assembling forms.

(5) Equipment Availability

Some formwork types require special handling techniques including hoisting by a

crane. The size o f a modular form may be limited by the crane carrying capacity and its
maximum and minimum lift radii.

(6) Potential Reuses

Each formwork type has a number of potential reuses based on its material life
time. Some formwork types tend to have a high initial cost, but the average potential
reuses may reduce the final formwork cost. For instance, the initial material and
fabrication costs o f metal forms are more expensive than wood forms, but metal forms
can be used more time than wood forms. Therefore, the selection of a form type is
determined through a comparison of the number of form uses in a project and the cost of
the forms.

6.4 3 Consultation Process

In the current AICES, the consultation process of formwork type selection was not
implemented because of insufficient knowledge acquisition. This section provides an
example of what consultation could look like if it were implemented. The overall
consultation process of formwork type selection would be similar to that of concrete
placing method selection. Knowledge for formwork types may be represented by IF-
THEN rules based on relationships among influencing factors. The user may interact
with the system to provide the values of variables in the rules. During consultation, the
 120

system would ask the user questions by displaying a list o f all the possible options to the
questions.
The applicable rules would be fired by comparing the answers with the information
in the knowledge base to produce a decision. For example, the system would suggest
using the flying forms for slab formwork when the following simplified rules are
satisfied:

IF slab system is flat plate or flat slab

AND building layout is rectangular
AND column spacing is uniform
AND gross floor area is more than 200,000 sf
THEN use Flying Forms.

Other choices would be examined on a similar basis. The results of consultation

may be applied to update formwork cost.

6.5 Summary

Cost estimating is performed through both a construction decision process and a

procedural process. This chapter has described a knowledge-based consultation function
in AICES to assist the user in selecting an appropriated construction method which is
applied to estimate the cost of a project.
Construction knowledge, such as concrete placing methods are represented by sets
of rules. These rules contain the variables whose values are obtained from the user by
interacting with the system through the questions. Other required information such as
building design data is directly retrieved from the AICES databases. Depending on the
obtained information, the system fires the related rules and suggests a suitable
 121

construction method which will be used to update the cost estimate if it is accepted by the
user.
Implementation programs for concrete placing method selection are presented in
Appendix H. The knowledge base expressed in the current AICES is a prototype which
can be extended in the future.
 CHAPTER VII

CASE STUDY

The development of AICES has been described in the previous chapters. This
chapter demonstrates the capabilities and limitations of the system through a case study.
First, it defines the scope of the case study. Then, it performs design and cost estimating
for an example project and analyzes the sensitivity of design and cost. Finally, it
evaluates AICES by comparing the system output with manual calculations.

7.1 Case Study Scope

As described in Chapter IV and V, AICES creates detailed design alternatives based

on the values of design variables which are input by the user, and it provides a detailed
cost estimate for each design alternative. Design alternatives are compared with each
other based on detailed cost estimates. AICES saves the design and cost data for each
alternative design the user generates, from which the user can make a selection. The case
study is based on alternative designs for the five-story reinforced concrete building which
has been used as an example project throughout the AICES implementation. The default
building design and estimating information and the schematic building layout, including
plan and section are presented in Appendix D .l, D.2 and D.3.
The case study focuses on the sensitivity analysis of alternative designs to compare
the quantities and costs for the variations of column spacing and slab thickness, to
compare costs of different numbers of modules, and to compare costs of different
formwork types.

122
 123

7.2 Sensitivity Analysis

This section shows the cost sensitivity analysis for alternative values of three
variables: slab thickness, column spacing, and duration. Each case is described below.

7.2.1 Slab Thickness vs. Cost

In AICES, slab thickness ranges from 5 to 10 inches in 0.5 inch intervals. As slab
thickness is increased, with column spacing held constant, both dead load and the internal
steel moment arm increase. In the slab default design, the increase in steel moment arm
is not large enough to compensate for the increase in dead load, and the quantity of
reinforcing steel increases slightly with slab thickness. Concrete volume varies directly
with slab thickness and concrete cost varies with concrete volume. Thus, the increase in
slab thickness increases concrete volume, which, in turn, increases concrete cost. The
small increase in reinforcing steel, increases reinforcing cost.
The thicker slab requires a larger formwork design capacity, which increases the
quantity of form material and, in turn, increases form material cost and fabricating cost.
AICES contains formwork designs for 6, 8, 10, and 12 inch slabs. Each slab form
design is applied for the slabs whose thicknesses are equal to or less than the designated
thickness. For example, slab form design for 8 inch slab is applied for the slabs whose
thicknesses are greater than 6 inches and less than or equal to 8 inches. Thus, formwork
cost goes up at 6.5 and 8.5 inches, and it remains constant at each thickness range (5 to 6
inches, 6.5 to 8 inches, 8.5 to 10 inches).
Table 7.1 shows slab quantity and cost of each element for different thicknesses in
a constant column spacing (20 ft in this example). Figure 7.1 is the cost comparison
graph for alternative slab thicknesses based on the data in Table 7.1. The ordinate
depicts the cost per square foot of gross floor area and the abscissa is slab thickness. The
 124

graph shows the total cost of slab and its three elements: formwork, reinforcing, and
concrete. Slab thicknesses for 20 ft column spacing range from 7 to 9.S inches in 0.5
inch intervals (Refer to Figure 7.2).

Table 7.1 Slab Quantity and Cost o f Each Element for Different Thicknesses

Slab Formwork Reinforcina Concrete Total

Thickness Quantity Cost Quantity Cost Quantity Cost Cost
(in) (sfca/sf) (S/sf) (D Sf) (S/sf) (cf/sf) (S/sf) (S/sf)
7.0 1.000 3.20 2.044 1.00 0.582 1.74 4.94
7.5 1.000 3.20 2.114 1.01 0.625 1.87 5.07
8.0 1.000 3.20 2.099 1.03 0.667 1.99 5.19
8.5 1.000 3.56 2.266 1.06 0.708 2.12 5.68
9.0 1.000 3.56 2.225 1.09 0.750 2.24 5.80
9.5 1.000 3.56 2.311 1.13 0.792 2.37 5.93

$ 8.00 t

7.00 -■

6.00
F o rm w o rk
5 .0 0 -
R e in fo rc in g
C O S t / S f 4 .0 0 -
Concrete
3 .0 0 -■
T o ta l
2.00 - -

1.00

0.00
7 7 .5 8 8 .5 9 .5
in
Slab Thickness

Figure 7.1 Slab Cost for Different Thicknesses for Constant Column Spacing
 125

As explained above, concrete and reinforcing cost increase as slab thickness is

increased. Formwork cost went up at the 8.5 inch thickness due to the change in slab
form design.

7.2.2 Colum n Spacing vs. Cost

In AICES, column spacing ranges from 12 to 28 ft in 1 ft intervals. Each column

spacing can have alternative slab thicknesses and reinforcing. The available ranges of
slab thicknesses for different column spacings are shown in Figure 7.2. The AICES
database contains default detailed slab design data for slab thicknesses in 0.5 inch
intervals for column spacings in 1 ft intervals.

in 10.0 -
9 .5 -

9.0 -

8 .5 -

8.0 -

Slab 7 5 _
Thickness
7 .0 -

6 .5 -

6.0 -

S l a b t h i c k n e s s e s a p p l i e d in S e c t i o n 7 2.1
5 .5 -
• ( F i g u r e 7 .1 ) *
* * » » ■ i i

O : M in im u m s l a b t h i c k n e s s f o r e a c h c o l u m n s p a c i n g

Column Spacing ft

Figure 7.2 Available Slab Thicknesses for Different Column Spacings

 126

Formwork unit quantity (sfca/sf) does not change for different slab thicknesses and
column spacings. Formwork design depends on slab thickness as explained in Section
7.2.1. Thus, formwork cost varies with different slab form designs. It is obviously
constant in the column spacings intervals for each slab thickness (Refer to Figure 7.2).
Figure 7.3 is the formwork cost variation graph for different slab thicknesses for different
column spacings. The ordinate depicts formwork cost per square foot o f gross floor area
and the abscissa is column spacing. In the graph, cost points overlap for different slab
thicknesses that use the same slab form design. For example, the same slab form design
is applied to both 7 inch slabs for column spacings from 15 to 21 ft and 8 inch slabs for
column spacings from 17 to 23 ft. Thus, cost points for both slab thicknesses overlap at
column spacings from 17 to 21 ft.
Reinforcing unit quantity varies with different slab thicknesses, as well as with
different column spacings. As slab thickness is increased at the same column spacing or
as column spacing is increased at the same slab thickness, reinforcing steel increases,
which, in turn, increases reinforcing cost. Figure 7.4 is the reinforcing cost variation
graph for different slab thicknesses for different column spacings. The ordinate depicts
reinforcing cost per square foot of gross floor area and the abscissa is column spacing.
As shown in the graph, reinforcing cost for each column spacing increases as slab
thickness increases except between 5 and 6 inch slabs. This unexpected behavior
between 5 and 6 inch slabs is probably due to the minimum required reinforcing ratio in
reinforced concrete design. That is, reinforcing amount cannot be less than the required
reinforcing ratio as described in the A Cl design code, though thinner slabs require less
reinforcing theoretically. As shown in the graph, reinforcing cost for each slab thickness
increases as column spacing increases, except for 5 and 6 inch slabs.
Reinforcing cost for different column spacings for 5 and 6 inch slabs are a special
case. As column spacing increases, the size, number, and length of rebars also increases.
But the area of bay also increases. For 5 and 6 inch slabs, bay area increases faster than
 127

reinforcing quantity, for short spans. Therefore, the quantity of reinforcing steel per
square foot o f bay area decreases as column spacing increases. That is, while longer
spans require more reinforcing in absolute terms, they require less in relative terms.
This decreasing trend in reinforcing quantity for 5 and 6 inch slabs is also found in the
steel quantity comparison chart in [C R S I1984].
Concrete unit volume at the same slab thickness does not change for different
column spacings. Concrete cost is obviously constant at the same slab thickness. Figure
7.5 is the concrete cost variation graph for different slab thicknesses for different column
spacings. The ordinate depicts concrete cost per square foot of gross floor area and the
abscissa is column spacing.

$ 3 .6 0 -

3 .5 5 -
F o rm w o rk fo r 1 0 " s la b
3 .5 0 -

1 0 " S la b
3 .4 5 •

3 .4 0 - — 9 - S la b
3 .3 5 ■
— 8" S la b
C O S t/S f 3 .3 0 -
— *— 7 * 8 1 0 6
3 .2 5 -
A A A
3 .2 0 ' o o ia D
F o rm w o rk fo r 8 " s la b
3 .1 5 -
* 5" S la b
Jk A
M. 1 4 4
3 .1 0 J
F o rm w o rk fo r 6 " s la b
3 .0 5 •

3 .0 0 - ------------------------- 1-------------------------- 1--------------------------1--------------------------1-------------------------- 1-------------------------- 1-------------------------- 1-------------------------- 1

12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28

Column Spacing

Figure 7.3 Formwork Cost for Different Slab Thicknesses and Column Spacings
 128

$ 1 .6 0

1 .5 0

1 .4 0 10" S ta b

1 .3 0 9* S la b

1.20 8 “ S la b
Cost/sf
1.10 7" S la b

1.00 6 “ S la b

0 .9 0 S ' S la b

0 .8 0

0 .7 0
12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28

Column Spacing

Figure 7.4 Reinforcing Cost for Different Slab Thicknesses and Column Spacings

$ 2 .7 5

2 .5 0

2 .2 5
9* S la b

2.00 — 8* S la b
Cost/sf
1 .7 5 7" S la b

6 “ S la b
1 .5 0
5 “ S la b
1 .2 5

1.00
12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28

Column Spacing

Figure 7.5 Concrete Cost for Different Slab Thicknesses and Column Spacings
 129

The costs of the three elements were combined in Figure 7.6 to show the effect of
each element cost on the total slab cost for alternative slab thicknesses for different
column spacings. Except for S and 6 inch slabs, the total costs o f all slabs increase as
column spacing is increased.

$ 7 .7 5 --

7 .5 0 --

7 .2 5 -■
10" S la b
7 .0 0 -■
9 " S la b
6 .7 5 -
6 .5 0 -- — 8 “ S la b
C o st/sf
6 .2 5 -■ 7* S la b
6.00 - -
6 " S la b
5 .7 5 - ■

5 .5 0 "

5 .2 5

5 .0 0 H

12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28
ft
Colum n S pacing

Figure 7.6 Total Slab Cost for Different Slab Thicknesses and Column Spacings

Column spacings in both directions determine the bay sizes (slab panel sizes).
Changes in column spacing affect moment and shear strength, which influence the slab
depth and reinforcing. As column spacing increases, the slab must deepen to support the
increase in moment and shear. The deepening of slab compounds the effect o f increasing
column spacing. Increased moment from longer span and greater dead load o f thicker
slab require increases in reinforcing steel as column spacing increases. Thus, the
increase in slab thickness increases concrete cost and increases reinforcing cost for the
same reasons explained in Section 7.2.1. Formwork unit quantity does not change, but
 130

slab form designs vary with different thicknesses which, in turn, affect formwork cost for
the same reasons described in Section 7.2.1.
AICES slab default design initially applies the minimum slab thickness for a
designated column spacing (Refer to Figure 7.2). Then, the user can modify slab
thickness to check the cost variation (See Section 4.3.2 for slab default design). Table
7.2 shows default slab thickness and the quantity of each element per square foot o f gross
floor area for different column spacings. In this table, the values for a 20 ft span are the
same as for a slab thickness of 7.0 inches in Table 7.1.

Table 7.2 Quantity of Each Element per Square Foot of Gross Floor Area

Span Ihk Formwork (sfca/sf) Reinforcina (DSf) Concrete Idl/sf)

(It) (in ) Slab Column Total Slab Column Total Slab Column Total
12 5.0 1.000 0.405 1.405 1.922 0.543 2.464 0.415 0.096 0.512
14 5.0 1.000 0.355 1.355 1.881 0.482 2.363 0.415 0.094 0.509
16 5.5 1.000 0.332 1.332 1.758 0.452 2.210 0.459 0.101 0.560
18 6.0 1.000 0.313 1.313 1.922 0.497 2.419 0.499 0.118 0.616
20 7.0 1.000 0.286 1.286 2.044 0.467 2.512 0.582 0.129 0.712
22 7.5 1.000 0.282 1.282 2.310 0.482 2.792 0.626 0.134 0.760
24 8.5 1.000 0.270 1.270 2.596 0.497 3.094 0.710 0.139 0.849
26 9.5 1.000 0.247 1.247 2.821 0.497 3.319 0.793 0.139 0.932
28 10.0 1.000 0.263 1.263 3.107 0.558 3.665 0.833 0.174 1.008

Figure 7.7 is the slab cost comparison graph fen: alternative column spacings using
AICES default slab thicknesses. In the graph, the ordinate depicts slab cost per square
foot of gross floor area, and the abscissa is column spacing. The graph shows the total
cost of slab and its three elements: formwork, reinforcing, and concrete. Each cost is
calculated by dividing the costs of all slabs in the building by gross floor area. Total slab
cost increases as column spacing increases. Formwork cost increases at specific column
spacings and remains constant in the following column spacing intervals: 12 to 18 ft, 19
 131

to 23 ft, and 24 to 28 ft. This implies that the same type of slab form design is applied in
each range of column spacings to calculate formwork cost. For example, slab
thicknesses in 19 to 23 ft column spacings are greater than 6 inches and less than or equal
to 8 inches. Thus, slab form design for an 8 inch slab is applied in this range of column
spacings for cost calculation, and formwork cost on the graph goes up at 19 ft column
spacing. The costs for other elements increase with the increase in column spacing.

$ 8.00

7.00

6.00
F o rm w o rk
5.00
R e in f o r d n g
Cost/sf 4.00
C o n c r e te
3.00 J" Formwork for 8'
T o ta l
2.00

1.00

0.00
12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28

Column Spacing *

Figure 7.7 Slab Cost for Different Column Spacings

The cost values in Figure 7.7 are the same as those in Figure 7.3 to Figure 7.6 for
column spacings for which the minimum slab thickness is 5.0, 6.0, 7.0, 9.0, and 10.0
inches, respectively. The total cost in Figure 7.7 are lower than in Figure 7.6 for column
spacings o f 16, 19, 22, 24, and 26 ft which have the minimum thickness of 5.5, 6.5, 7.5,
8.5, and 9.5 inches, respectively, because Figure 7.3 to Figure 7.6 do not include 0.5 inch
increments.
 132

As column spacing increases, the load carried by each column increases for two
reasons: (1) each column carries a larger slab area and (2) dead load increases as slab
thickness increases with column spacing. Thus, both axial force and moment on columns
increase as column spacing increases. Column sizes and reinforcing increase with axial
load and moment. Thus, column size and reinforcing increase as column spacing
increases.
Figure 7.8 shows column sizes of each column stack (interior and exterior) for
different column spacings. Usually, exterior columns are larger than interior columns
when the spans are uniform, as they are in AICES default design. This is because
exterior columns carry the unbalanced moment of exterior spans, as well as axial load.
However, when spans are short, interior columns are larger than exterior columns,
because the moment transferred to an exterior column is less significant than the axial
load in determining column size (See Section 4.3.2 for column default design).

