Precast cement is poured, formed over the rebar, and then restored in one area. When the solid is prepared for use, it is shipped to the building site. This cycle guarantees ideal curing conditions and makes solid and great cement.
Then again, site-cast concrete is poured, shaped, and restored directly at the construction site. While considering precast versus cast set up solid cost, the last is regularly less expensive. It is likewise exceptionally solid since the designers can add reinforced steel bars to increase its solidarity and toughness.
Precast versus cast-in-situ construction
Quality can be controlled and maintained without any problem.
Quality control and maintenance are troublesome.
Precast concrete is a less expensive type of construction if huge structures are to be developed.
The maintenance cost of the precast solid structure is higher.
In situ concrete is a less expensive type of construction for little structures.
The maintenance cost of the cast-in-situ solid structure is less contrasted with the precast solid structure.
The necessity of Worker and Machinery
Fewer works are required.
Skilled works are needed at construction sites.
Skilled and specialized contractual workers are needed for the construction of the precast solid structure.
Precast concrete requires large equipment and cranes for handling for example lifting and installation of substantial components
More works are required.
Skilled works are needed at construction sites.
Local contractual workers can likewise assemble the structure.
Cast-in-situ concrete doesn’t need such handling gear.
Precast solid construction is speedy as it very well may be installed promptly and there is no waiting for it to gain strength.
An increase in strength can be accomplished by quickened curing.
An site strength test isn’t needed.
High-strength cement can be utilized on the grounds that it is in controlled condition.
In situ solid construction is delayed as gaining solidarity requires time.
An increase in strength at situ by quickened curing is a troublesome undertaking.
On site strength test is required.
It will be hard to utilize high strength concrete as it relies upon site condition and assets accessible.
Season of Construction
Total construction time is less when contrasted with cast-in-situ.
Speedy construction is conceivable.
Total construction time is more when contrasted with precast.
Speed is less as components are casted at site.
Large number of joints in basic framework.
Less impervious to Earthquake and wind powers not suggested where seismic burdens are dominant.
In precast solid construction, subtleties at the joint become extremely basic and require cautious consideration.
The components must be intended for handling pressure or loads during handling, which could conceivably increase steel.
Elements of varying lengths and shape can be created.
Precast concrete doesn’t offer a solid engineering character.
Less number of joints present in auxiliary framework.
More impervious to quake and wind powers.
Elements can’t be casted ahead of time.
Elements are not to be intended for any such loads or stress.
There is constraint in length and state of component.
In situ solid offers a solid structural character.
According to ‘Bulletin of American Concrete Institute’ (1993), precast solid gives smooth interior finish henceforth they need minimum readiness before paint, backdrop and so forth or the other divider coverings can be applied straightforwardly.
In the cast-in-situ solid construction, you need to do mortar for the smooth finish and additionally requires pre-groundwork for a paint like divider clay and so on
Points to Be Taken Care of
One needs to be fastidious during work with precast cement on the grounds that the precast unit can be harmed during transportation and handling.
In the cast-in-situ solid construction, be cautious about following points:
- During the concreting cycle like mixing, transportation, placing, finishing and so on
- Curing of cement for certain time and so on
Prefabricated Construction or Construction on Site?
Is it possible to build anything with precast? Is traditional construction destined to evolve without remedy towards an industrialized construction system? The truth is that, as some experts point out, there are projects that are better prepared than others to be approached with prefabricated elements for their construction, but even those that are less so will have to assume that the future will be industrialized. As indicated by ANDECE, and as was shown in the first Congress on Industrialized Construction , this type of construction is still the “technical evolution” of construction as we know it.
For several hundred years, reinforced concrete became one of the building materials par excellence . Although many do not know it, concrete was positioned as a reference material due to the lack of wood to build, among other things. Precisely from the same moment in which concrete began to be used to build, without realizing it, the sector began to perfect what we know today as industrialized construction.
Yes, you read that correctly: perfect yourself. And it is that construction is a field of knowledge in continuous evolution, study and innovation. To speak of precast concrete is to speak of the highest quality , despite the fact that in many areas “precast for construction” is still associated with a pejorative term (something that fortunately is already residual). This constant evolution and innovation has meant that the prefabricated construction ends up presenting a series of indisputable advantages over the “in situ” version.
Traditional Construction vs Industrialized Construction
Construction with in-situ concrete (and all its associated materials, of course) refers exclusively to that carried out on the construction site. On the other hand, construction with precast concrete (PH) can be both on-site and off-site, in factories such as Consolis Tecnyconta’s in Tauste (Zaragoza). In these spaces, projects are received, needs are determined, the pieces are built and fragmented and transferred to the work space. Of course, as long as it complies with the relevant technical requirements, such as being a project in several stages, functional and easily built.
Thanks to this process, many things are achieved, but two very relevant must be highlighted :
- Compared to traditional construction, PHs reduce ancillary tasks and labor .
- Customers who choose to use prefabricated elements for construction are guaranteed from the first moment the quality of the product, which is always endorsed by the manufacturer itself.
Whenever the debate between prefabricated and in-situ construction comes up, two terms that never always take on much weight are money and deadlines. For large-scale works, these are two concepts that cannot be discussed. And even in small works it begins to be seen, more and more assiduously, the use of various prefabricated pieces for their construction .
Reasons like the above, and like the following, make the use of different types of precast in construction is increasingly valued:
- Formwork is not required . On the in-situ aspect, the expense in this aspect always ends up being high.
- No need to look at the sky . It is not dependent on the weather, and that is why better concreting is achieved compared to ‘concrete in situ’ techniques.
- The execution of the works on the site usually has the longest plans . And more time is always more money. On the other hand, industrialized construction can boast closed prices and much shorter terms.
- The works that are carried out with precasts generate less dust, less noise and, therefore, less movements . All of this means less hassle in the workplace. This must also be assessed from a social perspective, understanding that the discomfort is much less and less lasting over time.
Reduction of Occupational Risks in Construction
It seems clear that industrialized construction has high advantages , some of which are discussed here . To all that has been said is added the fact that all the processes (project, definition, production, handover …) occur one after the other, and not in parallel as in the traditional version. As a result, the chances of making mistakes are reduced, and the need for coordination between companies is reduced.
And we cannot forget the risks of construction. “The traditional methodology of execution of work in situ is a source of risks due to its intrinsic characteristics , “ they assure from ANDECE in this article , where the risks they are talking about are detailed. But thanks to the use of PH, the risks are considerably reduced thanks to different aspects and measures that are taken into account in this type of work: there are no intermediate stockpiles of material or the processes are completely regulated so that each worker complies with total security missions that have been entrusted during the process of joining the pieces.