Investigation of material waste incurred in the construction projects at karbala province in iraq

International INTERNATIONAL Journal of Civil Engineering JOURNAL and OF Technology CIVIL (IJCIET), ENGINEERING ISSN 0976 – 6308 AND
(Print),
ISSN 0976 – 6316(Online), Volume 5, Issue 10, October (2014), pp. 58-73 © IAEME
TECHNOLOGY (IJCIET)
ISSN 0976 – 6308 (Print)
ISSN 0976 – 6316(Online)
Volume 5, Issue 10, October (2014), pp. 58-73
© IAEME: www.iaeme.com/Ijciet.asp
Journal Impact Factor (2014): 7.9290 (Calculated by GISI)
www.jifactor.com
IJCIET
©IAEME
INVESTIGATION OF MATERIAL WASTE INCURRED IN
58

THE CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS AT KARBALA
PROVINCE IN IRAQ
Dr. Zeyad S. M. Khaled 1, Dr. Basil S. Alshathr 2, Ali Hasan Hadi3
1(College of Engineering, Alnahrain University/ Baghdad, Iraq)
2, 3(Building and Construction Engineering Department, University of Technology/ Baghdad, Iraq)
ABSTRACT
Construction waste is continually increasing due to everlasting need of new building and
infrastructure development projects. This has become one of the major environmental problems all
over the world. According to the European Union Waste Strategy, construction waste is considered
as one of the priority waste streams. This research aims at finding out waste percentages of
construction materials at the local construction industry in Karbala. Data of ten major construction
materials are extracted from past records of thirty finished projects. In addition, a field study is
employed to measure wastes of the same construction materials from six under construction projects.
Data analysis is carried out using the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS). Goodness of fit
tests, and t- Tests under (99%) level of confidence are conducted. Results show that waste
percentages of construction materials on local scale are fairly high and widely variable across the
studied projects, and there is lack of interest in waste minimization by all participants. The majority
of this waste can be avoided by implementing some preventive measures during construction, value
engineering, sustainability concepts, and constructability review at the pre-construction phases.
Keywords: Construction Materials Waste, Materials Waste Management, Waste Recycling,
Waste Reuse.
1. INTRODUCTION
Construction waste is a major challenge because of its tremendous environmental and
economic bad effects. On global scale, construction waste produces an average of (32%) of the total
annual waste that is disposed to landfills. It comprises (10-20%) of the total annual construction

International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET), ISSN 0976 – 6308 (Print),
materials used. Since construction materials account for (40-50%) of the total cost of construction
projects, thence (4-10%) of the project total cost is wasted [1].
59

1.1 RESEARCH OBJECTIVE
This study aims at finding out waste percentages of ten major construction materials on local
scale.
Results can be employed as early warning indicators that point out any access in waste
percentages at early stages in order to offer a chance to understand causes of waste and employ
suitable treatments in time.
1.2 RESEARCH JUSTIFICATION
Construction waste in the local construction industry is not paid enough care. The official
bodies concerned almost overly ignore it. There is a serious need to understand the impact of
construction waste on the environment. In addition to the economic benefits gained through reducing
the construction cost.
1.3 RESEARCH HYPOTHESES
Construction materials waste at the local construction industry in Karbala exceeds the limits
of the Ministry of Housing and Construction. This excess wastage can be eliminated by improving
the materials management process.
1.4 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
A wide survey of literature is conducted through the net to explore construction waste types,
causes, and treatment. Past records of thirty completed construction projects for each major type of
construction materials are studied carefully and analyzed. Observations of the streamline of materials
and workflow in six under construction projects are also conducted to check and verify past records.
2. CONSTRUCTION MATERIAL WASTE
Construction waste is defined as any losses produced by activities that generate direct or
indirect costs but do not add any value to the product from the point of view of the client [2]. It is
also defined as the surplus materials that are generated from construction, renovation and demolition
activities [3].
According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), construction waste
materials also include packaging material and rubble material that results from construction,
remodeling, repair, and demolition operations. In addition to any improvement materials that may be
used in construction sites [4].
2.1 CAUSES OF CONSTRUCTION WASTE
The main causes that lead to generate material wastage in construction projects are found to
be [5]:
i. Design mistakes. ii. Wrong specifications.
iii. Lack of execution information. iv. Bad estimating.
v. Bad transportation. vi. Bad storage of materials.
vii. Bad handling of materials. viii. Bad workmanship.
ix. Lack of supervision. x. Inefficient site management.