In 3 6 T

3 2 --

2 8 -■

2 4 -•
Column
Size 20 -
16 -

12

12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 26

Column Spacing

Figure 7.8 Column sizes of Each Column Stack for Different Column Spacings
 133

AICES maintains the same column size from floor to floor for each column stack
for economy in formwork fabrication. AICES adjusts the reinforcement at each floor
level to carry the different design forces.
Although column sizes increase as column spacing increases, as shown in Figure
7.8, the number o f columns per the area of a floor obviously decreases. Column size and
number of columns influence column cost. Figure 7.9 shows the variations of column
cost for alternative column spacings. The ordinate depicts column cost per square foot of
gross floor area, and the abscissa is column spacing. The increase in column size and
reinforcing increase concrete, formwork, and reinforcing steel cost of each column. This
is offset by the decrease in number of columns.

$ 2.00

— ■— F o rm w o rk

° R e in fo rc in g
Cost/sf 1-00 -:
“ *— C o n c r e te

° T o ta l
0 .6 0 -

0.20 -

16 18 20 22 24

Column Spacing

Figure 7.9 Column Cost for Different Column Spacings

 134

Slab and column costs were combined in Figure 7.10 to show the effect of each
cost on the total cost. Figure 7.10 is the total cost variation graph for alternative column
spacings. The ordinate depicts the total cost per square foot o f gross floor area, and the
abscissa is column spacing. As shown in the graph, formwoik is the most significant cost
element. Concrete cost is usually higher than reinforcing cost. As column spacing
increases, the cost o f each element and the total cost per square foot increases. The shape
of the graph is similar to that of the slab cost graph. This reiterates that changes in
column cost do not significantly affect total cost, as described earlier and as shown in
Figure 7.9.

s i o.oo T
9 .0 0 ■■

0.00 -

F o rm w o rk

6.00 R e in fo rc in g

Cost/sf 5.00 -■ C o n c r e te

C o lu m n

T o ta l

o ta l c o

12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 26
ft
Column Spacing

Figure 7.10 Total Cost for Different Column Spacings

 135

7 .2 3 Duration vs. Cost

Duration is a function of the number of modules and the duration of a module. A

module is defined as the work area for which a set of forms is applied to be erected
without interruption (See Section S.3.1 for the description of a module). That is, if the
number o f modules increases, the total project duration increases assuming a fixed
module duration. The minimum size of a module is equal to a bay size, and the
maximum size is equal to the area of a floor. By considering repetitive work in a floor or
floors, the size of a module should be a common divisor o f the number of bays per floor.
The number of modules per floor is calculated by dividing the number of bays in a floor
by the number of bays in a module. The total number of modules in a building is
computed by multiplying the number of modules by the number of floors. The required
form sets for a project are determined by the number of form uses and the total number
of modules (See Section 5.3.1 for the calculation formula). Forms fabricated in terms of
bays are calculated by multiplying the number of bays in a module by the number of the
required form sets. This calculation method can be applied to other formwork types
which have a different number of form uses.
Table 7.3 shows duration and forms fabricated in different modules for the example
building. The minimum duration of the example building is 35 days (7 days/floor x 5
floors) at the maximum module size which is equal to the area o f a floor.
Formwork cost varies with different durations (i.e., different modules) because the
required form sets varies with different modules. This section compares formwork unit
costs for alternative formwork types for different durations. Figure 7.11 is a unit cost
comparison graph for different formwork types for different durations. The ordinate
depicts the cost per square foot of gross floor area and the abscissa is a time scale. The
graph is based on the data calculated in Table 7.4. As shown in Figure 7.11 and Table
 136

7.4, duration increases as the module size becomes smaller and thus the number of
modules required to form a floor of given size increases.

Table 7.3 Durations and Forms Fabricated for Different Modules

Number of Modules Module Size Required Forms Duration

Fabricated
Per Floor (bays) Form Sets (bays) (Days)
Total
1 5 24 2 48 35
2 10 12 3 36 70
3 15 8 4 32 105
4 20 6 5 30 140
6 30 4 8 32 210
8 40 3 10 30 280
12 60 2 15 30 420
24 120 1 30 30 840

(Assumptions: Number of bays per floor-24, Number of floors-5, Number of form u ses-4 )

$ 6.00
5 .5 0

5 .0 0

4 .5 0

Cost/sf 4.00
3 .5 0

3 .0 0

2 .5 0
111 2M 3M 6M 8M 12M
2.00
35 70 105 140 175 210 245 280 315 350 365 420
days
Duration
W ood — °— Steel Fram ed — *— Aluminum — •— Steal Deck

M = number o f modules required per floor for a fixed floor size

Figure 7.11 Formwork Cost for Different Form Types for Different Durations
Table 7.4 Cost Comparison For Different Form work Types

Number of Modules Wc>od Framed Form SUtel Frameid Form Aluminum Framed R»rm Steel Form (Deck)
Per Floor Total Sets Material Labor Total Sets Material Labor Total Sets Material Labor Total Sets Material Labor Total
1 5 2 0.90 2.53 3.43 1 3.12 1.74 4.86 1 4.09 1.59 5.68 1 3.53 2.03 5.55
2 10 3 0.73 2.47 3.20 1 2.12 1.74 3.85 1 2.77 1.59 4.37 1 2.39 2.03 4.42
3 15 4 0.67 2.45 3.12 1 1.78 1.74 3.52 1 2.34 1.59 3.93 1 2.02 2.03 4.04
4 20 5 0.64 2.44 3.08 1 1.62 1.74 3.35 1 2.12 1.59 3.71 1 1.83 2.03 3.85
6 30 8 0.67 2.45 3.12 1 1.45 1.74 3.19 1 1.90 1.59 3.49 1 1.64 2.03 3.66
8 40 10 0.64 2.44 3.08 1 1.37 1.74 3.10 1 1.79 1.59 3.38 1 1.54 2.03 3.57
12 60 15 0.64 2.44 3.08 1 1.28 1.74 3.02 1 1.68 1.59 3.27 1 1.45 2.03 3.47
24 120 30 0.64 2.44 3.08 2 1.28 1.74 3.02 1 1.57 1.59 3.16 1 1.35 2.03 3.38

Material Cost 1.96 11.15 14.60 12.60

Number of Uses 4 75 120 200
Labor-Hour/1 OOsf 10 6 5.5 7
* Data from [Means 1990]
 138

As shown in Figure 7.11, formwork cost varies with the different number of
modules per floor, because the amount of forms fabricated varies for each module size.
The cost of wood forms does not change much as the number of modules increases,
because the number of wood form uses is limited to four and the amount of forms
procured remains the same. However, formwork cost of other formwork types decreases
with module size, because larger modules reduce the reuses below the reuse life of the
forms. The forms can be reused several times with only one or two sets of forms through
the entire building. As shown in the figure, wood forms give the minimum cost when the
number of modules per floor is less than 6. As the number of modules increases above 6,
the number of form uses influences formwork cost, and steel framed forms provide the
minimum cost.
Duration influences the total cost of a project, because it is associated with period
overhead costs which increase directly with duration. The costs of other elements do not
change, because material quantities are not a function of duration. The adjustment of
crew sizes necessary to achieve shorter durations need not increase direct labor costs, as
long as the output per labor hour is constant. Figure 7.12 and 7.13 show the total cost
comparison of different formwork types for different numbers of modules for the period
overhead costs of $200/day and $500/day, respectively. The total cost is obtained by
adding formwork, reinforcing, and concrete costs for slabs and columns to overhead cost.
For $200/day overhead cost, wood forms have the minimum total cost at the
duration of 70 days (2 modules per floor), and other forms have the minimum total cost
at the duration of 140 days (4 modules per floor). For $500/day overhead cost, wood
forms have the minimum total cost at the duration of 35 days (1 module per floor), steel
form has the minimum total cost at the duration of 70 days (2 modules per floor), and
other forms have the minimum total cost at the duration of 105 days (3 modules per
floor). Thus, the type of formwork can be selected by considering the total number of
modules (durations) and the amount of overhead cost.
 139

$500000 -
4 8 0 0 0 0 ■(j

4 6 0 0 0 0 -■
440000 -
4 2 0 0 0 0 ■■

Total 4 0 0 0 0 0 - ■o—

300000 i
360000

340000
320000 -
1 A
3 0 0 0 0 0 +~
35 70 105 140 175 210 245 280 315 350 385 420
days
Duration ( O v a rtia a d : $ 2 0 0 /d a y )
W ood S is si Frsm sd Aluminum S lssf Dsck

M = number of modules required per floor for a fixed floor size

Figure 7.12 Total Cost for Different Forms vs. Duration (Overhead: $200/day)

$600000 T
575000
550000
525000
500000
475000
Total 4 5 0 0 0 0
425000
400000
3 7 5 0 0 0 --
3 5 0 0 0 0 -■
325000 -
3M 4M
300000
35 70 105 140 175 210 245 280 315 350 385 420
days
Duration ( O v a r h a a d : $ 5 0 0 /d a y )
S ts*l Fram sd Aluminum S to d D tc k

M - number of modules required per floor for a fixed floor size

Figure 7.13 Total Cost for Different Forms vs. Duration (Overhead: $500/day)
 140

1 3 System Evaluation

Generally, a computer application system is evaluated through verification and

validation processes. In developing computerized system, verification ensures that the
system is precise and does not contain technical errors. Validation, on the other hand,
guarantees that the system satisfies the expected functions and goals and that each
component of the system is consistent with the whole [Barr 1982] [Modell 1990].
Verification and validation compose a number of activities that occur at the transitions
between stages in the development process.
Several milestones have been defined for system evaluation during the AICES
development. At each milestone, the system was modified, debugged, and executed to
ensure consistency with established system logic and expected system results. Finally,
the outputs from AICES were compared with manual computation to check the level of
accuracy. Table 7.5 shows the comparison results of detailed cost estimating for the
selected building.
Manual calculation was performed in two different methods. First, in order to test
the correctness o f AICES, the same method was applied to manual estimating. As shown
in the table, both AICES and manual calculation show the same results except for a
minor difference in the quantity of reinforcing. This verifies that overall computer
codings and mathematical equations have been correctly expressed during the
implementation.
Second, in order to test the accuracy of AICES, a widely accepted method
described in [Means 1990] was used in manual estimating. As shown in the table, the
differences between AICES and manual estimating outputs are within 5% for each
estimating element The quantities for formwork and concrete placing are the same, but
reinforcing quantities differ. The difference in the reinforcing quantity is due to a
different application of waste factor and a different method of converting the rebar length
 141

to steel weight. AICES considers the length of overlapping o f individual rebars instead
of applying a percentage of waste, but manual calculation applied a 3% of waste factor to
the total quantity of reinforcing. The conversion factor for the steel length in AICES
applies the weight per cubic inch of the steel, but the factors used in manual calculation
are based on the weight per foot for individual rebar obtained from an estimating
reference book.

Table 7.S Comparison of AICES and Manual Calculation

Comparison Items AICES Manual Process

Unit Output Same Different
Method % Method %
1. Quantity Takeoff
Formwork sfca 48000 48000 100 48000 100
Reinforcing ton 49.20 49.75 101 51.23 104
Concrete Placing cy 1037 1037 100 1037 100
2. Unit Cost
Formwork $/sfca 3.20 3.20 100 3.05 95
Reinforcing $/ton 978.29 978.28 100 948.74 97
Concrete Placing $/cv 80.66 80.65 100 79.80 99
3. Element Cost
Formwork $ 153544 153600 100 146400 95
Reinforcing $ 48131 48669 101 48604 99
Concrete Placing $ 83651 83634 100 82753 99
4. Total Cost $ 285326 285903 100 277757 97

H ie unit costs in both processes differ though they use the same material price.
For instance, the unit cost of formwork in AICES is higher than that in the manual
process. H ie unit cost calculation of formwork in AICES is based on the module size
 142

(i.e., the amount of the required forms), the number of form uses, and the labor
productivity of each work item: form fabrication, erection, stripping, and cleaning and
moving. The manual process, however, is based on the number of form uses and the
total crew productivity of formwork obtained from [Means 1990].
A comparison shows that the two processes estimate costs in a 5% range of
accuracy, which is generally acceptable in detailed cost estimating [Ahuja 1988].
 CHAPTER V ffl

CONCLUSIONS

This research has developed the Automated Interactive Cost Estimating System
(AICES) that can provide detailed cost information on design alternatives at all design
stages. AICES is implemented for reinforced concrete building structures. It enables the
designers to access concrete construction cost information that is sensitive to variations in
architectural and engineering design. This chapter summarizes the research results,
describes the contributions to knowledge, and suggests the future extension and direction
o f the research.

8.1 Research Results

H ie results of the research may be described as an answer to the following

questions which were raised at the beginning o f the research:

(1) How can a reinforced concrete structural design be developed efficiently with
default design data?
(2) What information from design is required to perform detailed cost estimating for
reinforced concrete building structures?
(3) How are the project databases structured and related to each other?
(4) How are construction decisions made during the cost estimating process?

The answer of each question has been addressed through the research and is
summarized as follows:

143
 144

(1) Hierarchical Design Modification Levels

Design is efficiently developed efficiently through a hierarchical and iterative

design process for schematic, preliminary, and detailed design modification. At each
design modification level, a usable detailed reinforced concrete structural design is
created from available design information. Level 1 creates a default detailed design
based on basic building parameters. Level 2 adjusts significant design variables of the
default design created at level 1. Level 3 customizes any design variables based on the
adjusted design at level 2. The design at each level is itself input to automated detailed
estimating. This provides accurate and realistic detailed estimates of costs for alternative
values o f design variables, which are sensitive to design alternatives.

(2) Design Information Applied to Detailed Cost Estimating

Design information has been identified and classified into three categories
according to its influence in the design modification at each level: basic building
parameters, significant design variables, and detailed design variables. These design
variables are applied to schematic, preliminary, and detailed design modification levels,
respectively. The design variables affect cost estimating as well as design. For example
column spacing is an important design variable that determines the member depth and
reinforcing. The member dimensions and reinforcing data are the input to detailed cost
estimating. AICES allows the user to change the values o f design variables to calculate
the cost sensitivity at each level.

(3) Project Database Structures and Relationships

The project database consists of the project independent database and the project
dependent database. The project independent database contains the generic data that are
 145

not influenced by a project, including default building information, default member

design data, material price, labor wages, construction methods, and formwork design
data. The project dependent database stores the specific data for a project, including
building information, member design configuration, and quantity and unit cost data. The
databases are related to each other for performing design and cost estimating during the
process.

(4) Construction Decisions during Cost Estimating

Cost estimating requires decision-making to obtain an accurate and realistic cost

estimate. AICES provides consultation for making a construction decision based on the
built-in construction knowledge. For example, the user can consult with the system to
determine the cost tradeoff between the quantity of forms fabricated or procured for the
project, and the project duration. It also enables the user to check the cost variation
according to different construction method.

8.2 Research Contributions

This research contributes to design and construction by integrating detailed cost

estimating to default detailed designs to provide designers with accurate costs o f design
alternatives. It contributes to the design process by suggesting a hierarchical and
iterative design modification method in different stages of design with varying degrees of
input and default detailed design data stored in the database. It also contributes to the
development of a detailed cost estimating system by organizing the project database
structure in which the design and estimating data are efficiently retrieved and used, and
with which the construction knowledge base is connected to incorporate a construction
decision process into the cost estimating process. The database structure and relationship
 146

described in AICES will be useful for improving the cost estimating procedure. Finally,
it contributes to the duration estimating process by reflecting the construction process in
duration estimating.

8.3 Future Research

Suggestions for future area of study related to the work presented in this thesis fall
into several areas.

(1) Extension of AICES to Other Structures

The current AICES is implemented for a flat plate system of reinforced concrete
building structures. It may be extended to other reinforced concrete slab systems, or to
other structures, such as masonry, steel, and reinforced concrete with steel frames.

(2) Extension of Default Design Database

This research has suggested a process to develop a design based on the default
design data stored in the project database. AICES default design database contains only
general building information and reinforced concrete structural design data. Therefore,
the AICES database needs to be extended to reflect a complete design that includes
exterior wall system, interior finish, mechanical and electrical system, and so on.

(3) Linkage of Structural Analysis System with AICES

AICES does not have structural design analysis function, because it develops a
reinforced concrete structural design based on default design data which are obtained
from historical structural design data. Thus, if the design input is beyond a feasible space
of default design data, the system cannot provide a usable reinforced concrete structural
 147

design. If AICES were connected with a structural analysis system, it could analyze any
design input based on the specified design codes and regulations. Therefore, it is
recommended that a structural analysis system be linked with AICES in the future.

(4) Linkage to Designers’ Own Default Design System

Design can be performed through several procedures based on designers'

knowledge, judgment, and experience in making design decision. Therefore, AICES
may also be linked to designers' own default design generation or modification system
which may have differences from AICES design modification.

(5) Extension to Generation of Competitive Bids

AICES suggests a way of detailed cost estimating which may be useful to a

contractor. Contractors prepare bids based on their own estimating procedures. AICES
may be extended to generation of competitive bids for construction, by linking to
multiple contractors' estimating system.

(6) Knowledge-Based Cost Estimating System

This research has presented a process to select construction methods during cost
estimating based on built-in construction knowledge. The knowledge base represented in
AICES is not a landmark for knowledge-based cost estimating. However, it gives an
idea that expert systems may be uniquely adaptable and applicable to detailed cost
estimating in the future. Since cost estimating is a field where subjective or judgmental
inputs must be quantified, expert systems may be ideal solutions to reflect the estimator's
decision-making procedure in a cost estimating system.
APPENDICES

148
 149

APPENDIX A

NOTATIONS

The following notations are used in this dissertation.

Ab = building area, sf
Agf —gross floor area, sf
Agfa = adjusted gross floor area, sf
AICES = automated interactive cost estimating system
Cl = formwork material unit cost of first use, Vsfca
CTLH - combined total labor-hours
cy = cubic yard
DL = dead load, psf
fc = concrete strength, psi
fy = steel strength, psi
HWC —hourly wages of a carpenter
HWcf = hourly wages o f a carpenter foreman
HWi = hourly wages o f a building laborer
kip - 1000 pounds
Lb = building length, ft
Lba = adjusted building length, ft
LHf = labor hours o f first use
LHr = labor hours o f reuse
LL = live load, psf
Ln = clear span length, ft
L* —column spacing in x-direction, ft
Ly = column spacing in y-direction, ft
Nb = number o f bays
NCnr = number of comer slab panels
Next = number of exterior slab panels
Nf = number o f floors
Nint = number o f interior slab panels
Nm = number o f modules
 150

Ns= number of form sets

Nu—number of form uses
Nxb= number of bays in x-direction
Nxcb, Sxcbi Qxcb = number, sizeand quantity, lb, of column strip btm bars in x-direction
Njict, Sxctt Qxct ~ number, size and quantity, lb, o f column strip top bars in x-direction
Nxmb, Sxmb* Qxmb= number, size and quantity, lb, of middle strip btm bars in x-direction
NXmt» Sxmt. Qxmt - number, size and quantity, lb, of middle strip top bars in x-direction
Nyb = number o f bays in y-direction
NyCb, SyCb, Qycb = number, size and quantity, lb, o f column strip btm bars in y-direction
Nyct, Syct, Qyct - number, size and quantity, lb, of column strip top bars in y-direction
Nymb, Symb, Qymb—number, size and quantity, lb, o f middle strip btm bars in y-dixection
Nymt, Synu, Qymt = number, size and quantity, lb, of middle strip top bars in y-direction
PDDB = project-dependent database
PIDB = project-independent database
psf = pound per square foot
psi = pound per square inch
Pu = factored design load, kips
Qc = concrete quantity, cy
Of = formwork quantity, sfca
Qfbm = form material quantity in feet board measure.
Or = reinforcing quantity, ton
Qxr = reinforcing quantity in x-direction, lb
Qyr = reinforcing quantity in y-direction, lb
Ra = building aspect ratio
Rf = formwork replacement factor
Sc = column size, in
sfca = square foot contact area
SS = social security taxes
Tm = module duration
Tt = total duration, days
Unemp = unemployment taxes
wb = building width
Wba = adjusted building width, ft
WC = workers' compensation insurance
Wr = steel weight per cubic inch, 0.2835 lb/in3
 151

A PPEN D IX B

A IC ES IM PL E M E N T A T IO N TO O L S

The implementation of AICES requires a selection o f the application development

tools. The selected tools must be able to build the databases and the knowledge base and
to exchange the data between the databases and the knowledge base. In addition, the
tools must have the programming capabilities for user interface screen design,
customized output reporting, data manipulation, searching, looping, and so on.
The selection of tools can be accomplished by examining the available software
packages and by applying the requirements of the system to each of those packages. This
appendix describes the requirements for the system development, explains the desired
capabilities of the application development tools, and introduces the selected tools for the
AICES implementation.

B .l System R equirem ents

B.1.1 Database Requirements

Design and cost estimating involves the creation, manipulation, and access of a
large amount of data including project-dependent data and project-independent data
described in Chapter m . Therefore, AICES should be able to create, manipulate, and
access the required data. During the process, the system requires the user interface for
data input, consultation, and output report. This section describes the system
requirements which govern the selection of the required tools.
 152

(1) Data input

The structural design information may be input by the user through the input
template. This input template consists of a menu driven screen to input the descriptive
information such as the types of structures and the quantitative information such as
structural dimensions. For instance, building information including building type and
floor system can be described with character strings. Structural component dimensions
can be described with real numbers.

(2) Datastorage

The system requires the data storage to contain the descriptive data as well as the
quantitative data. The stored data will be used to update the design, to compute the
quantity, cost, and duration, and to select the construction methods in the cost estimating
process.

(3) Computation capability

The system must be able to compute the quantity and cost in the estimating process.
The computation involves simple arithmetic such as addition, subtraction, multiplication,
and division based on the real numbers retrieved from the stored data.

(4) Application programming

Relating data among the different databases can be performed through the
application programs. The application programs enable the system to communicate with
the user by asking questions and showing appropriate information on the screen. There,
the selected tool should provide the programming environment through which the
required applications can be developed.
 153

(5) Output reports

The main output of the system involves the detailed design and the detailed cost
estimate. The detailed design shows the building information, the member dimensions,
and the reinforcing for each member. The cost estimate includes the quantity and cost of
each estimating element, and the duration. The output may include the selected
construction methods and form types, and the explanation o f the selection criteria.
Therefore, the output reports include a design table that describes design data, a recap
sheet that describes quantity and cost data, and a statement that explains the selected
construction methods and form types. These reports will be presented on the screen and
be printed.

B.1.2 Knowledge Base Requirements

AICES involves the construction decision process as well as the procedural process.
Construction decisions are based on construction knowledge, which is collected in the
knowledge base. Using this knowledge base, the system can guide and consult the user
to make correct decisions. The knowledge base contains the facts and rales that embody
the estimator's knowledge for the construction decisions, such as concrete placing method
and formwork type selection. Therefore, the system requires a tool to represent the
knowledge including the facts and rules.
Cost estimating requires decision making such as construction method selection and
formwork type selection based upon the available information and knowledge. The
construction knowledge which can be obtained from construction experts needs to be
properly organized and represented in a knowledge base. A rale-based knowledge
representation may be used to describe the construction knowledge in the system.
 154

B.2 Tool Selection

B.2.1 dBASE IV ™

In accordance with the system requirements, relational databases may be used to

store and retrieve the data for design and cost estimating. Relational databases, as
discussed in chapter IV, are much more user oriented than other types o f databases since
the user can request any type of information and the relational database management
system will perform all the necessary relational operations to create the relation
containing the data requested. Therefore, in this research, dBASE IV, which is a
relational database management system, has been selected as an implementation tool of
AICES.
dBASE IV is a powerful database management system for microcomputers which
provides a very flexible programming language to handle many different types of data
processing problems. dBASE IV has many functions including sorting, indexing,
querying, updating, displaying, and customized reporting.
Application programs for design modification, detailed estimating, and menu
driven screen templates have been coded in dBASE IV. Appendix E shows AICES
screen menu and user interface templates. Sample programs for design modification and
detailed estimating are presented in Appendix F and G, respectively.

B.2.2 VP-Expert &

In accordance with the requirements o f the knowledge base in AICES, a

knowledge-based expert system may be used to implement the construction knowledge
base. For this research, VP-Expert, which is a rule-based expert system, is selected as an
implementation tool of the knowledge base in AICES.
 155

VP-Expert has the ability to exchange data with database files and spreadsheet files,
and uses backward and forward chaining for problem solving. It uses confidence factors
that allow the user to account for uncertain information in a knowledge base. That is,
confidence factors indicate the relative degree of certainty for the conclusion of rules in
the knowledge base. In addition, VP-Expert has a What_If function that allows the user
to check how changing the value of a variable affects the outcome o f the consultation.
For the prototype implementation, sample rules for construction method selection
method have been represented through VP-Expert. These are shown in Appendix H.
H ie programs involve concrete placing method selection for a flat plate structure. The
program is connected with the AICES database to obtain the required information. H ie
selected method will be saved in the AICES database if it is accepted by the user.
 156

APPENDIX C

AICES DATABASE STRUCTURES

AICES databases consist of project-independent databases and project-dependent

databases. This appendix presents the structures of databases and excerpt data in each
group that support the database description in Section 3.5 of Chapter III.

C .l Project-Independent Databases

C .l.l Default Building Information Database

(1) Structure

Reid Name Type Width Dec Description

BLDG AREA Numeric 6 Buildina area, sf
FL NUM Numeric 3 Number of floors
CLM SP1 Numeric 3 Column spacing in x direction, ft
CLM SP2 Numeric 3 Column spacing in v direction, ft
NUM BAY1 Numeric 3 Number of x bays
NUM BAY2 Numeric 3 Number of v bays

(2) Data

BLDG AREA FL NUM CLM SP1 CLM SP2 NUM BAY1 NUM BAY2
9.600 5 20 20 6 4
24.000 8 24 20 10 5
 157

C.1.2 Default Slab Detailed Design Database

(1) Structure

Field Name Tvt>e Width Dec Description

CLM SP Numeric 3 Column spacing. It
THK Numeric 4 1 Slab thickness, in
CCT Numeric 2 Comer slab column strio too bar size
CCT N Numeric 2 Number of CCT bars
CCB Numeric 2 Comer slab column strio bottom bar size
CCB N Numeric 2 Number of CCB bars
CMT Numeric 2 Comer slab middle strio loo bar size
CMT N Numeric 2 Number of CMT bars
CMB Numeric 2 Comer slab middle strio bottom bar size
CMB N Numeric 2 Number of CMB bars
ECT Numeric 2 Exterior slab column strio too bar size
ECT N Numeric 2 Number of ECT bars
ECB Numeric 2 Exterior slab column strio bottom bar size
ECB N Numeric 2 Number of ECB bars
EMT Numeric 2 Exterior slab middle strio too bar size
EMT N Numeric 2 Number of EMT bars
EMB Numeric 2 Exterior slab middle strio bottom bar size
EMB N Numeric 2 Number of EMB bars
ICT Numeric 2 Interior slab column strio top bar size
ICT N Numeric 2 Number of ICT bars
ICB Numeric 2 Interior slab column strio bottom bar size
ICB N Numeric 2 Number of ICB bars
IMT Numeric 2 Interior slab middle strio too bar size
IMT N Numeric 2 Number of IMT bars
IMB Numeric 2 Interior slab middle strio bottom bar size
IMB N Numeric 2 Number of IMB bars
M EXT Numeric 3 Exterior neaative moment, ft-kbs
CS EXT Numeric 2 Minimum exterior column size, in
CS INT Numeric 2 Minimum interor column size, in
 158

(2) Data

CLM THK CCT CCT CCB CCB CMT CMT CMB CMB ECT ECT ECB ECB EMT
SP N N N N N N
12 5.0 4 10 3 8 4 8 3 8 4 10 3 8 4
13 5.0 4 11 3 8 4 8 3 8 4 11 3 8 4
14 5.0 4 12 3 9 4 9 3 9 4 12 3 9 4
15 6.0 4 12 3 10 4 9 3 9 4 12 3 10 4
16 5.5 4 12 3 12 4 9 3 9 4 13 3 12 4
17 6.0 4 12 3 14 4 9 3 11 4 14 3 14 4
16 6.0 4 13 4 9 4 9 3 11 4 17 4 0 4
19 6.6 4 14 4 10 4 10 3 13 5 12 4 10 4
20 7.0 4 15 4 11 4 10 3 14 6 14 4 11 4
21 7.0 4 19 4 12 4 11 3 14 5 16 4 12 4
22 7.6 4 20 4 13 4 11 4 9 6 12 4 13 4
23 6.0 4 22 5 10 4 12 4 10 6 14 5 10 4
24 8.5 5 16 4 16 4 12 4 12 5 20 4 16 4
28 9.0 5 17 5 12 4 13 4 13 7 12 5 12 4
26 9.6 5 19 6 9 5 9 5 9 5 24 6 9 5
27 10.0 6 15 6 10 6 10 5 10 7 14 6 10 5
28 10.0 6 17 6 11 5 10 5 10 7 16 6 11 5
(Continued be!low)

CLM EMT EMB EMB ICT ICT ICB ICB IMT IMT IMB IMB M CS CS
SP N N N N N N EXT EXT INT
12 8 3 8 4 10 3 8 4 8 3 6 8 10 11
13 8 3 8 4 11 3 8 4 8 3 8 10 10 11
14 9 3 9 4 12 3 9 4 9 3 9 18 14 11
15 9 3 9 4 12 3 9 4 9 3 9 27 18 12
16 9 3 9 4 12 3 9 4 9 3 9 33 18 12
17 9 3 11 4 14 3 10 4 9 3 11 39 18 12
16 9 3 11 4 16 3 12 4 9 3 11 61 21 14
19 10 3 13 5 12 3 14 4 10 3 13 62 22 14
20 10 3 14 5 13 3 IS 4 10 3 14 73 22 15
21 11 3 14 6 15 4 10 4 11 3 16 89 25 16
22 11 4 9 6 12 4 11 4 11 4 9 106 26 17
23 12 4 10 6 13 4 12 4 12 4 10 126 27 17
24 12 4 12 5 20 4 13 4 12 4 12 147 28 18
25 13 4 13 7 12 5 9 4 13 4 13 171 29 19
26 9 5 9 7 13 6 10 5 9 5 9 196 30 20
27 10 6 10 7 14 5 11 5 10 5 10 233 32 20
28 10 6 10 7 16 5 12 5 10 5 10 268 35 22
 159

C .U Default Column Detailed Design Database

(1) Structure

Field Name Tvoe Width Dec Description

CLM SIZE Numeric 2 Column size, in
P1 Numeric 4 Gravity load 1. kips
P2 Numeric 4 Gravity load 2. kios
M1 Numeric 3 Moment 1. ftkios
M2 Numeric 3 Moment 2. ftkios
M3 Numeric 3 Moment 3. ftkios
M BAR Numeric 2 Main bar size
NUM Numeric 2 Number of main bars
S BAR Numeric 2 Stirvuo bar size
SPACING Numeric 4 1 StirruD bar soacino. in

(2) Data

CLM SIZE PI P2 M1 M2 M3 M BAR NUM S BAR SPACING

10 177 66 7 25 11 4 4 3 8.0
10 226 78 8 33 17 5 4 3 10.0
10 244 75 10 37 22 6 4 3 12.0
12 17S 73 20 32 13 4 4 3 8.0
12 273 112 14 46 21 5 4 3 10.0
12 330 125 17 60 28 6 4 3 12.0
14 272 114 18 61 25 6 4 3 10.0
14 360 165 26 86 36 6 4 3 12.0
14 446 175 26 100 48 7 4 3 12.0
16 366 175 30 100 42 6 4 3 12.0
16 536 236 40 135 60 7 4 3 12.0
16 560 246 44 160 72 4 3 12.0
16 380 175 36 114 44 6 4 3 12.0
18 545 236 50 155 62 7 4 3 12.0
18 706 306 64 202 80 8 4 3 12.0
20 530 230 55 175 70 7 4 3 12.0
20 706 310 70 230 80 8 4 3 12.0
20 860 366 60 260 115 6 4 3 12.0
22 540 240 60 160 80 7 4 3 12.0
22 700 320 80 250 100 8 4 3 12.0
22 885 400 100 325 130 8 4 3 12.0
24 700 320 60 280 120 6 4 3 12.0
24 886 420 110 350 150 8 4 3 12.0
24 1070 480 130 380 180 7 8 3 12.0
 160

C.1.4 Material Price Database

(1) Structure

Field Name Type Width Dec Description

MATERIAL Character 15 Material name
ITEM Character 10 Material item
CLASS Character 10 Material class
UNIT Character 5 Quantity unit
PRICE Numeric 7 2 Material unit price. $/unit

(2) Data

MATERIAL ITEM CLASS UNIT PRICE

Lumber 2"x4" S4s mbf 320.00
Lumber 2"x6" s4s mbf 315.00
Plywood 5/8" msf 615.00
Plywood 3/4" mst 670.00
Rebar #3-#7 □rd40 ton 572.00
Rebar #3-#7 aid60 ton 587.00
Rebar #3-#7 aid75 ton 602.00
Rebar #8-#18 ard40 ton 562.00
Rebar #8-#18 ord60 ton 577.00
Rebar #8-# 18 ard75 ton 592.00
Concrete 2000psi cy 52.05
Concrete 3000osi cy 55.85
Concrete 4000osi cy 59.65
 161

