International J. Technology; July – December, 2015; Vol.

5: Issue 2

ISSN 2231-3907 (Print) www.enggresearch.net

ISSN 2231-3915 (Online) www.ijtonline.com

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Reduction of Wastage of Rebar by using BIM and Linear Programming

Dr. Yamini Varma Nanagiri1, Rohit Kumar Singh2

1
Faculty, NICMAR, Hyderabad
2
Graduate Student, NICMAR, Hyderabad
*Corresponding Author Email: nyamini@nicmar.ac.in, rohit.rk2009@gmail.com

ABSTRACT:
In construction projects, one problem that is often encountered is the large amount of fraction of reinforcing steel caused by
cutting. This study focuses on finding a method of reducing waste from the cutting. In regard to this problem, the study has
considered two software options for optimization of rebar – RGS REBAR and linear programming using Excel Solver. The
effectiveness of RBS REBAR and Excel Solver is evaluated using the case of Embassy Manyata, a Tech Park in a Bangalore
SEZ. The evaluation included material and cost savings as well as their contribution to enhancement of the construction
process.

KEYWORDS: Self Compacting concrete, Portland Cement, Fly ash.

INTRODUCTION:
Waste management is one of the key concepts in the Lean Construction philosophy. Any improvement in building materials
management on construction sites has the potential to enhance the construction industry’s performance with cost-saving benefits.
For building construction, the structure that is most often built is reinforced concrete because it costs less than other types of
structures. The major cost of the structure consists of concrete, reinforcing steel, and formwork. Concrete and reinforcing steel
are permanent materials that exist along with the life of the structure while formwork is considered to be a temporary work that
will be removed after the structure can support itself. One problem that a constructor often encounters is that there are a large
number of lengths of reinforcing steels used in construction. The standard length in India is 12 meters. In construction, the
required steel lengths are cut from the standard lengths, causing a large amount of wastes of reinforcing steels in a project.
Construction waste has caused serious environmental problems in many large cities. In order compensate for the wastage, more
than required construction materials are usually purchased. Reduction of such wastages can contribute significantly to the
reduction in project cost and its environmental impact. Waste management also results in reduction of non-value adding activities
on construction site.

BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY:

Several studies from different countries have confirmed that waste represent a relatively large percentage of production costs.
The contributions of material wastage to project cost overruns have been calculated to be 11% as per a study conducted by the
Hong Kong Polytechnic and the Hong Kong Construction Association. In Netherlands, the same has been calculated to be 20-
30% of project cost overruns as per a study conducted by Boss ink and Bounwers (1996). Similarly, the contributions of material
wastage to project overruns in United Kingdom has been reported to be 15% as per a study conducted by Skoyles in Tam et al.
(2007). Identifying the extent of waste generated by the various building material and their implication on final project cost will
be of immense benefits both to the environment and the construction industry of developing economies. Hence the need for the
present study which aims at examining the effect of material wastage on construction sites on project cost and their mitigation
measures.

OBJECTIVE OF THE STUDY:

The objective of this study is to find the effectiveness of various software in reducing waste of reinforcing steel from cutting and
study its impact on improving the construction process.

Scope of this study:

1. Use RGS REBAR software and calculate project cost savings and improved efficiency in construction process
2. Use a linear programming model in Excel Solver for reducing rebar cut off wastage
329
 International J. Technology; July – December, 2015; Vol. 5: Issue 2

MATERIALS AND METHODS:

Materials and tools:
1. A set of PC- CPU: with minimum 1 GB RAM
2. Software:
- Operating system: Windows XP & Above
- Other software package: AutoCAD, RGS Rebar, Microsoft Excel Solver (Office 7)

Methods
Optimization of Rebar using RGS Rebar
About RGS Rebar:
RGS REBAR is the state of the art Rebar Detailing software developed to meet the challenging quality requirements of large
sized projects with frequent revisions and fast turnaround time. This product is developed by RGS-CAD, an experienced and
highly respected international rebar detailing company. The main focus of RGS REBAR detailing software is to reduce scrap and
off cuts generation. It provides a great option for the detailers to preview the possibility of off cut bars and scrap generated from
the drawing in the stage of detailing itself. The detailers can adjust the detailing lengths without violating the engineer’s intent
shown in the structural drawings. An optimized Bar Bending Schedule (BBS) / Bar list can be automatically generated. This
Optimized Bar list will aid in savings in Fabrication. [1]

ADVANTAGES:
1. It can automatically generate bar list, placing list, and other reports
2. It has powerful filter options to select rebar entities
3. It also allows for partial take offs so that daily planning or segregated planning can be done
4. It also facilitates addition/deletion of bars from bar list already taken
5. BBS can be generated in the interface or also in excel sheets to facilitate execution at site
6. The bar marks can be easily tracked. It supports multiple country detailing codes
7. The rebar detailing can be globally outsourced and managed efficiently
8. The fabrication status, placement status, “Heat Number” of the stock rebar used to fabricate the bar etc could be found at the
click of a button from the placing drawing
9. It also has many revision friendly tools in case of changes

1.1. Procedure For RGS Rebar Implementation:

Figure 1.Steps to follow for implementing RGS Rebar

1.2. Interface Of RGS Rebar:

RGS Rebar has IS 2502 detailing data included in it. So the bar shape desired is entered first followed by Stock Length , Bar
Diameter, Center to center distance, lap length, Shear Bars , Bend Bars Coil Fabrication , Special Bends , Special Length. [2]
After entering the basic required data the software automatically calculates the cutting length of the Bar with a unique Bar Mark.

