Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Optimum cost design of facade scaffoldings

  • Published:
Sādhanā Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Scaffolds are the structures that are temporarily installed for workers to stand on while working at height. They constitute approximately 12%–15% of entire project costs. This study finds solutions for optimum cost in H-frame facade scaffolding configurations by considering horizontal and vertical dimensions, and module distance as variables. For this purpose, 6 different facade configurations with various widths, heights and module distances were modeled, and their structural analyses were performed. The cost analysis was conducted, and the results were compared. The results indicated that more economical solutions were achieved in cases where H-type facade scaffolds were used on facades with fixed height and increased width, which shows that H-type scaffold systems would be more economical for wide facades. Furthermore, although the facade scaffolding with 2.5 m module distance are the most used scaffolds in the construction sector, optimum cost scaffold configurations were obtained using 3 m module distances.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4
Figure 5
Figure 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Dai J, Goodrum P M and Maloney W F 2009 Construction craft workers’ perceptions of the factors affecting their productivity. J. Construct. Eng. Manag. 135(3): 217–226

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Yin Z and Caldas C 2020 Scaffolding in industrial construction projects: current practices, issues, and potential solutions. Int. J. Construct. Manag. 22(13): 2554–2563

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Riley D R 1994 Modeling of the space behavior of construction activities, Ph.D. thesis, Department of Architectural Engineering, Pennsylvania State University

  4. Sanvido V E 1984 A framework for designing and analyzing management and control systems to improve the productivity of construction projects. Technical Report No. 282, Stanford, CA: Stanford University

  5. Ministry of Labor and Social Security, Regulation on Occupational Health and Safety in Construction. Retrieved from:https://www.mevzuat.gov.tr/File/GeneratePdf?mevzuatNo=18928&mevzuatTur=KurumVeKurulusYonetmeligi&mevzuatTertip=5, 2013. Accessed 30.09.2022. (in Turkish)

  6. Tonetto M S and Saurin T A 2021 Choosing fall protection systems in construction sites: coping with complex rather than complicated systems. Saf. Sci. 143: 1–14

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Liu H, Jia L, Wen S, Liu Q, Wang G and Chen Z 2016 Experimental and theoretical studies on the stability of steel Tube-Coupler Scaffolds with different connection joints. Eng. Struct. 106: 80–95

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Akinci B, Fischen M, Levitt R and Carlson R 2002 Formalization and automation of time-space conflict analysis. J. Comput. Civil Eng. 16(2): 124–134

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Kim K and Teizer J 2014 Automatic design and planning of scaffolding systems using building information modeling. Adv. Eng. Inform. 28(1): 6–80

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Lipecki T, Jamińska-Gadomska P, Bęc J and Błazik-Borowa E 2020 Façade scaffolding behaviour under wind action. Arch. Civil Mech. Eng. 20(1): 1–15

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Błazik-Borowa E, Borowa A, Kawecki B, Kotowicz M and Robak A 2019 Geodesic inventory of scaffolding geometry. Eng. Struct.. 196: 1–10

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Błazik-Borowa E, Jamińska-Gadomska P and Pieńko M 2020 Influence of foundation quality on the stress in the elements of steel façade scaffolding. Buildings. 10(7): 130

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Ilcik J, Arora V and Dolejs J 2016 Design of new scaffold anchor based on the updated finite element model. Eng. Struct. 118: 334–343

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Stationschefbmo, Belgium scaffolding collapse kills one. Retrieved from: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-45968575. Accessed 30.09.2022

  15. Smith A Scaffolding collapses near Royal Free Hospital in Hampstead. Retrieved from: https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-london-47487290. Accessed 30.09.2022

  16. Scaffolding collapses in Taksim. Retrieved from: https://www.internethaber.com/taksimde-iskele-coktu-foto-galerisi-1205726.htm Accessed 30.09.2022

  17. Liy C H, Ibrahim S H, Affandi R, Rosli N A and Nawi M N M 2016 Causes of fall hazards in construction site management. Int. Rev. Manag. Mark. 6(8): 257–263

    Google Scholar 

  18. Whitaker S M, Graves R J, James M and McCann P 2003 Safety with access scaffolds: development of a prototype decision aid based on accident analysis. J. Saf. Res. 34(3): 249–261

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Błazik-Borowa E and Robak A 2017 Numerical models of scaffolding decks and their applications. Int. J. Civil Eng. 15(7): 979–989

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Błazik-Borowa E and Gontarz J 2016 The influence of the dimension and configuration of geometric imperfections on the static strength of a typical façade scaffolding. Arch. Civil Mech. Eng. 16(3): 269–281

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Beale R G 2014 Scaffold research—A review. J. Construct. Steel Res. 98: 188–200

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Soyluk A and Harmankaya Z Y 2012 Examination of earthquake resistant design in the education of architecture. Procedia-Soc. Behav. Sci. 51: 1080–1086