C.1.5 Labor W age Database

(1) Structure

Field Name Type Width Dec Description

CRAFT Character 10 Craft
BAS Numeric 5 2 Base waoe
H W Numeric 5 2 Health and Welfare
VAC Numeric 5 2 Vacation and/or Holiday
PEN Numeric 5 2 Pension Fund
APP Numeric 5 2 Apprentice Fund
IAF Numeric 5 2 Industry Advancement Fund
SUB Numeric 5 2 Sup. Unemployment Benefit
BTF Numeric 5 2 Basic Trainina Fund
DUE Numeric 5 2 Dues
W EFF Date 8 Wage effective date
W EXP Date 8 Wage expire data

(2) Data

CRAFT BAS H W VAC PEN APP IAF SUB BTF DUE W EFF W EXP
carpenter 19.87 1.80 0.00 2.00 0.05 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.00 6/1/90 6/1/91
carpent f 21.12 1.80 0.00 2.00 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 6/1/90 6/1/91
rod men 16.09 2.90 3.06 5.31 0.18 0.08 0.50 0.00 0.00 6/1/90 6/1/91
rodm f 17.09 2.90 3.06 5.31 0.18 0.08 0.50 0.00 0.00 6/1/90 6/1/91
trawel 23.35 0.00 0.00 2.50 0.15 0.10 0.15 0.00 0.72 6/1/90 6/1/91
laborer 16.13 1.65 1.55 1.05 0.00 0.10 0.00 0.07 0.00 6/1/90 6/1/91
labor f 17.13 1.65 1.55 1.05 0.00 0.10 0.00 0.07 0.00 6/1/90 6/1/91
operator 18.75 2.45 2.44 3.00 0.15 0.08 0.03 0.00 0.20 6/1/90 6/1/91
 162

C.1.6 Construction Methods Database

(1) Structure

Field Name Tvoe Width Dec Descriction

CODE Character 7 Construction method code
ELEMENT Character 12 Construction element
COMP Character 10 Structural comoonent
ITEM Character 10 Material item
CLASS Character 10 Material class
CREW Numeric 5 Construction crew tvoe
UNIT Numeric 5 Quantity unit
PRODUCT Numeric 8 2 Production rate
MANHOUR Numeric 6 3 Man-Hour
FACTOR Numeric 5 2 Material waste factor

(2) Data

CODE ELEMENT COMP ITEM CLASS CREW UNIT PRO­ MAN- FACTO
DUCT HOUR R
fs1221 tormwork slab t<«6 elevated f 2 sfca 545.00 0.088 4.00
fs2221 formwork slab 6<t<-8 elevated f 2 sfca 545.00 0.088 4.00
fs3221 formwork slab 8<t<-10 elevated f 2 sfca 545.00 0.088 4.00
fc1211 formwork column w<-16 sauare f 1 sfca 220.00 0.145 3.00
fc2211 formwork column w>16 SQuare f 1 sfca 230.00 0.139 3.00
rs1211 reinfoicina slab #3-#7 ard40 r 1 ton 2.30 13.910 0.03
rs2211 reinforcina slab #3-#7 ard60 r 1 ton 2.90 11.030 0.03
rc1211 reinfo rcina oolumn #3-#7 grd60 r 1 ton 1.50 21.330 0.03
IC2211 reinforcina column #8-#18 ard60 r 1 ton 2.30 13.910 0.03
cs0410 concrete slab 4000osi c 1 cV 165.00 0.290 0.05
CS0420 concrete slab 4000osi c 2 cv 130.00 0.492 0.05
CS0430 concrete slab 4000dsI c 3 cy 110.00 0.581 0.05
CC0420 concrete column 4000DSi C2 cv 45.00 1.420 0.05
CC0430 concrete oolumn 4000DSi c 3 cy 40.00 1.600 0.05
 163

C.2 Project Dependent Database

C.2.1 Building Information Database

(1) Structure

Field Name Tvoe Width Dec Description

PNAME Character 20 Project name
PLOCA Character 20 Protect location
BLDG AREA Numeric 6 Building area, at
FL NUM Numeric 3 Number of floors
CLM SP1 Numeric 3 Column spacing in x direction, ft
CLM SP2 Numeric 3 Column spacing in v direction, ft
NUM BAY1 Numeric 3 Number of x bays
NUM BAY2 Numeric 3 Number of v bavs

(2) Data

PNAME PLOCA BLDG FL CLM CLM NUM NUM

AREA NUM SP1 SP2 BAY1 BAY2
Building 1 Ann Arbor 9.600 5 20 20 6 4
Building 1 Ann Arbor 9.072 5 18 18 7 4

C.2.2 Slab Design Configuration Database

(1) Structure

Field Name Tvoe Width Dec Description

COMP ID Character 10 Component identifier
NUM Numeric 3 2 Number of slab panels
X D Numeric 5 2 Slab length, ft
Y D Numeric 5 2 Slab width, ft
Z D Numeric 5 Slab thickness, in
(Continued on next page)
 164

Field Name Tvoe Width Dec Description

XCT Numeric 2 Column strip top bar in x direction
XCT N Numeric 3 Number of column strip top bars
XCB Numeric 2 Column strip bottom bar in x direction
XCB N Numeric 3 Number of column strip bottom bars
XMT Numeric 2 Middle strip top bar in x direction
XMT N Numeric 3 Number of middle strip top bars
XMB Numeric 2 Middle strip bottom bar in x direction
XMB N Numeric 3 Number of middle strip bottom bars
YCT Numeric 2 Column strip top bar in v direction
YCT N Numeric 3 Number of column strip top bars
YCB Numeric 2 Column strip bottom bar in y direction
YCB N Numeric 3 Number of column strip bottom bars
YMT Numeric 2 Middle strip top bar in v direction
YMT N Numeric 3 Number of middle strip top bars
YMB Numeric 2 Middle strip bottom bar in v direction
YMB N Numeric 3 Number of middle strip bottom bars

(2) Data

COMP ID NUM X D Y D Z D XCT XCT N XCB XCB N XMT XMT N

S INT 8 20 20 7.0 5 13 3 15 4 10
S EXT 12 20 20 7.0 5 14 4 11 4 10
S CNR 4 20 20 7.0 4 15 4 11 4 10
(Continued below)

COMP ID XMB XMB N YCT YCT N YCB YCB N YMT YMT N YMB YMB N
S INT 3 14 5 13 3 15 4 10 3 14
S EXT 3 14 5 14 4 11 4 10 3 14
S CNR 3 14 4 15 4 11 4 10 3 14
 165

C.23 Column Design Configuration Database

(1) Structure

Field Name Tvoe Width Dec Description

COMP ID Character 10 Component identifier
X D Numeric 4 1 Column x dimension, in
Y D Numeric 4 1 Column v dimension, in
M BAR Numeric 2 Main bar size
NUM Numeric 2 Number of main bars
S BAR Numeric 2 Stirrup bar size
SPACING Numeric 4 1 Stimjp bar soacina. in

(2) Data

COMP ID X D Y D M BAR NUM S BAR SPACING

1CS INT 16.0 16.0 7 4 3 12.0
1CS EXT 22.0 22.0 7 4 3 12.0
1CS CNR 22.0 22.0 7 4 3 12.0
2CS INT 16.0 16.0 4 3 12.0
2CS EXT 22.0 22.0 7 4 3 12.0
2CS CNR 22.0 22.0 7 4 3 12.0
3CS INT 16.0 16.0 4 3 12.0
3CS EXT 22.0 22.0 7 4 3 12.0
3CS CNR 22.0 22.0 7 4 3 12.0
4CS INT 16.0 16.0 6 4 3 12.0
4CS EXT 22.0 22.0 7 4 3 12.0
4CS CNR 22.0 22.0 8 4 3 12.0
5CS INT 16.0 16.0 6 4 3 12.0
5CS EXT 22.0 22.0 7 4 3 12.0
5CS CNR 22.0 22.0 8 4 3 12.0
 166

C.2.4 Quantity and Unit Cost Database

(1) Structure

Field Name Tvoe Width Dec Description

COMP Character 10 Structural component
ELEMENT Character 10 1 Estimatino element
UNIT Character 4 Quantitv unit
QUANT Numeric 8 2 Quantity
M UNICO Numeric 6 2 Material unit cost
L UNICO Numeric 6 2 Labor unit cost
E UNICO Numeric 6 2 Eautoment unit cost

(2) Data

COMP ELEMENT UNIT QUANT M UNICO L UNICO E UNICO

slab formwork sfca 48000 0.62 2.52 0.06
slab reinforcina ton 49.20 604.61 373.68 0.00
slab concrete cv 1037 62.63 13.79 4.24
column formwork sfca 13680 0.58 1.96 0.05
column reinforcina ton 11.26 604.61 722.45 0.00
column concrete cy 206 62.63 39.85 12.24
 167

APPENDIX D

AICES IMPLEMENTATION EXAMPLE

D .l Default Design Information

Design Description Default Data Remark

Gross Floor Area 48.000 Sf **
Number of Floors 5 **
Column Spacing in X-Direction 20 ft. +*
Column Spacing in Y-Direction 20 ft. **
Number of X-Bavs 6 **
Number of Y-Bavs 4 **
Slab Thickness 7 in. **
Column Size 12x12 in. **
Floor to Floor Height 12 ft. *
Design Live Load 100 psf *
Concrete Strength 4.000 psi *
Steel Strength 60,000 psi *

D.2 Default Estimating Information

Estimating Description Default Data Remark

Formwork Type Wood Forms **
Number of Form Uses 4 **
Reinforcina Steel Grade 60 *
Concrete Placing Pumping **
Concrete Tvoe Readv-Mixed *
Module Duration 7 days **
Number of Modules per Floor 2 ♦*

*+ Default values that can be modified or selected by the user

* Default values that are assum ed constant for AICES
 168

D.3 Building Layout ( Plan and Section)

ao 2 0 '- 0 ” . 1 2 0 '

<§>

10
D.4 Flat plate Detailed Design Table (bom [CRSI1984])
flA T P1ATI S Y ltM — MMI r. -U M p ti
RAT R A H SYIT1M [WITHOUT — MHtaOtl
M M It M l
MAN m Mp b im I
ta n ■OOGNO MW M ta ta O P l i MMMM MMI
Mil 0+
ptm d n»*(i) M u 9 (31 IN III
*■ -
h talM I
O /k. Iw l CtOmm -44 +«* -M Ctaaa JM» MMM Mh,
ti- u ir - Il'-T ta 1*4* ------------
------------
— ------------
lii urn m tMl W Imm4 w C ta . M r »*W* U n• p P P M
— ^ —* ---------- — * *■* *•» *ta wt C«l
m Ml Mi *« o-ftj fc-fcl fc-*J hi. ta . h*. 14. ta t»2 «H1 Or) *•» | ■« *•* Im. K
■ 1 - « • ■
r - to tu vm ROt KM u n u ju . 7
*- m u u ta m n or m i *jm a / a .

IS SI 10 0447 1 V 47 M* n -n 1141 *44 *44 in Ul 1A0 11 M 10 *-n n -n *n n -n us 171 171

11 IM 11 «l
M7 11 a M M* 1141 1*44 1141 *44 in 1J* \J t IS 100 II *n n -n M* n -n ITS 174 177
is III 11 0441 M n 71 M* 744 1144 1141 *44 IJI IM 141 IJ IM 14 •* n n -n m * n -n 140 IJI IJ I
is m IS U » 17 41 U *-M 1*41 1144 1141 *44 IM l.tl 149 IS MO IS im * n -n M* n -n 1.91 l.tl IJ4
IS 290 10 U07 47 4* M IM* 1141 1444 M41 •4* IM 1.94 1.94 is IM 14 im * ii-n M* n -n 1.97 IM IJ*
IS 900 33 I.WI 41 41 M 1144 t-M 1*41 114* *44 1.11 111 114 11 300 17 ■*n n -n M* n -n 109 IM U»

U » 10 UM 10 41 a IM* 1141 1*44 1141 •44 IM 144 141 14 M 10 w-n n -n M* n -n 147 147 147
U too 10 UP IS M 74 IM* 744 1*44 114 * *n in m 1J* 14 100 11 i* n n -n M* n -n 147 171 171
14 IM 11 4444 24 11 17 IM* M* 14-n 1141 *n IM 104 144 14 IM 14 u -n n -n *n n -n ITS U t IJ I
14 Ml It UP SI 44 M 11-14 M* 1*41 1141 *44 IM 1.92 1.9S 14 SOI IJ i* n n -n M* n -n 147 IJ* U t
14 754 23 1011 44 4* IM 14-74 *-n *4* vm
n -n H4* 110 115 14 IM 14 ■*n *-n M* n -n 249 ID U4
14 MO 14 ISM 79 n 111 ll-n *44 U41 1141 *4* VO U7 241 14 300 10 IH I *n M* n -n 12S 171 U l

17 SI 10 41S1 11 14 It IM* ii-n 1144 1141 *44 IM 147 144 17 M 10 i* n n -n *n n -n 147 144 IJ*
17 IM 10 0491 II It M ■M* *4* 1444 1141 *44 iji 1JS 147 17 100 11 i* n ii-n **4 IM l IT* 17* IJ*
17 IM 10 u a 41 4t M l*-M *4* i* n 1141 *44 IM 101 1.91 17 IM 14 i* n n -n m * IM l 1.93 1.(1 l.tl
17 IM 11 1434 47 74 111 14* *4* 1141 1*41 *4* IM IM 109 17 Mi II 17
-n •M l m * IM l 144 U t uv
17 7M M 1144 IS 71 in ii-n 1*44 1141 1141 *44 IM IN 134 17 SM IS •m i *n M* IM l 124 U4 171
17 MO M 4047 or n 114 it-** 1*44 1**4 1141 *4* 147 *M 122 17 M0 11 14
-n *n *#* n -n 149 14* 14*

II M 10 0.743 14 «s n 11-14 144 n -n 1141 *44 174 1-71 144 14 M 10 n -n n -n * *1 ■Ml 144 171 17*
II IM IS U P sv 71 itt ll-#4 *4* 1*44 1*41 ♦44 IM 1J7 147 10 IM II •s-n ll-n *n n -n 144 IJ7 IJ*
II IM 11 1494 4S 77 in l*-#4 1*44 1141 1141 *44 1*4 104 247 10 IM 14 •M l n -n *n •M l 141 U l Ul
II u 1414 •4 n in n -n 10-74 1*14 1141 *4* 11* 110 HI 10 MO 11 **n n -n *n IM* 1.14 1.14 lit
II IM 70 1441 101 *t •41 i4-n 11-44 11 *4 114! *44 111 IM 151 II 2M 21 n -n ■*n *#4 n -n 1.40 14* 14*

19 M 10 UN 14 77 tt im 1044 n -n i*-n 1*4* IM 1JI 144 19 M 10 ■*n ■*n i*-n •M l 141 IJI IJ I
It IM It 1.141 17 7* 114 •M* 1*44 1141 i* n 1*4* IM 1.94 1.91 19 100 IS w-n n -n i* n t* n 1.91 1.(1 IJ I
It IM IS 1.044 M •4 in •7-n 1144 14-n 1*4* i»«* 11* lit 121 19 IM 14 i* n IM l IM* i* n 2.17 114 114
It M IV ISIS 101 t4 I4t 14 -n 1144 i* n i* n 1*44 144 144 140 19 M0 M ■*n i* n •M* i* n 2-40 11* 11*
It IM 14 1174 111 101 1*1 17 -n 1144 1741 n -n 1*44 171 144 in 19 2M 14 n -n n-n IM* IM l 244 Ul IJ*

M M IS 0410 41 It in IM* 1*4* 1744 1441 1*44 IM IOI 141 M M 10 i* n i* n •M* 14

-n IJ I 17* IJ*
11 IM 11 1441 7* t7 in IM* 114* i* n 1441 1*4* IM 191 144 M IM IS i* n n -n •M* 14
-n 240 Ul U t
M IM M UP ft *4 hi i*4i 1144 1*41 1441 1*4* Ul IM 131 M IM 19 i* n i* n •M* 14
-n Iff 174 IM
* MO 33 1914 111 IM l*t i7-n •*-#* 114 1141
* 1*44 Ul 141 140 20 MO S3 •M* 11*4 IM* IM l 241 U4 IM

11 M II 0040 SS 17 •n 1*44 1144 1*44 1141 1144 IM 1-09 149 11 M 12 u n n -n ii- n IM l I.M It* IJ*
11 IM IS 1.730 09 M IM 1*44 n -n 1*41 1*41 1144 11* 117 114 11 IM 14 ■m i n n n -n IM l 2.14 117 lit
11 IM 11 14M
"7 H44 IM in *41 n -n *44 1144 U l 124 1S9 11 ?M 31 u -n u-n n -n n -n 2J0 U* U t

9mtanral Mpfaatltrr■«*«aw *••••M Omah 4*17. H r mi 111111 t t M i n j, - i»

HIU h m n m P m m 4 M u Hft kaJ > - - 4 4 _ . t-------
* I^M IMP^I nW i n t H MWM tMVPMIl
 170

D.5 Slab Types, Strips and Rebar Arrangement (from [A C I1989])

Comer Exterior Exterior

Slab Slab Slab

Exterior Interior Interior

Slab Slab Slab

Column
t
Middle mi \m\
Strip Strip Ly

50% As

|N
I*

Ln (Clear Span)

Column Strip

^ 0.22Ln^,
r^ |

U
-i
Ln (Clear Span)
L ----------
Middle Strip
 171

D.6 Column Design Chart (from [Neville 1984])

16x16 Column
fe ■4 k*i
fy *60 hsi
$ -0.70
Rebars .8(*Pa )
4 # 6 391
4 # 7 533
4 ♦ 8 568
1050 4 # 9 614
4 #10 648
685
8 * 9 741
8 #10 809
900 883
12 #10 970
16 # 9 995

750
*a.