Figure 2.RGS Rebar Data input interface

330
 International J. Technology; July – December, 2015; Vol. 5: Issue 2

Case Study:
Embassy Manyata:
Highlights:
Embassy Manyata is one of the largest Business Parks in India. Developed across a sprawling 110.5 acres, housing 41
companies and catering to a workforce of 90,000. It is an integrated facility with commercial, residential, hospitality and retail
components. The Business Park offers SEZ and Non-SEZ options for office occupiers. On an experimental basis, Building “G4”
of the facility has been used in the analysis. The data was recorded till Ground floor roof construction [3] . The details of the
project are as below:

Table 1.Project Details of G4 Building till 12th Floor

SL No. Description Qty Units
1 Cost 85 Cr
2 Area per floor 7654 (86 X 89) Sqm
3 Floor 10+2
4 RCC 41800 CUM
5 Steel 4690 MT
6 CUM/Slab 1400 CUM

Data Collection:
The data were prepared from the detailed Reinforcement drawings of Beams, Columns, Slab etc. from excavation till Ground
Floor Roof Construction of Building “G4” as mentioned earlier.

Output Without RGS Rebar:

Table 2.Rebar Wastage when BBS Prepared and cut manually

Sl No Component Units Concrete Qty BOQ Steel Qty Actual Site Report % wastage
1 FOOTING-G3-Teak Cum 4235.12 169.40 176.18 3.85%
2 Grade slab ,Grade Beam Cum 1234.96 98.80 101.96 3.10%
3 UB TO GF COLUMN Cum 350.30 70.06 72.58 3.47%
4 Ground Floor Column Cum 310.00 62.00 64.29 3.57%
5 Upper basement floor Slab Cum 1449.91 159.49 164.12 2.82%
6 UB Beam Cum 109.00 19.08 19.78 3.57%
7 Ground Floor Slab Cum 1402.78 196.39 201.89 2.72%
8 GF Beam Cum 292.00 56.94 59.16 3.75%

Output With RGS Rebar:

Table 3.Rebar Wastage when BBS Prepared by using RGS Rebar

Sl No Component Units Concrete Qty BOQ Steel Qty Actual Site Report % wastage
1 FOOTING-G3-Teak Cum 4235.12 169.40 170.25 0.50%
2 Grade slab ,Grade Beam Cum 1234.96 98.80 99.39 0.60%
3 UB TO GF COLUMN Cum 350.30 70.06 70.27 0.30%
4 Ground Floor Column Cum 310.00 62.00 62.37 0.60%
5 Upper basement floor Slab Cum 1449.91 159.49 159.81 0.20%
6 UB Beam Cum 109.00 19.08 19.21 0.70%
7 Ground Floor Slab Cum 1402.78 196.39 197.96 0.79%
8 GF Beam Cum 292.00 56.94 57.28 0.60%

Comparison Of Outputs
Table 4.Comparison of the wastage in rebar while manual BBS preparation and while using RGS Rebar
Sl No Component Units Manual Qty RGS Qty Variance (MT) Cost Saved
1 FOOTING-G3-Teak Cum 176.18 170.25 5.93 326,104.38
2 Grade slab ,Grade Beam Cum 101.96 99.39 2.57 141,279.93
3 UB TO GF COLUMN Cum 72.58 70.27 2.31 127,157.81
4 Ground Floor Column Cum 64.29 62.37 1.92 105,710.00
5 Upper basement floor Slab Cum 164.12 159.81 4.31 236,842.98
6 UB Beam Cum 19.78 19.21 0.57 31,473.75
7 Ground Floor Slab Cum 201.89 197.96 3.93 216,027.97
8 GF Beam Cum 59.16 57.28 1.88 103,346.10
TOTAL 23.42 12,87,942.92

Cost Of Implementation
Table 5. Total Cost of implementation of RGS Rebar
Sl No. Software Name Type Price(Rs)
1 Autodesk AutoCAD 2015 Commercial Standalone 1,90,806
2 RGS Rebar Standalone 40,000
TOTAL 2,30,806
331
 International J. Technology; July – December, 2015; Vol. 5: Issue 2

USING EXCEL SOLVER:

About Excel Solver:
A model in which the objective function and all of the constraints are linear functions of the decision variables is called a linear
programming problem. Excel includes a tool called Solver that uses techniques from the operations research to find optimal
solutions for all kind of decision problems.