60

2.2 CLASSIFICATION OF CONSTRUCTION WASTE
Construction waste is generally classified according to:
• The possibility of controlling the process of material usage where waste is classified into
avoidable waste (produced due the execution technique) and unavoidable waste (inherent in the
execution of the activity) [6].
• Its nature into direct waste (related to the physical nature of materials) and indirect waste
(related to the financial loss and the surplus use of materials). Both types exist in all seven
phases of work; delivery, processing, overproduction, substitution, waiting time, movement, and
inventories [7].
• Its origin, i.e. the stage that the main root cause is related to. Table (1) summarized the origins of
waste and its causes in each origin [8]:
Table 1: Construction waste origins and causes
Origins Causes of waste
Design Complexity, errors, changes, non-clarity, unsuitability …
Contract Errors, incomplete contract documents ...
Supply Ordering errors, over allowances, supplier errors ...
Transport Damage, improper site access, inefficient unloading ...
Storage Inappropriate place or location, improper methods …
Handling Inadequate, loose form ...
Planning Improper organization, information, supervision …
Mgmt. Malfunction, poor craftsmanship, wrong materials …
Residual Off-cuts, uneconomical shapes, packaging ...
Others Weather, vandalism, theft ...
3. SIMILAR PREVIOUS RESEARCHS
Material waste in (114) construction sites in the UK have been monitored. It was found that
there is a considerable amount of waste that can be avoided by adopting relatively simple prevention
procedures. In addition, storage and handling were pointed out as the major causes of construction
waste [9].

In the United State, an empirical study was conducted in which five houses at four separate
construction sites were observed. Three processes were analyzed: masonry foundations, timber
frames, and concrete members. The main causes of waste were investigated, based on a model that
generically describes the flow of solid waste in building sites and on a proposed classification of
waste according to its sources. One of the major sources of waste was the residual scrap resulting
from cutting materials. Packaging and improper handling were also identified as fairly important
causes of waste [10].
A two years study co-ordinated by the Brazilian Institute of Technology and Quality in
Construction (ITQC) involving (15) universities and more than one hundred construction sites had
been conducted. The wastes of eighteen construction materials were monitored. The study concluded
that the waste of construction materials is higher than the percentages that are assumed by the
companies in their cost estimates, and the variability between the waste indices from site to site
indicates that a considerable portion of this wastage can be avoided [11].
Another study was developed in Hong Kong University. The main objective of this study was
to collect data about waste in construction materials. Seventeen construction companies were
surveyed to collect the necessary data. The study found that there are different levels of waste for the
different types of projects [12].
61

4. DATA ACQUISITION
To determine the average waste percentages of construction materials at the local
construction industry in Karbala, past records of thirty construction projects concerning each major
type of construction materials are studied carefully and analyzed. Table (2) summarizes the
distribution of these finished projects among local principal clients. On the other hand field
investigations that include live observations of materials flow and waste generation in six under
construction projects are also conducted. Table (3) summarizes the distribution of these under
construction projects among local principal clients.
Table 2: Finished projects covered by the study
Client No. of projects
Directorate of Karbala Municipality. 5
Directorate of Karbala Education. 10
General Directorate of Roads and Bridges. 3
Directorate of Karbala Electric. 2
General Secretariat of the Husseiniya Shrine. 9
General Secretariat of the Abasia Shrine. 1
Total 30