9
a.
600

450

300

P2, M2)j
150

50 too 150 200 250 300 350

 172

APPENDIX E

AICES SCREEN MENU AND TEMPLATES

E.1 Introduction

A u to m a te d I n t e r a c t i v e C o s t E s t i m a t i n g S y stem

by
H yun-S oo Lee

T h is sy ste m w i l l h e lp th e s t r u c t u r a l d e s ig n e r s to check
th e c o s t o f t h e i r d e s ig n a l t e r n a t i v e s d u rin g th e d e s ig n
p r o c e s s b a s e d u p o n s e q u e n t i a l d e s i g n m o d i f i c a t i o n s an d
d e t a i l e d c o s t e s tim a te s in v o lv in g c o n s tr u c tio n d e c is io n .
 173

£.2 Overall System Menu

Jlntrodu^^^n Pr^ect Moi^fy" Design””""^lodif y Coating Report Exit

S r i t n Outline
User's Guide

J lH tr o d u c tio n " '" ” ^ ^ ” ^ t e p o r t ” ^ ” E x iT

New
Retrieve

^Introduction Project Modify Design Modify Coating Report Exit

Level 1: Schematic
Level 2: Preliminary
Level 3: Detailed

IIntroduction Project Modify Design Modify Coating Report Exit

Jconatructioi^^ethod
jconcrate Placing election
Type
Select Prom biat
Consult Bxpert

IIntroduction Project Modify Dealgn Modify Coating Report Exit

Deaign
Quantity
Coat
Duration
 174

E.3 Project Identification

IIntroduction Projtet Modify Design Modify Costing Report tit

Mow

Project Mono

Project Location: _____________________

*• Plesso input project none end location. •*

 175

E.4 Schematic Design Modification

S c h e m a tic D esig n M o d if ic a tio n

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

S c h e m a tic d e s i g n m o d i f i c a t i o n i s t o c r e a t e t h e d e f a u l t
d e ta ile d d e sig n . S e le c t b a s ic b u ild in g p a ra m e te rs f o r
w h ic h y o u c a n i n p u t t h e v a l u e s . The s y s t e m w i l l u t i l i z e
d e fa u lt d a ta to c a lc u la te th e v a lu e s of th e p a ra m e te rs
f o r w h ic h y o u d o n o t h a v e a n y i n f o r m a t i o n .

***<<Flease enter any key to continue>>***

 176

E.4.1 Building Parameter Input

Introduction Frojact Modify Design Modify Costing Report Exit

Laval 1: Schematic
Laval 3: Preliminary
Laval 3: Detailed

• Building Paraaatara Input Tabla

Flaaaa input aaailabla information
for aaeh building paraaatar. DESCRIPTION OMIT INPUT ADJUSTED
<Skip input for no information>
Structure ayatam
Design loads psf
Gross floor area ft
Structure Syaton Total floors fls
Ona_Way Flat Plata Clm spacing Lx ft
Two_Mey Flat Plata
One_Way Flat Slab cim spacing Ly ft
Two_May Flat Slab
One_Way Traditional Number of x bays aa
Two-Way Traditional
One_tfay Jolat Number of y bays aa
T w o w a y Joist
Mot Known Building area sf
Building length sf
Building width ft
Aspect ratio
 177

E.4.2 Building P aram eter A djustm ent & Building Layout

IntroductionProjectModify DesignModify C o s t i n g R e p o r t E x i t I
Laval 1: Schematic
Laval 2: Prallnlnary
Laval 3 : Detailed

* Schematic Building Layout * Bulldlna Paramatars Input Ta^ie

r DESCRIPTION UNIT INPUT ADJUSTED
4P Structure ayatam (Two..Nay riat Plata)
3T\ F TT Dealan loads psf 225

TT Gross floor area ft 50000 48000

I I I I I Total floors fls 5 5

<<Building Sactlon>> Cln spacing Lx ft 20 20
Cln spacing Ly ft 0 20
Number of x bays aa 6 6
1 2 3 4 5 6
Number of y bays aa 0 4
7 8 9 10 11 12
Building area af 9600
13 14 15 16 17 18
Building length af 120
19 20 21 22 23 24
Building width ft 80
<<Floor Plan> >
Aspect ratio 1.5

Please review the adjusted values.

Do you want to change your input?
[Y] yea. IN) no:
 178

E.4.3 Detailed Cost E stim ating for a Default Detailed Design

IIntroduction Project Modify DoaIon Modify Coating Report Bxlt

Doalgn
Quantity
Coat
Duration

• Cost estimating Results Table * Building Parameters Input Table

DESCRIPTION DPT DESCRIPTION UNIT INPUT ADJUSTED
QTY (af > 48000 Structure ayaten (Two._Hay Flat Plate)
p
O M uc o.sa Design loads psf 225
R TC 396S9
M L UC 2.52 Oroaa floor area ft 48000
If TC 121163 (Building Area) 9600
O E UC 0.06 Total floors f la 5
R TC 2721
K Clm spacing Lx ft 20
rw TOT 153544
Clm spacing Ly ft 20
R QTY(ton) 49.20
E Number of x bays ea 6
I M UC 604.61
N TC 29746 Number of y bays ea 4
P L UC 373.68
O TC 16385
R E UC 0.00
C TC 0
E ** Notation * •
RP TOT 48131
DPT: Default Design FM : Formwork
QTY (cy) 1037 HIM: New Design RP : Reinforcing
c OLD: Old Design CON: Concrete
O M UC 62.63
N TC 64952 QTY: Quantity UC : Unit Cost
C L UC 13.79 M Material TC : Total Cost
R TC 14304 L : Labor TOT: Element Total
E E UC 4.24 E Eguipnent
T TC 4395
B
COM TOT 83651
Mill you modify design again?[Y/N]
Total Cost 285326
 179

£.5 Preliminary Design Modification

P r e l i m i n a r y D e s ig n M o d i f i c a t i o n
A**********************************

P re lim in a ry d e s ig n m o d ific a tio n i s to a d ju s t b a s ic d e sig n

v a r ia b le s o f th e d e f a u l t d e s ig n c r e a te d a t l e v e l 1. You
may m o d if y t h e d e s i g n v a r i a b l e s i n c l u d i n g c o lu m n s p a c i n g
and s la b th ic k n e s s . I f y o u m o d ify t h e s e v a r i a b l e s , o t h e r
v a r i a b l e s s u c h a s r e i n f o r c i n g f o r s l a b a n d co lu m n w i l l b e
a u to m a tic a lly a d ju s te d a c c o rd in g to th e m o d ifie d d a t a .

***<<Pleese enter any key to continue>>***

 180

E.5.1 Basic Design V ariable Changes & Building Layout

IntroductionProjectModify DesignModify C o s t i n g R e p o r t K x i t I
Level 1: Schematic
Level 3: Preliminary
Level 3: Detailed

• Schematic Buildina Layout • Design Modification Input Table

srT DESCRIPTION UNT DPT NEW OLD

4F FT Oroas fir area
Adjusted
sf
sf
48000 48000
45360
3F II II I Bid? footprint
Adjusted
sf
sf
9600 9600
9073
3P I I I I I Total floors fl 5 5
IF mm
<<Building Section*>
Aspect ratio
Bldg length
Adjusted
Bldg width
ft
ft
ft
1.5
130
80
1.8
130
136
80
Adjusted ft 73
Clm spacing Lx ft 30 18
Total x bays ea 6 7
Clm spacing Ly ft 30 18
1 3 3 4 5 6 7 Total y bays ea 4 4
8 9 10 11 13 13 14 Slab thickness in 7.0 6.0
15 16 17 18 19 30 31
33 33 34 35 36 37 38
<<Floor Plan>>

Do you want to check coat? IY/N]:

 181

E.5.2 Detailed Cost Estimating for Adjusted Default Designs

|IntroductionProjectModify DesignModify C o s t i n g R e p o r t B x l t
DeeIon
Quantity
Coet
Duration

■ Coat Rstlnatino Reeulta Table * Deslon Modification Input Table

DES<:r i p t x o n DPT NEW OLD DESCRIPTION UNT DPT NEW OLD
QTY (af) 48000 48400 45360 Grose fir area sf 48000 48000 45360
P Adjusted sf 48400
O M UC 0.62 0.62 0.60 Bide footprint sf 9600 9600 9072
R TC 29659 29906 27189 Adjusted sf 9680
M L UC 2.52 2.52 2.46 Total floors fl 5 5 5
W TC 121163 122173 111579 Aspect ratio 1.5 1.3 1.8
o 8 UC 0.06 0.06 0.06 Bid? length ft 120 120 126
R TC 2721 2744 2506 Adjusted ft 110
R Bldg width ft 80 80 72
PM TOT 153544 154823 141273 Adjusted ft 88
Cln spacing Lx ft 20 22 18
R QTY(ton) 49.20 55.77 43.67 Total x bays ea 6 5 7
■ Cln spacing by ft 20 22 18
I M UC 604.61 604.61 604.61 Total y bays ea 4 4 4
N TC 29746 33720 26403
P L UC 373.68 373.68 373.68 Slab thickness ln 7.0 7.5 6.0
O TC 18385 20841 16319
R E UC 0.00 0.00 0.00
C TC 0 0 0
8 ** Notation * •
RP TOT 48131 54561 42722
DPT: Default Design PM : Porwwork
QTY <ey> 1037 1120 840 NSW: New Design RP : Reinforcing
c OLD: Old Design CON: Concrete
O M UC 62.63 62.63 62.63
M TC 64952 70172 52611 QTY: Quantity UC : Unit Cost
C L UC 13.79 13.79 13.79 M Material TC : Total Cost
R TC 14304 15453 11586 L : Labor TOT: Blenent Total
8 8 UC 4.24 4.24 4.24 8 Bgulpnent
T TC 4395 4749 3560
8
CON TOT 83651 90373 67758
• •<< Project Duration: 70 Daya>>*«
Total Coet 285326 299758 251753 ••<< Prase any key to continue.>>••
 182

E.5.3 Cost Comparison Chart For Design Alternatives

(introduction frojeet Modify Design Modify Costing Report Exit |

D e s ig n
Quantity
Cost
Durstlon

* Cost Comparison Chart [S20K/grldl * Dssign Modification Input Table

— I— I— i— I— I— I— I— l— I— I— I— I— I I
Md DESCRIPTION UNT DPT NEW OLD
Mn
Mo Orosa fir area sf 4SOOO 48000 45360
Ld Adjusted af 48400
rw Ln Bldg footprint sf 9600 9600 9072
Lo Adjusted sf 9680
Sd Total floors fl 5 5 5
En Aspect ratio 1.5 1. 3 1.8
Eo Bldg length ft iao 120 126
Adjusted ft 110
Md Bldg width ft 80 80 72
Mn
■
Mo M l
Adjusted
Cln spacing Lx
ft
ft 20
88
22 18
Ld Total x bays sa 6 5 7
RP Ln Cln spacing Ly ft 20 22 IB
Lo
Ed
1 Total y bays aa « 4 4
En Slab thickness in 7.0 7.5 6.0
Bo
Md
Mn
Mo ■Hlfc ** Notation * •
Ld DPT: Default Design PW : Pornwork
COM Ln HEW: New Dssign RP : Reinforcing
Lo
Ed
1* OLD: Old Design CON: Concrete
En QTY: Quantity UC : Unit Cost
Eo M Material TC : Total Cost
L Labor TOT: Element Total
d E Sguipmant
TOT n
o

d Default design cost Will you nodify dssign sgain7fY/N]

n s H t M e w dssign cost
o H I : O l d design cost
 183

E.6 Detailed Slab Design Modification

S la b D esig n M o d if ic a tio n
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

T h is i s t o m o d ify d e t a i l e d s l a b d e s i g n and t o c h e ck
d e ta ile d co st e s tim a te . You may c h a n g e s l a b t h i c k n e s s
and r e in f o r c e m e n t b a s e d upon th e m o d ifie d d e f a u l t d e s ig n .
You c a n n o t c h a n g e c o lu m n s p a c i n g s i n t h i s mode b e c a u s e
th e y have a l r e a y b ee n f i x e d th ro u g h th e p r e li m i n a r y
d e s ig n m o d if ic a tio n a t l e v e l 2.

•**<<Please enter any key to continue)>•**

 184

E.6.1 Detailed Design Variable Changes & Building Layout

|lntroductlon Project Modify Design Modify Costing Report Bxlt |

Level 1: S c h m t l c
Level 2: Preliminary
Level 3: Detailed

* Schematic Building Layout * Design Modification Input Table

*-rrr DESCRIPTION UNT DPT NEW OLD

4F M i l l Groaa fir area
Adjusted
Sf
Sf
48000
48000
48000 48000
48000
»M M M Bldg footprint
Adjusted
sf
sf
9600
9600
9600 9600
9600
» n ~ 'i i i i Total floors fl 5 5 5

-mrrm <<Building Section>>

Aspect ratio
Bldg length
Adjusted
Bldg width
ft
ft
ft
1.5
120
120
80
1.5
120
120
80
1.5
120
120
80
Adjusted ft 80 80 80
Clm spacing Lx ft 20 20 20
Total x bays ea 6 6 6
Clm spacing Ly ft 20 20 20
1 2 3 4 5 6 Total y beys ea 4 4 4
7 8 9 10 11 12 Slab thickness in 7.0 6.0 6.0
13 14 15 16 17 18 X-Direction
Clm strip top * 5 4 5
19 20 21 22 23 24 Bar apacing in 9.0 8.0 9.0
Clm strip btm • 3 4 3
<<Ploor Plan>> Bar spacing ln 8.0 10.0 8.0
Mid strip top • 4 4 4
Bar spacing in 12.0 10.0 12.0
Mid strip btm * 3 4 3
Bar spacing in 9.0 10.0 9.0
Y-Direetion
Clm strip top • 5 4 5
Bar spacing ln 9.0 10.0 9.0
Clm strip btm • 3 4 3
Bar spacing in 8.0 10.0 6.0
Mid strip top • 4 4 4
Bar apacing in 12.0 10.0 12.0
Mid strip btm • 3 3 3
Bar spacing in 9.0 10.0 9.0
 185

E.7 Detailed Column Design Modification

Colum n D t s l g n M o d i f i c a t i o n
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

T h is i s t o m o d i f y d a t a i l a d c o lu m n d e s i g n a n d t o c h e c k
d e ta ile d c o st e s tim a te . You may c h a n g e co lu m n d e s i g n
s t o r y b y s t o r y . You c a n n o t c h a n g e t h e n u m b er o f c o lu m n s
b e c a u se th e y have a l r e a y been f ix e d th ro u g h th e p re v io u s
d e sig n m o d ific a tio n .

***<<Please enter any key to continue>>***

 186

E.7.1 Default Column Data Retrieval

flntroduction Project Modify Design Modify Coating Report Kxit

Lavtl 1: Sehaiatie
Level 2: Preliminary
Level 3: Detailed

Schematic Building Layout * Design Modification Input Table

5r I I I I I DBSCRZPTXON UNT DPT ALT1 ALT 2
4F Column Type

i i r I
N
X Dimension
Y Dimension
in
in
2f( r T Total Clms ea

"\ IT II I I S
R
I
Main Bar
Numbers
•
ea
<<Building Section)> O Stirrup Bar •
R Spacing ln
B X Dimension ln
X Y Dimension in
1 2 3 4 5 6 T Total Clms ea
B
7 8 9 10 11 12 R Main Bar *
I Nwabers ea
13 14 15 16 17 18 O Stirrup Bar #
R Spacing in
19 20 21 22 23 24
X Dimension in
<<Floor Plan>> C Y Dimension in
O Total Clms ea
R
H Main Bar i
B Numbers ea
R Stirrup Bar •
Spacing in

Please select column location.