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Peng J, Wu C, Chan S and Huang C 2013 Experimental and numerical studies of practical system scaffolds. J. Construct. Steel Res. 91: 64–75

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Chandrangsu T and Rasmussen K J 2011 Investigation of geometric imperfections and joint stiffness of support scaffold systems. J. Construct. Steel Res. 67(4): 576–584

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Jia L, Liu H, Chen Z, Liu Q and Wen S 2016 Mechanical properties of right-angle couplers in steel tube–coupler scaffolds. J. Construct. Steel Res. 125: 43–60

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Błazik-Borowa E, Pieńko M, Robak A, Borowa A and Jamińska-Gadomska P 2017 Analysis of ledger-stand joints in the aluminum modular scaffold. Arch. Civil Eng. 63(1): 17–31

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Weesner L B and Jones H L 2001 Experimental and analytical capacity of frame scaffolding. Eng. Struct. 23(6): 592–599

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Błazik-Borowa E and Pieńko M 2017 Scaffoldings. Politechnika Lubelska, Lublin, pp. 7–109

  29. Cimellaro G P and Domaneschi M 2017 Stability analysis of different types of steel scaffolds. Eng. Struct. 152: 535–548

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. İlerisoy Z Y and Takva Y 2017 Nanotechnological developments in structural design: load-bearing materials. Eng. Technol. Appl. Sci. Res. 7(5): 1900–1903

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Harmankaya Z Y and Tuna M E 2011 Effects of number of storeys and concrete strength on the building cost of the multi storied buildings produced by using tunnel form in Turkey. J. Fac. Eng. Arch. Gazi Univ. 26(2): 427–443

    Google Scholar 

  32. İlerisoy Z Y and Tuna M E 2018 Effects of plane dimensions and number of storeys on the cost of rectangular-plane buildings constructed with tunnel form. Megaron. 13(4): 559–568

    Google Scholar 

  33. Pieńko M, Robak A, Błazik-Borowa E and Szer J 2018 Safety conditions analysis of scaffolding on construction sites. Int. J. Civil Environ. Eng. 12(2): 72–77

    Google Scholar 

  34. New Zealand Government 2016 Scaffolding In New Zealand. New Zealand, pp. 44

  35. TS EN 12811-2 2005 Temporary works equipment - Part 2: information on materials. Turkish Standards Instution (TSE), Ankara, pp. 6

  36. Takva Y 2018 Examination of Working Scaffoldings within Occupational Health and Safety in Construction Sector and Optimum Solution, Msc. thesis, Gazi University Institute of Science, Ankara

  37. Takva Y 2017 Interview with Ali Osman Kahveci on H type facade scaffolding. Ali Osman Kahveci's Office, Bursa

  38. TS EN 12811-1 2005 Temporary works equipment - Part 1: Scaffolds – Performance requirements and general design. Turkish Standards Instution (TSE), Ankara, pp. 7-16

  39. IskeleCAD V.4.5. 2020 Software of facade scaffold analysis and design, GÖKsa Software Engineering Industry and Trade Limited Company, Bursa

  40. Robak A, Pieńko M and Błazık-Borowa E 2015 Examples of unusual construction scaffoldings used for renovation works of historic buildings. Civil Environ. Eng. Rep. 18(3): 115–120

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. İlerisoy Z Y and Tuna M E 2013 Construction costs of tunnel form buildings. Građevinar. 65(2): 135–141

    Google Scholar 

  42. Hou L, Zhao C, Wu C, Moon S and Wang X 2016 Discrete firefly algorithm for scaffolding construction scheduling. J. Comput. Civil Eng. 31(3): 1–15

    Google Scholar 

  43. Kumar C, AbouRizk S M, Mohamed Y, Taghaddos H and Hermann U 2013 Estimation and planning tool for industrial construction scaffolding. In ISARC. Proceedings of the International Symposium on Automation and Robotics in Construction, pp. 634–642

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank the Civil Engineer Mr. ALI OSMAN KAHVECİ, who provided the opportunity to use the IskeleCAD V.4.5 program. The authors would like to thank Gazi University Academic Writing Application and Research Center for proofreading the article.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Architecture, Gazi University, Ankara, Turkey

    Yenal Takva, Zeynep Yeşim Ilerisoy & Mehmet Emin Tuna

  2. Civil Engineering Department, Gazi University, Ankara, Turkey

    Tekin Gültop

Authors
  1. Yenal Takva
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Zeynep Yeşim Ilerisoy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Tekin Gültop
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Mehmet Emin Tuna
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yenal Takva.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Takva, Y., Ilerisoy, Z.Y., Gültop, T. et al. Optimum cost design of facade scaffoldings. Sādhanā 48, 91 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12046-023-02146-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12046-023-02146-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation