IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ids/ijpoma/v5y2013i1-2p57-68.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Construction cost performance of structural frames in Australia

Author

Listed:
  • Anthony Mills

Abstract

This research is concerned with the comparative cost of building structural frames in Australia. The research has been undertaken to evaluate the cost performance of a number of technologies that are typically used in medium-rise commercial buildings of ten storeys. The research methodology is based on pricing a number of standard building frame designs in five Australian cities. The results represent the cost of producing the same building using different building construction designs. By utilising a standard model, project variables like building quality, ground conditions and access were eradicated, thereby facilitating an unbiased comparison of cost performance. The second stage of the research invoiced a focus group of industry experts who were asked to validate the results of the cost study. In addition, participants of the focus group were asked to comment on the preferred construction practice for each of the typical building designs. Results suggest that post-tensioned in situ concrete frames have the best cost performance for most buildings. However, other designs can have good cost performance under some circumstances. Findings suggest that the Australian construction industry has long cultural preference for the use of in situ concrete in structural frames.

Suggested Citation

  • Anthony Mills, 2013. "Construction cost performance of structural frames in Australia," International Journal of Project Organisation and Management, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 5(1/2), pages 57-68.
  • Handle: RePEc:ids:ijpoma:v:5:y:2013:i:1/2:p:57-68
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.inderscience.com/link.php?id=53154
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ids:ijpoma:v:5:y:2013:i:1/2:p:57-68. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sarah Parker (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.inderscience.com/browse/index.php?journalID=96 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.