Floor Humber: 0
 187

E.7.2 Detailed Cost Estimating for Customized Column Design

|Introduction Project Modify Design Modify Coating Report Exit 1

Daalgn
Quantity
Coat
Duration

a Cost Estimating Rasulta Table • Design Modification Input Table

DBS<:r i p t i o n DPT ALT1 ALTS DESCRIPTION UMT DPT ALT1 ALTS
QTY (sf) 136S0 13393 Column Type S S
p
O M UC 0.58 0.58 I X Dimension in 1S.0 14.0
R TC 7993 7S34 N Y Dimension in 16.0 14.0
M L UC 1.96 1.96 T Total Clns ea 15 15
M TC 36777 36314 ■
O B UC 0.05 0.05 R Main Bar * 6 7
R TC 690 676 I Numbers ea 4 4
K O Stirrup Bar • 3 3
FW TOT 35460 34713 R Spacing in 13.0 10.0
R Q T Y {ton> 11.36 11.83 E X Dimension in 33.0 30.0
s X Y Dimension in 33.0 30.0
I H UC 604.61 604.61 T Total Clms ea 16 16
N TC 6805 7149
P L UC 733.45 733.45 R Main Bar • 7 8
O TC 8131 8543 I Numbers ea 4 4
R E UC 0.00 0.00 O Stirrup Bar • 3 3
C TC 0 0 R Spacing in 13.0 10.0
B
RF TOT 14936 15693 X Dimension in 33.0 30.0
C Y Dimension in 33.0 30.0
QTY <ey) 306 198 0 Total Clns ea 4 4
c a
O M UC 63.63 63.63 M Main Bar • 7 8
N TC 13S74 13373 E Numbers aa 4 4
C L UC 39.85 39.85 R Stirrup Bar • 3 3
R TC 8191 7873 Spacing in 13.0 10.0
E B UC 13.34 13.34
T TC 3517 3419
B
CON TOT 33583 33664

Total Cost 73978 73069

 188

E.8 Unit Cost Review for Selected Construction Method

IIntroduction Project Modify Dttlgn Modify Coating Report Exit

[constructloi^Iotbod
[concrete Placing •loctlon
■Typo
Soloct Pron Lint
ConnuXt
flmb
Coluan

CODE COMP CLASS CKEW UWIT PRODUCT MAMHOUR METHOD

ca0410 alab 4000pai c 1 ey 165.00 0.390 DlractCbuta
ca0420 alab 4000pal c a ey 130.00 0.493 Puapad
cn0430 alab 4000pai c_3 cy 1 1 0 .0 0 0.561 CranaWlthBuckat

Unit Cont of Snlnctnd Concrntn Placing Mothod

Coda Muaber: ca0430
Conatructlon Motbod:CrnnoWltbBuckot
Quantity OnIt CuYd
Mntnrlnl Unit Cont : 59.65
Labor Unit Cont 16.30
Bqulpaent Unit Coat: 7.00
Total Unit Cont 63.95
Will you accapt tba nalactad nethod? (Y/N]:

J_______________ I________________I________ I________ I-------------------1-----------------L

 189

E.9 Material Price Update

[ i n t r o d u c t i o n P r o j e c t M o d i f y D e e l g n M o d i f y Coating Report Exit

Conetruction Metbod
Crew Type
Material Selection

MATERIAL ITEM CLASS OMIT PRICK

limber 3"x4" e4e mbf 330.00
lumber 2"x6" a4e mbf 315.00
plywood 5/S" mef 615.00
plywood 3/4" mef 670.00
rebar #3-#7 grd40 ton 573.00
rebar *3-#7 grdeo ton 587.00
rabar #3-#7 grd"’' ton 603.OO
rebar 98-918 grd40 ton 563.00
rebar 98-918 grdSO ton 577.00
rebar 98-918 grd75 ton 593.00
wire fabric w. w. f 6*6 w 3 .1 cef 10.45
wire fabric w.w. f 6*6 W4 cef 19.75
wire
wire
cone
cone Infornation of Selected Matarlal
eonc
poly Material Mama: concrete
fIni
curl Quantity Unit : cy
curl Material Sise(Type):
exp_ ciaee(Grade/Str) :4000pal
Material Price(S) : 59.65
Will you update the price of material?(Y/N]:

___________ ------------------- «______ ------------------------------------------ -

 190

APPENDIX F

DESIGN MODIFICATION PROGRAMS

F .l Schematic Design Modification Program

SCHEMATIC DESIGN MODIFICATION PROGRAM

DO WHILE .T.

DO mbpara (* S ee Design Parameter Subroutine.)

ans«M"
@1,2 SAY "Do you want to check cost ?[ Y/N] :"GET ans PICT "I"
READ

IF UPPER(ans)-"Y"
check-"schema"
DO slabcost (* See Appendix G.)
ENDIF

n e w -""
@1,2 SAY "Will you modify design again?[Y/N]"GET new PICT "I"
READ

IF UPPER(new)-"Y"
LOOP
ELSE
CLOSE ALL
EXIT
ENDIF
ENDDO

[D e sig n P a ra rm e te r S u b ro u tin e ]

SELECT a
USE djbpara
SELECT b
USE d_bldg
SELECTc
USE d_slab
SELECT d
USE strsys
SELECT e
 191

USE prcode
SELECT f
USE project
LOCATE FOR md-"OKM
pn-TRIM(pname)
pl-TRIM(ploca)

DO frame4
DO str_sys
SELECT a
sts-str_sys
SELECT d
GOTO sts
fls-T+TRIM (str_sys)+y
SELECT b
LOCATE FOR pnam e-pn .AND. ploca-pl
fls-TRIM(fl_str)
inp-LTRIM<STR(c1.1))+LTRIM(STR(c2.1))+LTRIM(STR(c3.1))+LTRIM(STR(c4.1))+
LTRIM(STR(c5,1))+LTRIM(STR(c6,1))
SELECTd
GOTO Sts
fIs-T+TR IM(Str_sys)+T
SELECT e
LOCATE FOR inp_code-inp
IF SUBSTR(dft_code,1,1 )-"1"
qa-a->bldg area*a->fl num
ENDIF

IF SUBSTR(dft_code,2,1 )-"1"
f__num-a*>fl_num
ENDIF

IF SUBSTR(dft_code,3,1 )-"1"
clmspl -a->clm_sp1
ENDIF

IF SUBSTR{dft_code,4,1 )-"1"
clmsp2-a->clm_sp2
ENDIF

IF SUBSTR(dft_code,5,1 )-"1"
sx-a->num_bay1
ENDIF

IF SUBSTR(dft_code,B,1 )«"1"
sy-a->num_bay2
ENDIF

IF S UBSTR (cic_code, 1,1 ) - M1"

Qa-f_num*clmsp1 *clmsp2*sx*sy
ENDIF
 192

IF SUBSTR(ckJ_code,2,1 )«"1"
f_num«ROUND(ga/(clmsp1 *clmsp2*sx*sy),0)
ENDIF

IF SUBSTR(dc_code,3,1)-"1 ”
clmsp1-ROUND(ga/(f_num*clmsp2*sx*sy),0)
ENDIF

IF SUBSTR{dc__code,4,1)-H1"
cl msp2« RO UND(ga/(f_nu nrTclmsp 1*sx *sy).0)
ENDIF

IF SUBSTR(dc_code,5.1)-”r
sx«ROUND(ga/(f_num*clmsp1*clmsp2*sy)lO)
ENDIF

IF SUBSTR(clc_code,6,1)*"1M
sy-ROUND(ga/(f_num*clmsp1*clmsp2*sx),0)
ENDIF
ga-f_num*clmsp1 *clmsp2*sx*sy
ba-clm spt *clmsp2*sx*sy
bl-ROUND(clmsp1 *sx,0)
bw«ROUND(clmsp2*sy,0)
ar-ROUND(clmsp1*sx/(clmsp2*sy),1)

REPLACE pname WITH pn.ploca WITH pi

REPLACE site_area WITH ROUND(ba*1.5.*3),bldg_area WITH ba,fl_num WITH f_num
REPLACE clm_sp1 WITH clmsp1,clm_sp2 WITH clmsp2
REPLACE num_bay1 WITH sx,num_bay2 WITH sy
REPLACE s jo a d WITH ld,asp_rt WITH ar
REPLACE asp_rt WITH ar
REPLACE fl_str WITH "flat plate"
SELECT c
GO TOP
REPLACE ALL x_d WITH clmspl
REPLACE ALL y_d WITH clmsp2
GO TOP
LOCATE FOR compJd-"S_INT"
REPLACE num WITH {sx-2)*(sy-2)
GO TOP
LOCATE FOR comp_id-"S_EXT"
REPLACE num WITH (sx-2)*2+<sy-2)*2
GO TOP
LOCATE FOR comp_id-"S_EDGM
REPLACE num WITH 4
design-"schemaH
DO slabdsn (* See Slab Default Design Program.)
DO clmdsn (* See Column Default Design Program.)

ENDDO
 193

F.2 Preliminary Design Modification Program

PRELIMINARY DESIGN MODIFICATION PROGRAM

DO WHILE T.
SELECT a
USE project
LOCATE FOR md-"OK"
pn-pnam e
pl-ploca
SELECT b
USE d_bldg ALIAS dbldg
LOCATE FOR pnam e-pn .AND. ploca-pl
SELECT c
USE d_slab ALIAS dslab
SELECT d
USE tjbldg ALIAS tbldg
LOCATE FOR pnam e-pn .AND. ploca-pl
SELECT e
USE t_slab ALIAS tslab
SELECT f
USE m_bldg ALIAS mbldg
LOCATE FOR pnam e-pn .AND. ploca-pl
SELECT g
USE m_slab ALIAS mslab
SELECT h
USE fp_slab ALIAS fslab
DO framel

SELECT dslab
GO TOP
lx»x_d
iy-y_d
dz-z_d
SELECT mslab
tz-z_d
SELECT dbldg
f_num-fl_num
y-SQRT(bkJg_area/asp_rt)
x-asp_rt*y
sx-ROUND(x/lx,0)
sy-ROUND(y/ly,0)
SELECT tbldg
REPLACE bldg area WITH mbkJg->bldg_area
REPLACE asp_rt WITH mb(dg->asp_rt

DO schem el
DO framel
 194

DO WHILE .T.
a n s-""
@1,1 SAY "Do you want to change spacing?!Y/N]"GET ans PICT
READ
IF UPPER(ans)-"Y"
@15,70 GET Ix PICT "99" RANGE 12,28
@17,70 GET ly PICT "99" RANGE 12,28
READ

sx-ROUND(x/lx,0)
sy-ROUND(y/ly,0)
cb_area-lx*sx*ly*sy
ar-ROUND(lx*sx/(ly*sy),1)
SELECT mbldg
REPLACE bldg area WITH cb_area,clm_sp1 WITH Ix, clm_sp2 WITH ly
REPLACE num_bay1 WITH sx,num_bay2 WITH sy
REPLACE asp_rt WITH ar
SELECT Islab
SET FILTER TO clm_sp-ly
GO TOP
tz-thick
SELECT mslab
REPLACE ALL z_d WITH tz
GO TOP
LOCATE FOR comp_id-"S_EDG"
REPLACE num WITH 4,x_d WITH lx,y_d WITH ly
GO TOP
LOCATE FOR comp_id-"S_EXT"
REPLACE num WITH (sx-2+sy-2)*2,x_d WITH lx,y_d WITH ly
GO TOP
LOCATE FOR comp_id-"S _INT"
REPLACE num WITH (sx-2)*sy,x_d WITH lx,y_d WITH ly
design-"prelim"
DO slabdsn (* See Slab Default Design Program.)
DO clmdsn (* See Column Default Design Program.)
ELSE

SELECT mslab
tz-z_d
EXIT
ENDIF
ENDDO
DO WHILE .T.
a n s-""
@1.1 SAY "Will you change slab thickness?IY/N]"GET ans PICT "I"
READ

IF UPPER(ans)-"Y"
 195

@20,68 GET tz PICT “99.9" RANGE 4,12

READ
SELECT mslab
GO TOP
REPLACE ALL z_d WITH tz
SELECT tslab
GO TOP
REPLACE ALL z_d WITH tz
destgn-"prelim"
DO slabdsn (* See Slab Default Design Program.)
DO clmdsn (* See Column Default Design Program.)
a n s -” "
@1,2 SAY "Do you want to check cost?[Y/N]:“GET ans PICT "I"
READ
IF UPPER(ans)-"Y"
check«"prelim"
DO slab_est (* See Appendix G.)
DO co!m_est (* S ee Appendix G.)
ENDIF
ENDDO

F.3 Detailed Design Modification Program

F.3.1 Slab Reinforcing Modification Program

SLAB REINFORCING MODIFICATION PROGRAM

SELECT a
USE m_slab
SELECT b
USE t_slab
ZAP
APPEND FROM m_slab

DO WHILE .T.
a n s-""
@1,2 SAY "Will you review reinforcing?[Y/N]"GET ans PICT "I"
READ
STORE 0 TO flr,snum,s_num
IF UPPER(ans)-"Y"

DO WHILE .T.
@1,2 SAY "Please select floor and slab number."
@2,5 SAY "Floor Number:"GET fir PICT "99" RANGE 1,f_num
 196

@3,5 SAY "Slab Number :"GET snum PICT "99" RANGE 1 ,sx*sy
READ
DO CASE
CASE snum-1 .OR. snum -sx .OR. snum-sx*sy .OR. snum«sx*(sy-1 )-1
s_*d-"S_EDG"
s_num«4
CASE 8num>1 .AND. snum<sx-1
sJd-"S_EXT"
s_num-(sx-2)*2
CASE snum>sx*(sy-1 )+1 .AND. snum<sx*sy
s_id«"S_EXT"
s_num«(sx-2)*2+(sy-2)*2
OTHERWISE
S_id-"S_INT"
s_num-(sx-2)*(sy-2)
ENDCASE
ENDIF
ENDDO
a n s-""
@1,1 SAY "Will you change reinforcing?[Y/N]"GET ans PICT "I"
READ
IF UPPER(ans)-"Y"

@23,70 GET x d PICT "99"

@24,68 GET xc1 n PICT "99.9"
@25,70 GET xc2 PICT "99"
@26,68 GET xc2n PICT "99.9"
@27,70 GET xml PICT "99"
@28,68 GET xmln PICT "99.9"
@29,70 GET xm2 PICT "99"
@30,68 GET xm2n PICT "99.9"
@32,70 GET yc1 PICT "99"
@33,68 GET ycln PICT "99.9"
@34,70 GET yc2 PICT "99"
@35,68 GET yc2n PICT "99.9"
@36,70 GET ym1 PICT "99"
@37,68 GET ym ln PICT "99.9"
@38,70 GET ym2 PICT "99"
@39,68 GET ym2n PICT "99.9"
READ
SELECT b
GO TOP
LOCATE FOR comp_id-s_id
REPLACE xct WITH xc1 ,xct_n WITH xdn.xcb WITH xc2,xcb_n WITH xc2n
REPLACE xmt WITH xml ,xmt_n WITH xmln.xmb WITH xm2,xmb_n WITH xm2n
REPLACE yet WITH yc1 ,yct_n WITH yc1 n.ycb WITH yc2,ycb_n WITH yc2n
REPLACE ymt WITH ym1 ,ymt_n WITH ym1 n.ymb WITH ym2,ymb_n WITH ym2n
ENDIF
ENDDO
 197

F.3.2 Colum n Design M odification P rogram

COLUMN DESIGN MODIFICATION PROGRAM

SELECT 1
USE m_bldg alias mb
SELECT 2
USE m_slab alias ms
SELECT 3
USE t_colm alias tc
SELECT 4
USE m_colm alias me

SELECT 1
GO TOP
LOCATE FOR fl_str-"flat plate"
f_num-fl_num
SELECT 2
GO TOP
LOCATE FOR comp_id-"S_EXT"
sx-num/2+2
LOCATE FOR comp_id-"S_INT"
sy-num/sx+2

DO WHILE .T.

DO schem el
DO frame3

@1,2 SAY "Please select column location."