62

Table 3: Under construction projects covered by the study
Client No. of projects
Karbala Investment Commission. 1
Directorate of Karbala Education. 2
Karbala Health Department. 1
General Secretariat of the Husseiniya Shrine. 2
Total 6
A preliminary meeting was held with each executive manager to explain the objectives of this
study and the procedure to be followed as well as to agree upon the way of coordination with the
archive officials of the finished projects to extract data from past records.
In a parallel endeavor, the same meetings were held concerning the six under construction
projects in order to agree upon the coordination with the construction site staff about field
observations. During field observation, periodical meetings are held with the related staff of the six
under construction projects including contractors, consultants, resident engineers, site managers,
quantity surveyors, and store keepers. The meeting aims at a clearer understanding of the causes and
origins of waste and the possible preventive actions.
4.1 PAST RECORDS
A retrospective study is conducted to extract data from the materials ordering sheets of thirty
finished projects and estimate net quantities from related drawings. Ordering records of construction
materials were analyzed in order to determine the actually purchased quantities of materials, while
the net required quantities of materials were accurately estimated from design drawings. The
required quantity of each material is the quantity needed to execute a definite item according to
design (so called estimated). The purchased quantity of material is the quantity actually delivered to
execute the same item of work (so called Consumed). Waste percentage is then simply calculated by
using equation (1) as follows:
W% =

……………… (1)
4.2 FIELD OBSERVATION
On the other hand, an observational method is employed to measure the required data in six
under construction projects by the aid of a worksheet that is shown in Fig. (1).
The stream line movement of materials once it is delivered the work site until being used and
built in its final position is intensively tracked and measured. Several factors that usually cause
construction materials waste in local construction industry are studied in an attempt to discover their
influences. The construction materials streamline flowchart is illustrated in Fig. (2).
At the storage phase, many factors can cause more construction materials waste.
Inappropriate storing, ineffective control, poor organization, and hasty work are some of them. At

hauling and placing phases, it is found that the main reason to generate waste is workmanship.
Without careful control and rewarding systems, construction workers may become careless in
hauling and processing materials. As a result; reusable reinforcement bars, discarded half-bags of
cement, discarded brick and timber pieces are often thrown around the sites. The research study
indicates that skill, enthusiasm and collectivism are the main factors affecting the amounts of wastes
produced by workers.
63

Construction Materials Waste Data acquisition Worksheet
General Information
Sheet No.: Date: Location:
Material: Work Time: (from: to: )
Project:
Contractor:
Client:
Field Measurements
Activity:
Construction Method:
Weather: Temperature: Moisture:
Level of execution:
Estimated Quantity:
According to drawing No.:
Actual quantity:
According to delivery sheet No.:
Calculation Results
W% =

W% = ( ) %
Specific Notes
Figure 1: Data acquisition worksheet form


Ordering Supply
Storage
Hauling
Processing
Residual materials Off-site
Reusable Non-reusable
64

Pre-construction phase
Construction phase
Estimating
recycling,
reclamation,
or landfill.
Figure 2: Construction materials streamline flowchart
5. STUDY RESULTS
Ten major construction materials that are used in the majority of construction activities
namely; sand, gravel, cement, steel reinforcement, bricks, thermo-stone, gypsum, terrazzo tiles,
marble, and ceramics are considered. Waste percentages are measured in various activities, of
different architectural design, at several elevations, for various work gangs. Nevertheless, all of them
are carried out at the same storage conditions, with the same way of unloading and handling, and at
the same work conditions using the same specifications and equipment available at the local
industry. Records of related quantities for thirty finished projects are collected and analyzed. The
waste percentages determined in the retrospective study are shown in table (4).
Table 4: Waste percentages of materials as for past records
Project Sand Gravel Cement Steel Brick Stone Gyps. Tiles Marble Ceram.
Almujtaba Library. 11.12 10.18 5.69 5.07 - 12.07 18.07 - - -
Second Municipal. 11.32 10.25 5.41 4.59 15.24 - 17.88 - 8.19 8.39
Sixth Municipal. 12.00 10.33 5.58 4.61 15.31 - 18.17 - 8.28 10.62
Gardens Dept. 12.07 10.42 4.84 4.69 15.43 - 18.68 - 7.89 11.54
Alwaeli Hospital. 12.66 10.53 4.76 4.73 - 11.43 17.85 - - -
Alsomood school. 11.70 11.03 5.18 4.84 15.67 - 17.94 11.70 - -
Alhindia school. 11.80 11.32 5.07 4.81 15.78 - 18.33 11.80 - -