FEATURES:
It may be used to solve linear and nonlinear optimization problems.
It allows integer or binary restrictions to be placed on decision variables.
It can be used to solve problems with up to 200 decision variables.

Collecting data:
The data needed for the analysis are bar bending lists that show types, sizes, lengths, and number of each reinforcing steel bars
used in construction. This data are used to generate possible cutting patterns. The data were collected from construction projects
that already had prepared bar bending schedules.

Table 6. Sample site BBS for input

Bar mark Bar Dia Length (mm) Quantity
1 20 11850 6
2 22 3000 2
3 22 3500 48
4 22 4000 30
5 22 4500 2
6 22 5000 36
7 25 3500 2
8 25 4000 18
9 25 5000 30

1.3. Develop a subprogram for inputting data:

A subprogram for inputting data is needed in order to keep the data as a file that can be accessed later. The data include the
lengths of reinforcing steels and the amount of reinforcing steel for each length.

Table 7. Program in Excel solver for Minimization

Assumptions:
1.The summation of lengths of reinforcing steels in any pattern cannot be greater than 12 m. (Standard length).
2. The number of bars required are integers and finite.

332
 International J. Technology; July – December, 2015; Vol. 5: Issue 2

Develop subprograms for calculation process:

Table 8. Setting Variable cells and constraints in Excel Solver

Objective function:
Min Z = C1 * X1 + C2 * X2 + …………+ Cn * Xn

Constraints:
L1: a11 * X1 + a12 * X2 + …………+ a1n *Xn = b1
L2: a21 * X1 + a22 * X2 + …………+ a2n *Xn = b2
::::
::::
Lm: am1 * X1 + am2 * X2 + ………+ amn *Xn = bm
Xj ≥0 and integer for j = 1 to n

Where:
Min Z = the objective function. For this model, it is to minimize waste from cutting steel
Cj = fraction of reinforcing steel in group j which is unutilized ; j = 1 to n.
Xj = input variables’ = 1 to n.
aij = coefficients
bi = amount of steel for each length

This subprogram generates all possible cutting patterns using data from the previous step. Each pattern will be checked with the
assumptions 1, and 2. Only if it passes the assumptions, then the pattern will be used as a variable.

Developing mathematical model:

This subprogram uses the string variables from the data files in the previous steps to generate the mathematical model in a matrix
form (m x n). The mathematical model includes variables (Xj), coefficients (aij), waste (Cj), and amount of steel for each length
(bi). The mathematical model will be saved in a data file.

Solving the model:

The model from step 2.2 can be solved using any mathematical programming software, for instance, Microsoft Excel Solver.
However, to eliminate interfacing issues between different software programs, this research uses a subprogram that has been
developed by the author in order to solve the model. The subprogram is verified by comparing the solution from the subprogram
with the solution from a standard software. The solution from the subprogram will be saved in a data file for the next step.

Obtaining Output:
This subprogram generates output using the solution in the previous steps. The output shows the number of cutting patterns
needed, standard length(s) used, and the fractions from the cutting patterns.

333
 International J. Technology; July – December, 2015; Vol. 5: Issue 2

Table 9. Output in Excel Solver after running the Minimization Linear Program

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION:

Table 10. Result Obtained in Excel Solver

• We require 22 (15+4+3) No. of full 12 m bars.

• 15 Bars will be cut as (5000+5000)
• 4 Bars will be cut as (4000+4000+4000)
• 3 Bars will be cut as (3500+4000+4000)

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS:

Using RBS REBAR software, the cost savings in the case study project from foundation to ground floor slab (includes 2
basement floors) alone have worked out to be Rs. 12 lakhs (approximately). The overall cost savings for the entire project which
includes numerous towers could be enormous. The average wastage as per manual BBS is 3.36%. The wastage using RBS
REBAR software works out to be 0.53% which is 23.42MT savings in steel. After comparing all the pros and cons of both the
methods the authors would recommend to use RGS Rebar for projects which have a large amount of steel reinforcement involved
in the construction work and by using this software they can incur a substantial amount of savings by reducing rebar wastage. On
the counterpart, use of Excel solver is suggested on every site because the steelyard bar cutting is done as per the BBS Sheet
supplied by site officers and without considering the proper cutting pattern to reduce off-cut bars.

REFERENCES:
1. About RGS Construction Teshnologies - site: http://www.rgsrebar.com/download/DEMO/RGSREBARDEMO.pdf
2. RGS Rebar Interface – site: http://www.rgsrebar.com/rebar.aspx
3. Embassy Manyata, Business Parks in Bangaloresite:http://www.embassyofficeparks.com/park/embassy-manyata
4. Santi Chinanuwatwong - Reducing Waste from Cutting Reinforcing Steel in Construction Projects - Kasetsart J. (Nat. Sci.) 34 : 526 - 535
(2000)

Received on 14.11.2015 Accepted on 22.12.2015

© EnggResearch.net All Right Reserved
Int. J. Tech. 5(2): July-Dec., 2015; Page 329-334
DOI: 10.5958/2231-3915.2015.00043.7

334