<§>2,7 SAY "Floor Number:“GET fir PICT "99" RANGE 1 ,f_num
READ

SELECT 4
GO TOP
SET FILTER TO VAL(left(compJd,1))«flf
SELECT 3
GO TOP
SET FILTER TO VAL(left(comp_id,1))=ftr
@5,62 SAY SUBSTR(comp_id,3,1) PICT "!"
r-7
GO TOP

DO WHILE .NOT. EOF()

c_id-trim{comp_id)
DO CASE
 198

CASE RIGHT(cJd,3)-"INT"
SELECT 2
GO TOP
LOCATE FOR comp_id-"S_INT"
int-num
GO TOP
LOCATE FOR comp_id-"S_EXT"
ext-num
nclm-(int/(ext/2+2)+1 )*(ext/2+3)
@r+2,62 SAY nclm PICT “999"
CASE RIGHT(c_id,3)-"EXT"
SELECT 2
GO TOP
LOCATE FOR Comp_id-“S_EXT"
ext-num
nclm-ext+2
<g>r+2,62 SAY nclm PICT "999"
OTHERWISE
<g>r+2,62 SAY 4 PICT "999"

ENDCASE

SELECT 3
SKIP
ENDDO

r-7
a n s-""
<3>1,1 SAY "Will you modify columm design?[Y/N]"GET ans PICT "I"
READ

IF UPPER(ans)-"Y"
r-7
P-7
ELSE
DO colmcost (* See Appendix G)
EXIT
ENDIF

SELECT 3
GO TOP
DO WHILE .NOT. EOF()

x-"x"+STR(k,1)
y-"y"+STR(k,1)
mbar-"mbar"+STR(k, 1)
sbar-"sbar"+STR(k,1)
mbnum-"mbnum"+STR(k,1)
sbsp-"sbsp"+STR(k,1)
&x-x_d
&y-y_d
&mbar-m_bar
& sbar-s_bar
 199

&mbnum-num
&sbsp-spacing
@r,61+p GET &x PICT "99.9"
<S>r+1,61+p GET &y PICT "99.9"
c_id-trim(comp_id)
DO CASE

CASE RIGHT(c_id,3)-"INT"
SELECT 2
GO TOP
LOCATE FOR SUBSTR(compJd,3,3)-"INT"
int-num
GO TOP
LOCATE FOR SUBSTR(CompJd,3,3)-"EXT"
ext-num
nclm-(int/(ext/2+2)+1 )*(ext/2+3)
<g>r+2,62+p SAY nclm PICT "999"
CASE RIGHT(c_id.3)-"EXT"
SELECT 2
GO TOP
LOCATE FOR SUBSTR(comp_id,3,3)-"EXT"
©xt-num+2
nclm-ext
<g>r+2,62+p SAY nclm PICT "999"
OTHERWISE
@r+2,62+p SAY 4 PICT "999"

ENDCASE

SELECT 3
®r+4,63+p GET &mbar PICT "99"
@rn 5,63+p GET &mbnum PICT "99"
@r+6,63+p GET &sbar PICT "99"
©r+7,61+p GET &sbsp PICT "99.9"
READ
REPLACE x_d WITH &x,y_d WITH &y,m_bar WITH &mbar,s_bar WITH
&sbar,spacing WITH &sbsp
r-r+9
k-k+1
SKIP
ENDDO

a n s-""
<§>1,2 SAY "Do you want to check cost?[Y/N]"GET ans PICT T
READ

IF UPPER(ans)-"Y"
DO colm_est (* See Appendix G)
ENDIF

ENDDO
 S « ci
ST C C -O
°. C| J E
C| f i E 7
5 A A £

« a & C\1 » & N t\l

5i
1- iT”3 "Oi r - T>T3
F.4 Slab and Column Default Design Programs

D O O ^ Z J O g 11
^AriEToflrDCT S o OO C C S o OC C
UJ O DC J O £E CC I O O CC CC I o CC CC JC

t l i i c f j i c , | | i S = | 5 i !
„3c,= 4 5 c e j
© h~ =. n' £ fc C.ia'g t f-
0 X O 'J o § K- J o fc >
v ' O X, X j ] 5 x Z J o t x . w ___
Ui UJ ■g B x X ..O B >? ^ .o
£ ,« ^.^3 C C Ir-O C fc ax E
m
u
00
>.
■
Q.
1O1
C
i
■a stmisl?
I A » I rt A • 1 n
liiliill?
ii a ii ■« * a ■< ■’ ■
4 £444 £444
s V
e i a
0. E IO- U) ^ 1- U 4^
o .9
5. O f 8 t f b t t f t t £
•“ cc
DCO !S 8 CC
O
Hi UL e u.
m 1’i c S f£ s € ff o o fc fc o o fc fc
COt j Hi 8 h H UJ . r t & l m i t N X X X X >s >> >* >* N X X X X > t > t > t > .
aeg iO O 1-
< UJ UJ UJ UI UJ UJ UJ UJ UJ > UIUJUJUJUJUJUJUJUJ < UIUJUJUJUJUJUJUJUJ
c ui UJ o O O O O O O O O O o O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O Z
4) Oui$ 01—1 —I GC
Q W CO _J
•J)Uj yjii. § 5 5 5 S 5 5 5 S 5 8 O
A $ ® 8 W3 a.a.O -CLO .O .Q .Q .0. - 1 0.0-0.0.0.0.0.0-11. L Q .iaQ .O .Q .111. h-
« LU UIUJUJUJUJUJUJUJUJ LLIUJUJUJUJUIUJLUUI UJUJLUUILUUJUiUJUJ UJ
CO !t £u 2 cc ac cc ac cc cc cc cc cc GC GC GC GC GC CC GC CC GC GCGCQCGCGCGCGCGCGC GC
53

fa
 201

F.4.2 Colum n Default Design P rogram

IF design-"schema"
SELECT a
USEd_bldg
SELECT b
USE d_slab
ELSE
SELECT a
USE mjbldg
SELECT b
USE m_slab
ENDIF

SELECT c
USE clm_dsn
SELECTd
USE t_oolm
ZAP
SELECT e
USE project
LOCATE FOR md-"OK"
SELECT f
USE fp_slab
SELECT a
LOCATE FOR pnam e-e->pnam e .AND. ploca-e->pk>ca
fnum-fl_num
SELECT b
x-x_d
y.y_d
z»z_d
SELECT f
LOCATE FOR clm_sp-a->clm_sp2 .AND. thick«z
mu_e-m_ext/2
mu_c«sqrt(2*m_ext*m_ext)
cs_i-CEILING(cs_int/2)*2
cs_e«CEILING(cs_ext/2)*2
p_int-(1.4*150*z/12*x*y+100*x*y)/1000
p_ext-1/2*p_int
tp-"CS"
int-HINT"
ext-"EXT"

n-1
DO WHILE fnum>0

t_int-p_int*fnum
t_ext-p_ext*fnum

SELECT c
SET FILTER TO clm_size>-cs_i .AND. p1>-t_int
 202

GO TOP
cs-MAX(clm_size,csJ)
mb»m_bar
nb-num
sb-s_bar
sp-spacing
SELECTd
APPEND BLANK
REPLACE oom pjd WITH LTRIM(str(n.2)+LTRIM(tp)+H_"+LTRIM(int))
REPLACE x_d WITH cs,y_d WITH cs
REPLACE m_bar WITH mb,num WITH nb
REPLACE s_bar WITH sb.spacing WITH sp
SELECT c
SET FILTER TO clm _size>-cs_e .AND. p1>-t_ext
GO TOP
DO WHILE .T.

IF mu_e<(m1+(t_ext-p2)/{p1 -p2)*(m2-m1))
cs-MAX(clm_size,cs_e)
m b-m jbar
nb-num
sb-s_bar
sp-spacing
SELECT d
APPEND BLANK
REPLACE c o m p jd WITH LTRIM(str(n,2)+LTRIM(tp)+"_"+LTRIM(ext))
REPLACE x_d WITH cs,y_d WITH cs
REPLACE m_bar WITH mb,num WITH nb
REPLACE s_bar WITH sb.spacing WITH sp
EXIT
ELSE
IF mu_e<(m3+t_ext/p2*(m2-m3))
cs-MAX(clm__size,cs_e)
m b-m_bar
nb-num
sb-s_bar
sp-spacing
SELECT d
APPEND BLANK
REPLACE co m p jd WITH LTRIM(str(n,2)+LTRIM(tp)+V+LTRIM(ext))
REPLACE x_d WITH cs,y_d WITH cs
REPLACE m_bar WITH mb,num WITH nb
REPLACE s_bar WITH sb.spacing WITH sp
EXIT
ELSE
SKIP
LOOP
ENDIF
ENDIF
ENDDO
 203

APPENDIX G

D E T A IL E D C O ST ESTIM A TIN G PR O G R A M S

G .I Q uantity T akeoff Program

QUANTITY TAKEOFF PROGRAM

SELECT 1
USE project ALIAS prj
LOCATE FOR md-"OK**
SELECT 2
USE m_slab ALIAS mslab
SELECT 3
USE m_bldg ALIAS mbldg
SW-490/(12*12*12)
SELECT mbldg
LOCATE FOR pname«prj->pname .AND. p!oca->prj->ploca
f_n-fl_num
dur-f_n*2*7
SELECT mslab
GO TOP

DO WHILE .NOT. EOF()

fcode-f_code
rcode»r_code
ccode-c_code

cs«cs+x_d*y_d*z_d/12/27*f_n*num
fs«fs+x_d*y_d*num*f_n
IF x _ d > - y _ d
span-x_d
S trp -y _ d /2
ELSE
span»y_d
strp-x_d/2
ENDIF

ct 1-0.3*(span-c_s/12)+c_s/2/12
ct2«0.2‘(span-c_s/12)+c_s/2/12
xcb1»x_d+6/12
 o
N>
(0 c o c o CO CO CO CO CO CO V TJ
c o m co *< X *< X 3 *< x •<
3 to
rn m rn m rn iti C 3J Oz * N
—
* u 'x'x 3 3 3 3 II oCToCT oCT
CD O ct ct ct ct O N N - *
cm cm cm cm crncm
COOCOOCOOCOOCOOCOO
mHm-iniHnnm-Kin
o o
O m
n
e
§g^
80) °
to
+
HHHM
l-.O
M N -1
I KI I
-1

B
I I I
r rr
3 c
w> X
a+ 3 J CTt 3 *J ocr + a1 a* a4»a4» - l a a a
S P P g>
I- i* * kS' »1 ? 5= m n **.f *oT^ M
a ^^ w* T
^a
x 3fci
P P g» g> » -*■-* !s
3 10 10
> $ > >
to £. CO C X I O < 5 < ? i o w 1A ui* cn»
M

n to n to 0 'c| to o
> B to 0 i l l *sx
> > > > C + £a £a .
CO n CO
CO 8 Z
c
3 io » » a a
> o > > 'c a C x* w § IO IV} S 1010
2 CO
s
CO
3
TJ
CO
0
W
H
O
O
3
O
O
to
a
+
+
to o
CO
H
*3
■i
o»
0
u
S’
c
c
1
tssmsi ■A
to
o +

s >
1“
s to
5
3
x m
S 'O ^ 'O ^
w x
3 n g? l . 3 D ®
o m o m
• e w

3 b o TJ K>
.CT ,3 c 1 <o< (3Zu o m ? ^ 0
c
5 P ~ * .c P ° * .c
b 3 CT D2 3 2
H 3 Va OS ^'oO S
'c
b o C 5d, 5 - 33 A i s
.© z 3
TJ + 2 3 s ? 2 |S ?

o c
G) 3
00 i 15; d
> m ^ S i^ b
i» & P CTK
cr =T-i,CTX
- - c
2 3 ■3 SI N 6 2 I IV
C
* M X M J w 'o IO
(S IO C
*< X
i?
5 3
IO
O
O £
o
 205

SELECT est
GO TOP
LOCATE FOR code-fcode
reuse-factor
SELECT fm
GO TOP
LOCATE FOR comp-est->comp .AND. item-est->item
fm_u-price/reuse
SELECT cr
GO TOP
LOCATE FOR crew«est->crew
n -2
DO WHILE n<-9
a-LOWER(FIELD(n))
a_n-&a
IF a_n<>0
SELECT wa
GO TOP
LOCATE FOR craft-a
wage«bas+h_w+vac+pen+app+iaf+sub+btf+due+.3*(bas+vac+due)
fl_wage«fl_wage+a_n *wage*8
ENDIF
n-n+1
SELECT cr

ENDDO
fL_u«fl_wage/(est->product*2)
n-10
DO WHILE n<-15
b-LOWER(FIELD(n))
b_n»&b
IF b_n<>0
SELECT eq
GO TOP
LOCATE FOR equip«b
fe_cost-fe_cost+b_n*renta
ENDIF

n»n+1
SELECT cr

ENDDO
fe_u«fe_cost/(est->product*2)

STORE - " TO c,d

STORE 0 TO rm_u,rl_u,re_u,n,a_n,b_n
STORE 0 TO wage,rl_wage,re_cost
 206

SELECT est
GO TOP
LOCATE FOR code-rcode
SELECT mp
GO TOP
LOCATE FOR item-est->item .AND. class-est->class
rm_u»price
SELECT cr
GO TOP
LOCATE FOR crew-est->crew

n-2
DO WHILE n<-9
c-LOWER(FIELD(n))
c_n-&c

IF c _ n o 0
SELECT wa
GO TOP
LOCATE FOR cratt-c
wage»bas+h__w+vac+pen+app+iaf+sub+btf+due+.3*(bas+vac+due)
rl_wage«rl_wage+c_n*wage*8
ENDIF

n«n+1
SELECT cr

ENDDO
rl_u-rl_wage/est->product

n-10
DO WHILE n<«15
d»LOWER(FIELD(n))
d_n-&d

IF d_n<>0
SELECT eq
GO TOP
LOCATE FOR equip-d
re_cost-re_cosl+d_n *renta
ENDIF

n-n+1
SELECT cr

ENDDO

re_u*re_cost/est*>product

STORE " HTO e.f

STORE 0 TO cm_u,cl_u,ce_u,n,a_n,b_n
STORE 0 TO wag©,cl_wage,ce_cost
 207

SELECT est
GO TOP
LOCATE FOR code-ccode
SELECT mp
GO TOP
LOCATE FOR item-est->item .AND. class-est->class
cm_u«price
SELECT cr
GO TOP
LOCATE FOR crew«est->crew
n -2
DO WHILE n<«9
e-LOWER(FIELD(n))
e_n-& e

IF e_n<>0
SELECT wa
GO TOP
LOCATE FOR craft-e
wage«bas+h_w+vac+pen+app+iaf+sub+btf+due+.3*(bas+vac+due)
cl_wage-c l_wag e+e_n* wag e*8
ENDIF

n»n+1
SELECT cr
ENDDO
cl_u-cLwage/est->product

n-10
DO WHILE n<-15
f-LOWER(FIELD(n))

IF f_n<>0
SELECT eq
GO TOP
LOCATE FOR equip-f
ce_cost-ce_cost+f_n*renta
ENDIF

n-n+1
SELECT cr

ENDDO

ce_u«ce_cost/est->product

RETURN
 208

G.3 Total Cost Calculation Program

TOTAL COST CALCULATION PROGRAM

DO unitcost
fm_c-fs*fm_u
fl_c-fs*fl_u
fe_c-fs*fe_u
ft_c-fm_c+tl_c+fe_c
rm_c»rs*rm_u
rl_c-rs*rl_u
re_c-rs*re_u
rt_c» rm_c+ rl_c+re_c
cm_c»cs*cm_u
cl_c-cs*cl_u
ce_c«cs*ce_u
ct_c«cm_c+cl_c+ce_c

'PROJECT DURATION

ACTIVATE WINDOW yesno

@1,2 SAY " * •« Project Duration: "+str(dur,3)+“ "+"Days»**"
WAIT * * * « Press any key to continue.»**"
DEACTIVATE WINDOW yesno

LOCATE FOR code-fcode

REPLACE quan WITH fs.mate WITH fm_c,labo WITH fl_c,equi WITH fe_c,total
WITH ft_c

LOCATE FOR code-rcode

REPLACE quan WITH rs.mate WITH rm_c,labo WITH rl_c,equi WITH re_c,total
WITH rt_c

LOCATE FOR code-ccode

REPLACE quan WITH cs.m ate WITH cm_c,latx> WITH cl_c,equi WITH ce_c,total
WITH ct c

RETURN
 209

APPENDIX H

CONCRETE PLACING METHOD SELECTION PROGRAM

RUNTIME;
ACTIONS
WOPEN 1,3,9,10,61,7
WOPEN 2,16,18,3,47,1
WOPEN 3,15,16,3,47,3
ACTIVE 1
DISPLAY"

CONCRETE PLACING METHOD SELECTION PROGRAM

This program will help you to select the most suitable

concrete placing meth<xJ based upon project information."
ACTIVE 3
LOCATE 3,0
DISPLAY " « Press any key to start the consultation.»-"
W CLOSE1
WCLOSE 2
WCLOSE 3
MENU slab jy p e, ALL, slab_sys, str_sys
FIND placing_method
WOPEN 4,1,5,8,69,3
ACTIVE 4
DISPLAY-

RECOMMENDED CONCRETE PLACING METHOD

It is recommended to use the {placing_method} method.