65

Almojtaba school. 12.91 11.41 5.03 4.94 15.96 - 17.59 12.91 - -
Alshimokh school. 12.98 11.28 5.08 5.13 16.1 - 18.95 12.98 - -
Altaka school. 13.33 10.78 5.21 5.27 16.28 - 17.37 13.33 - -
Omalhawa school. 11.80 10.62 5.33 5.39 16.38 - 13.91 11.8 - -
Alrafidain school. 13.64 10.86 5.41 5.47 16.41 - 19.21 13.64 - -
Aldobat school. 14.00 10.91 5.48 5.56 16.5 - 17.20 14.00 - -
Alitarat school. 14.12 11.59 5.18 5.64 16.64 - 14.64 14.12 - -
Alsalam nursery. 10.00 9.89 5.64 5.81 14.13 - 19.74 10.00 - -
Alkawther Mall. 10.64 8.92 5.72 6.03 14.23 13.51 17.68 10.64 - 9.75
Almustafa Mall. 12.07 8.75 5.91 6.21 - 13.79 14.94 12.07 - 6.81
Zain Hospital. 12.04 8.61 6.22 6.46 - 13.97 17.58 - 7.27 -
Alkafel Hospital. 12.13 8.83 6.43 6.90 - 17.02 17.47 - 7.38 -
Alataba Plantation. 10.63 9.47 4.98 4.54 13.91 - 15.43 - - -
Medinat Al-Zairin1. 12.50 9.56 4.83 4.48 13.64 - 20.31 - 6.54 9.88
Mukhaim Toilets1. 12.66 12.19 4.53 4.01 - - 17.18 - 9.81 8.83
Mukhaim Toilets2. 14.56 12.96 4.48 2.98 12.00 - 16.97 - 10.09 7.25
Aldariba Bridge. 13.00 12.43 4.23 3.29 - - - - - -
Towayrige Bridge. 13.30 12.69 4.08 3.48 16.91 - - - - -
Algaire Bridge. 13.34 11.73 3.89 3.54 - - - - - -
Friha E. Station. 14.45 11.84 3.71 3.72 17.46 - 16.28 13.34 - 13.39
Alkhairat E. Station. 13.66 10.18 3.46 3.96 17.91 - 16.17 13.66 - 10.56

The observational study targeted the usage process during executing the same activities in
both finished and under construction projects. When observed measures are compared with the
estimated quantities, it is found that, most of the waste occurs due to estimating errors and storage
defects. Improper storage areas cause a noticeable increase in waste because of acts of tamper,
impairing, damp, dispersion, and mixture with other materials. The findings also reveal that, waste of
steel reinforcement bars is not well considered at the design stage. Results of the field study
indicated a lack of interest paid from both designers and contractors to optimize dimensions. It is
found that, most of the brick waste occurs due to unloading and workmanship. Table (5) summarizes
the waste percentages of the same materials obtained from the field study observations and shows
waste representative rates founded by analyzing both past records and observed measures.
66

Table 5: Observed waste percentages
Project Sand Gravel Cement Steel Brick Stone Gyps. Tiles Marble Ceram.
Durrat
Housing.
12.00 10.33 5.38 4.81 14.50 11.62 17.84 10.17 - 9.67
Khatem
Hospital.
11.92 10.72 5.03 4.34 15.32 - - - - -
Orphans
School.
13.01 11.01 5.29 4.64 - - - - - -
Turkish
Hospital.
12.04 11.44 4.72 5.27 15 - - - 8.93 10.75
Alsalam
school.
12.66 10.09 4.90 4.61 15.11 - 17.41 - - 8.81
Almilad
school.
11.91 10.23 5.11 5.19 14.66 - 16.71 - - 9.08
Norm
rates
12.47 10.76 5.03 4.81 15.23 12.77 17.25 9.45 9.19 10.27
6. DATA ANALYSIS AND VERIFICATION
In order to determine a representative waste percentage for each major construction material
at the local scale, the past data obtained are tested against statistical measures. Normal distribution
curves are fitted to verify the credibility of the determined statistical society of past records for each
material using the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) as shown in Fig. (3). Then, the
distribution of each statistical society of past records is submitted to the Goodness of fit test to
verify its characteristic under (99%) level of confidence. The results of goodness of fit test for all
materials wastes are summarized in table (6) which reveals that (Ho) is accepted i.e. the statistical
society of all materials wastes conform to the normal distribution.
Reliability of the method adopted to determine the waste percentages of materials are verified
against the data measured from field investigation of six under construction projects then a t- Test
for six different iterations of each material at (99%) level of confidence is conducted. The results of
hypotheses test of the field measures for all materials wastes are summarized in table (7) which
reveals that (Ho) of each test is accepted i.e. the observed waste percentages of all materials have no
significant diversion from the hypothetical mean.

67

Figure 3: Statistical distributions of past records

68

Table 6: Results of goodness of fit test of past records
Materials Chi-Square Df * Asymp. Sig.**
Sand 17.103 26 0.045
Gravel 13.651 28 0.153
Cement 2.406 26 0.194
Reinforcement Steel Bars 2.087 29 0.081
Bricks 3.12 29 0.09
Thermo-stone 10.71 28 0.163
Gypsum 4.333 29 0.294
Terrazzo Tiles 26.059 28 0.067
Marble 3.933 28 0.509
Ceramics 8.083 29 0.019
*Degree of Freedom. ** Two tailed test.
Table 7: Results of hypotheses test of observed data
Material
Waste
%
t Df * Sig.**
MeanDi
f.
Conf. Interval ***
Lower Upper
Sand
12 2.391 29 0.023 0.5206 -0.795 1.1208
11.92 2.759 29 0.01 0.6006 0.0005 1.2008
13.01 -2.202 29 0.036 -0.4793 -1.079 0.1208
12.04 2.208 29 0.035 0.4806 -0.1195 1.0808
12.66 -0.64 29 0.527 -0.1393 -0.7395 0.4608
11.91 2.805 29 0.009 0.6167 0.0105 1.2108
Gravel
10.33 19.74 29 0.058 0.4576 -0.1815 1.0968
10.72 0.292 29 0.773 0.0676 -0.5715 0.7068
11.01 -0.959 29 0.346 -0.2223 -0.8615 0.4168
11.44 -2.813 29 0.009 -0.6523 -1.2915 -0.013
10.09 3.009 29 0.005 0.6976 0.0585 1.3368
10.23 2.405 29 0.023 0.5576 -0.815 1.1968
Cement
5.38 -2.778 29 0.009 -0.3573 -0.7118 -0.003
5.03 -0.057 29 0.955 -0. 007 -0.3618 0.3472
5.29 -2.079 29 0.047 -0.2673 -0.6218 0.0872
4.72 2.353 29 0.026 0.3026 -0.0518 0.6572
4.9 0.954 29 0.348 0.1226 -0.2318 0.4772
5.11 -0.679 29 0.502 -0.0873 -0.4418 0.2672
Reinfor-cement
Steel
Bars
4.81 0.065 29 0.949 0.0113 -0.4696 0.4923
4.34 2.759 29 0.01 0.4813 0.0004 0.9623
4.64 1.039 29 0. 307 0.1813 -0.2996 0.6623
5.27 0.571 29 0.016 -0.4467 -0.9296 0.0323
4.61 1.211 29 0.236 0.2113 -0.2696 0.6923
5.19 2.113 29 0.043 -0.3687 -0.8496 0.1123
* Degrees of freedom. ** Two tailed test. *** 90% Confidence interval.