FIND cpm_confirm;

RULE 10
IF slab_type<>UN KNOWN
THEN GET slab__type-fl_str,m_bldg,ALL
placingLheight-(fl_num*12+12)
placing distance- (clm_sp 1*num_bay1)
ask*mix_type;

RULE 12
IF ask»mix_type AND
concrete_mix-ready_mixed OR
 210

concrete_mix-site_mixed
THEN mix-ok;

RULE 14
IF deli very_status-slow OR
large_aggragat e -y e s OR
placing height>150 OR
placing distance>200
THEN concrete-not_pumpable;

RULE 20
IF mix-ok AND
placing locate-below around AND
truck_access-yes
THEN placing method-direct chute
CLS
WOPEN 5,9,5,8,69,7
ACTIVE 5
LOCATE 0,0
DISPLAY "*** Selection Criteria **'*
1. Truck mixers can access near the concrete placing sHe.”;

RULE 22
IF mix-ok AND
placing_locate-below_jground AND
truck_access-no
THEN dummy 1-yes;

RULE 30
IF dummy1-yes AND
concrete-pu mpable
THEN placing_method-pumped
CLS
WOPEN 5,9,5,8,69,7
ACTIVE 5
LOCATE 0,0
DISPLAY Selection Criteria ***
1. Truck mixers cannot access near the concrete placing site.
2. Concrete is pumpable.
Aggragate size<3 in and
Placing Height<150 ft and
Placing Distance<200 ft and
Transportation is not slow ”;

RULE 40
IF dummy1-yes AND
 211

concrete-not_pumpable
THEN ask1 -space;

RULE 42
IF ask1 -sp a ce AND
site_space-yes
THEN placing method-crane with bucket
CLS
WOPEN 5,9,5,8,69,7
ACTIVE 5
LOCATE 0,0
DISPLAY Selection Criteria ***
1. Truck mixers cannot access the construction site.
2. Concrete is not pumpable.
Aggragate size>-3 in and/or
Placing height>150 ft and/or
Placing distance>200 ft and/or
Transportation of concrete is slow.
3. Site space is avaitabe to locate a crane.";

RULE 44
IF ask1-space AND
site_space-no
THEN placing method-direct chute
CLS
WOPEN 5,9,5,8,69,7
ACTIVE 5
LOCATE 0,0
DISPLAY "*** Selection Criteria ***
1. Truck Mixers cannot access the construction site.
2. Concrete is not pumpable.
Aggragate size>-3 in and/or
Transportation of concrete is slow.
3. Site space is not availabe to locate a crane.
4. Required to construct an access road for truck mixers.";

RULE 50
IF mix-ok AND
placing locateobelow AND
co n creteo n o t jpum pable
THEN placing method-pumped
CLS
WOPEN 5,10,5,7,69,7
ACTIVE 5
LOCATE 0,0
DISPLAY ” ** Selection Criteria ***
1. Concrete is pumpable.
Aggragate size<3 in and
Placing Height<150 ft and
 212

Placing Distance<200 ft and

2. Transportation is not slow.”;

RULE 60
IF mix-ok AND
placing locate-above ground AND
concrete-not_pumpable
THEN ask2-crane;

RULE 62
IF ask2-crane AND
site_space*yes
THEN placing met hod-crane with bucket
CLS
WOPEN 5,9,5,8,69,7
ACTIVE 5
LOCATE 0,0
DISPLAY "*** Selection Criteria ***
1. Concrete is not pumpable.
Aggragate size>-3 in and/or
Placing height>150 ft and/or
Placing distance>200 ft and/or
Transportation of concrete is slow.
2. Site space is availabe to locate a crane.”;

RULE 64
IF ask2-crane AND
site_space-no
THEN placing method-crane with bucket
CLS
WOPEN 5,9,5,8,69,7
ACTIVE 5
LOCATE 0,0
DISPLAY Selection Criteria ***
1. Concrete is not pumpable.
Aggragate size>«3 in and/or
Placing height>150 ft and/or
Placing distance>200 ft and/or
Transportation of concrete is slow.)
2. Site space is not availabe to locate a crane.
3. Required to install a concrete tower.”;

RULE confirm_yes
IF placing_method<>UNKNOWN AND
confirm-yes
THEN cpm_confirm-done
WOPEN 6,17,5,4,69,3
ACTIVE 6
 213

DISPLAY" * * « Concrete placing cost need to be updated.»**

[Quit] to return to dBase IV main screen.
[Enter] to consult again.-'';

RULE confirm_no
IF placing_methodoUNKNOWN AND
confirm-no
THEN cpm_con firm-done
WOPEN 6,17,5,4,69,3
ACTIVE 6
DISPLAY "
[Enter] to consult again.
[Quit] to return to dBase IV main screen.-";

ASK slab_type: "What is the type of structural slab system?";

ASK concrete_mix: "Which concrete mix will you use?";
CHOICES concrete_mix: ready_mixed, site_mixed;

ASK large_aggragate: "Are the maximum sizes of aggragates larger than 3

inches?";
CHOICES large_aggragate: yes, no;
ASK conc_strength: "Please select the strength of concrete used in the design.";
CHOICES conc_strength: 3000 psi, 3500 psi, 4000 psi, 5000 psi, 6000 psi
ASK placing_k>cate: "Where is the concrete placed?";
CHOICES placing_locate: belowjground, above ground, both;
ASK truck_access: "Can the truck access to concrete placing area?";
CHOICES truck_access: yes, no;

ASK delivery_status: "How is the transportation speed of concrete mix from the
mixing place to the site?";
CHOICES delivery_status: fast, normal, slow, unknown;

ASK site_space: "Is there enough space to locate and maneuver the crane at the
site?";
CHOICES site_space: yes, no;

ASK confirm:"Will you accept this selection result?";

CHOICES confirm: yes, no;
BIBLIOGRAPHY

214
 215

B IB L IO G R A P H Y

[ACI 1989] ACI Committee 318, B u ild in g C o d e R e q u ir e m e n ts f o r R e in f o r c e d C o n c r e te

(A C I 3 1 8 -8 9 ) a n d C o m m e n t a r y - A C I 3 1 8 R - 8 9 , American Concrete Institute,
Detroit, MI., 1989.

[Adeli 1988] Adeli, H. (ed.), E x p e r t S y s t e m s in C o n s t r u c t i o n a n d S tr u c tu r a l E n g in e e r in g ,

Champman and Hall, New York, N.Y., 1988.

[AGC 1990] Associated General Contractors, 1 9 9 0 - 1 9 9 1 W a g e L i s t , The Associated

General Contractors of America, Detroit Chapter, Inc., Detroit, MI., 1990

[Ahuja 1988] Ahuja, H.N. and Campbell, W.J., E s t i m a t i n g : f r o m C o n c e p tu a l to

C o m p l e t i o n , Prentice-Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, N.J., 1988.

[Ajdukiewicz 1990] Ajdukiewicz, A., and Starosolski, W., R e i n f o r c e d - C o n c r e t e S l a b -

C o l u m n S t r u c t u r e s , Elsevier Science Publishing Co., Inc., New York, N.Y., 1990.

[Alagic 1986] Alagic, S, R e la tio n a l D a ta b a s e T e c h n o lo g y , Springer-Verlag, New York,

N.Y., 1986.

[Alkass 1990] Alkass, S. and Aronian, A., "Computer Aided Equipment Selection for
Concrete Placing," C o n c r e t e I n t e r n a t i o n a l : D e s i g n a n d C o n s t r u c t i o n , Vol. 12, No.
12, Dec., 1990, pp. 39-45.

[Ashley 1987] Ashley, D. and Levitt, R.E., "Expert Systems in Construction: Work in
Process," J o u r n a l o f C o m p u t i n g in C i v i l E n g i n e e r i n g , ASCE, Vol. 1, No. 4, Oct.,
1987, pp. 303-312.

[Ashworth 1988] Ashworth, A., "Expert Systems - Are They Jeopardizing The
Estimator’s Job?" C o s t E n g i n e e r i n g , Vol. 30, No. 6, June, 1988, pp. 11-15.

[Au 1986] Au, T., Hendrickson, C.T., and Pasquale, A.F., "Introduction of Relational
Data Bases Within a Cost Estimating System," T r a n s p o r t a t i o n R e s e a r c h R e c o r d ,
Vol. 1050, 1986, pp. 57-62.

[Barr 1982] Barr, A. and Feigenbaum, E.A. (Ed.), The H andbook o f A r tific ia l
I n t e l l i g e n c e , Vol. II, William Kaufmann, Inc., 1982.

[Birrell 1980] Biirell, G.S., "Construction Cost Estimating in the Design Process,"
J o u r n a l o f th e C o n s tr u c tio n D iv is io n ,
ASCE, Vol. 106, No. C 04, Dec., 1980, pp.
551-566.
 216

[Boyer 1972] Boyer, L.T. and Volkman, R.C., "Remote Terminal Cost Estimating,"
Journal o f the Construction Division, ASCE, Vol. 98, No. C O l, Mar., 1972, pp. 1-
20 .

[Buchanan 1985] Buchanan, B.G. and Shortliffe, E.H., Rule-Based Expert Systems,
Addison-Wesley, 1985.

[Bulkley 1987] Bulkley, P.F., Professional Estimating: Conceptual Cost Planning,

Kimberley Ruth Corporation, Santa Rosa, CA., 1987.

[Bulkley 1984] Bulkley, P.F., Professional Estimating: Quantities and Price Analysis,
Division 3 Concrete, Kimberley Ruth Corporation, Santa Rosa, CA., 1984.

[Carr 1989] Carr, R.I., "Cost-Estimating Principles," Journal o f Construction

Engineering and Management, ASCE, Vol. 115, No. 4, Dec., 1989, pp. 545-551.

[Ciarico 1989] Ciarico, A.R., Adams, T., and Hendrickson, C.T., "Cost Estimating
Module to Aid Integrated Knowledge-Based Preliminary Design," Computing in
Civil Engineering, Proceedings of the 6th Conference, ASCE, 1989, pp. 52-59.

[Clark 1983] Clark , J.E., Structural Concrete Cost Estimating, McGraw-Hill Book Co.,
Inc., New York, N.Y., 1983.

[Clark 1978] Clark, F.D. and Lorenzoni, A.B., Applied Cost Engineering, Marcel
Dekker, Inc., New York, N.Y., 1978.

[Cook 1989] Cook, P.J., Quantity Takeoff fo r the General Contractor, R.S. Means
Company, Inc., Kingston, MA., 1989.

[Cooke 1990] Cooke, T.H., Concrete Pumping and Spraying: A Practical Guide,
Thomas Telford Ltd, London, U.K., 1990.

[CRSI 1984] CRSI Handbook, 6th Edition, Concrete Reinforcing Steel Institute,
Schaumburg, 111., 1984.

[Davis 1982] Davis, R. and Lenat, D., Knowledge Based Systems in Artificial
Intelligence, McGraw-Hill Book Co., Inc., New York, N.Y., 1982.

[Diekmann 1984] Diekmann, J.D., "Probabilistic Estimating: Mathematics and

Applications," Journal o f Construction Engineering and Management, ASCE, Vol.
109, No. 3, Sept., 1984, pp. 297-308.

[Domel 1990] Domel, A. and Ghosh, S.K., "Economical Floor Systems for Multi-story
Residential Buildings," Concrete International: Design and Construction, Vol. 12,
No. 9, Sept., 1990, pp 37-40.
 217

[Dym 1991] Dym, C.L. and Levitt, R.E., Knowledge-Based Systems in Engineering,
McGraw-Hill Book Co. Inc., New York, N.Y., 1991.

[Erikson 1976] Erikson, C.A. and Boyer, L.T., "Estimating: State-of-the Art," Journal o f
the Construction Division, ASCE, Vol. 102, No. C 03, Sept, 1976, pp. 455-464.

[Fraser 1981] Fraser, D.J., Conceptual Design and Preliminary Analysis o f Structures,
Pitman Publishing Inc., Marshfield, MA., 1981.

[Fisher 1989] Fisher, M., "A Constructibility Expert System for The Preliminary Design
of Reinforced Concrete Structure," Computing in Civil Engineering, Proceedings of
the 6th Conference, ASCE, 1989, pp. 60-66.

[Halpin 1985] Halpin, D.W., Financial and Cost Concepts fo r Construction

Management, John Wiley & Sons, New York, N. Y., 1985.

[Harmon 1985] Harmon, P. and King, D., Expert Systems: Artificial Intelligence in
Business, John Wiley & Sons, New York, N.Y., 1985.

[Herbsman 1984] Herbsman, Z. and Motramo, J.D., "INES: An Interactive Estimating

System," Journal o f Construction Engineering and Management, ASCE, Vol. 110,
No. 1, March, 1984, pp. 19-33.

[Howard 1989] Howard, H.C. and Rehak, D.R., "KADBASE: Interfacing Expert
Systems With Databases," IEEE Expert, Fall, 1989, pp. 65-76.

[Hurd 1984] Hurd, M.K., Formwork fo r Concrete, Special Publication No. 4, 4th ed.,
American Concrete Institute, D etroit MI., 1984.

[Ibbs 1986] Ibbs, C.W., "Future Direction for Computerized Construction Research,"
Journal o f Construction Engineering and Management, ASCE, Vol. 112, No. 3,
Sept., 1986, pp. 326-345.

[Karshenas 1984] Karshenas, S., "Predesign Cost Estimating Method for Multistory
Buildings," Journal o f Construction Engineering and Management, ASCE, Vol.
110, No. 1, Mar., 1984, pp. 79-86.

[Kenny 1975] Kenny, M.F., Concrete Estimating Handbook , Construction Publishing

Company Inc., New York, N.Y., 1975.

[Korth 1986] Korth, H.F. and Silberschatz, A., Database System Concepts, McGraw-Hill
Book Co., Inc., New York, N.Y., 1986.

[Kouskoulas 1974] Kouskoulas, V, and Koehn E., "Predesign Cost Estimating Function
for Buildings," Journal o f the Construction Division, ASCE, Vol. 100, No. C 04,
Dec., 1974, pp. 589-604.
 218

[Kramer 1965] Kramer, P. and Shaffer, L.R., COBESTCO (Computer Based Estimating
Techniques ), Technical Report Construction Research Series, No. 7, Department of
Civil Engineering, University o f Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, 111., 1965.

[Lin 1988] Lin, T.Y. and Stotesbury, S.D., Structural Concepts and Systems fo r
Architects and Engineers, 2nd Ed., John Wiley & Sons, New York, N.Y., 1988.

[Lloyd 1986] Lloyd, P., A Comparison o f Some Estimating Techniques fo r Construction,

Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Nottingham, U.K., 1986.

[Love 1981] Love, T.W., Concrete and Formwork, Craftsman Book Co., Solana Beach,
CA., 1981.

[Maher 1987] Maher, M.L., "Expert Systems for Structural Design," Journal o f
Computing in Civil Engineering, ASCE, Vol. 1, No.4, Oct., 1987, pp. 270-283.

[McGartland 1986] McGartland, M.R. and Hendrickson, C.T., "Future Direction for
Computerized Construction Research," Journal o f Construction Engineering and
Management, ASCE, Vol. 112, No. 3, Sept, 1986, pp. 326-345.

[Means 1990] Means: Building Construction Cost Data, 48th Annual Edition, R.S.
Means Company, Inc., Kingston, MA., 1990.

[Michaels 1989] Michaels, J.V. and Wood, W.P., Design to Cost, John Wiley & Sons,
Inc., New York, N.Y., 1989.

[Modell 1990] Modell, M.E., Data-Directed Systems Design: A Professi&naVsJGuide,

McGraw-Hill Book Co. Inc., New York, N.Y., 1990

[Neville 1984] Neville, G.B. (Ed.), Simplified Design: Reinforced Concrete Buildings o f
Moderate Size and Height, Portland Cement Association, Skokie, 111., 1984.

[Park 1963] Park, W.R., "Pre-Design Estimates in Civil Engineering Projects," Journal
o f the Construction Division, ASCE, Vol. 89, No. C O l, S ept, 1963, pp. 11-22.

[Parker 1991] Parker, D.E. and Dell'lsola, A.J., Project budgeting fo r Buildings, Van
Nostrand Reinhold, New York, N.Y., 1991.

[Peurifoy 1989] Peurifoy, R.L. and Oberlender, G.D., Estimating Construction Costs, 4th
Ed., McGraw-Hill Book Co., New York, N.Y., 1989.

[Peurifoy 1976] Peurifoy, R.L., Formwork fo r Concrete Structures, 2nd Ed., McGraw-
Hill Book Co., New York, N.Y., 1976.

[Pigford 1990] Pigford, D.V. and Baur, G., Expert Systems fo r Business: Concepts and
Applications, Boyd & Fraser Publishing Co., Boston, MA., 1990.
 219

[Reynolds 1988] Reynolds, C.E. and Steedman, J.C., Reinforced Concrete Designer's
Handbook, 10th Ed., University Press, Cambridge, U.K., 1988.

[Spradlin 1982] Spradlin, W.H., Jr. (Ed.), The Building Estimator's Reference Book,
Frank R. Walker Co., Chicago, 111., 1982.

[Stewart 1991] Stewart, R.D., Cost Estimating, John Wiley & Sons, New York, N.Y.,
1991.

[Stukhart 1987] Stukhart, G. (Ed.), "Construction Management Responsibilities During

Design," Journal o f Construction Engineering and Management, ASCE, Vol. 113,
N o.l, Mar., 1987, pp. 90-98.

[Swinburne 1980] Swinburne, H., Design Cost Analysis fo r Architects and Engineers,
McGraw-Hill Co., Inc., New York, N.Y., 1980.

[Timberline 1989] Timberline Software, Background Information on Precision CADLink

and AutoCAD Integrator, Timberline Software Corporation, Beaverton, OR., 1989.

[Ullman 1988] Ullman, J.D., Principles o f Database and Knowledge-Base Systems, Vol.
1, 1988.

[Wang 1979] Wang C. and Salmon C.G., Reinforced Concrete Design, 3rd Ed., Thomas
Y. Crowell Co., Harper & Row Publishers, New York, N.Y., 1979.

[Zozaya-Gorostiza 1989] Zozaya-Gorostiza, C., Hendrickson, C.T., and Rehak, D.R.,

Knowledge-Based Process Planning fo r Construction and Manufacturing,
Academic Press, Inc., San Diego, CA., 1989.