69

Table 7: Results of hypotheses test of observed data (continued)
Material Waste % t Df * Sig.** Mean Dif.
Conf. Interval ***
Lower Upper
Bricks
14.5 2.903 29 0.007 0.801 0.0404 1.5616
15.32 0.069 29 0.946 -0.019 -0.7796 0.7416
14.93 1.345 29 0.189 0.371 -0.3896 1.1316
15 1.091 29 0.284 0.301 -0.4596 1.0616
15.11 0.692 29 0.494 0.191 -0.5696 0.9516
14.66 2.323 29 0.027 0.641 -0.1196 1.4016
Thermo-stone
11.62 2. 937 29 0.006 1.1636 0.0715 2.2559
12.84 0.766 29 0.45 0.3036 -0.7885 1.3959
13.77 -2.489 29 0.019 -0.9863 -2.0785 0.1059
13.59 -2.035 29 0.051 -0.8063 -1.8985 0.2859
12.56 0.564 29 0.577 0.2236 -0.8685 1.3159
12.07 1.801 29 0.082 0.7136 -0.3785 1.8059
Gypsum
17.84 -2.159 29 0.039 -0.5777 -1.3153 0.1599
17.31 -0.178 29 0.86 -0.0477 -0.7853 0.6899
16.96 1.1301 29 0.268 0.3023 -0.4353 1.0399
18.01 -2.794 29 0.009 -0.74767 -1.4853 -0.010
17.41 -0.552 29 0.585 -0.14767 -0.8853 0.5899
16.71 2.064 29 0.048 0.55233 -0.1853 1.2899
Terrazzo Tiles
10.17 -2.545 29 0.016 -0.73733 -1.5358 0.0611
9 1.494 29 0.146 0.43267 -0.3658 1.2311
9.81 -1.303 29 0.203 -0.37733 -1.1758 0.4211
8.63 2.771 29 0.01 0. 80267 0.0042 1.6011
9.38 0.182 29 0.857 0.05267 -0.7458 0.8511
10.31 -3.029 29 0.005 -0.87733 -1.6758 -0.079
Marble
9.52 -1.265 29 0.216 -0.34133 -1.0853 0.4027
10 -3.043 29 0.005 -0.82133 -1.5653 -0.077
8.44 2.737 29 0.01 0.73867 -0.053 1.4827
8.93 0.921 29 0.365 0.24867 -0.4953 0.9927
9.71 -1.968 29 0.059 -0.53133 -1.2753 0.2127
9.07 0.403 29 0.69 0.10867 -0.6353 0.8527
Ceramic
9.67 1.724 29 0.095 0.68733 -0.4114 1.7861
9.38 2.452 29 0.02 0.97733 -0.1214 2.0761
10.17 0.47 29 0.642 0.18733 -0.9114 1.2861
10.75 -0.985 29 0.333 -0.39267 -1.4914 0.7061
9.13 3.079 29 0.005 1.22733 0.1286 2.3261
10.08 0.696 29 0.492 0.27733 -0.8214 1.3761
* Degrees of freedom. ** Two tailed test. *** 90% Confidence interval.

The test also helped to cross check the compatibility of waste percentages for each material
obtained from past records with field observations. This means that, the waste percentages of all
materials that are determined from past records do represent the waste percentages at the local
construction industry of Karbala to an acceptable degree.
It is quite clear that values of the mean, median and mode for each material waste are
convergent values. This gives an indication to the consistency of data and its credibility. The travail
skewness is acceptable due to specific circumstances of each project. The kurtosis is relatively small
indicating that the distributions have a slightly high or low crest. The average of squares deviations is
very slightly away from the mean value. All of that indicate that values tend to centralized around
the mean values and the mean values can truly represent materials wastes in construction sites at
Karbala.
70

7. COMPARISON WITH MOHC LIMITS
Table (8) shows the descriptive statistics of all materials wastes obtained by SPSS. The
results summarized in table (8) confirm that the waste of materials at the local construction industry
in Karbala is relatively higher than the limits set by the Iraqi Ministry of Housing and Construction
(MOHC) and that much of this waste is predictable and avoidable which coincides with the research
hypothesis.
The fact that some relatively simple and inexpensive preventive measures have not been
implemented in the local construction industry indicates a lack of knowledge among construction
managers and contractors about the performance at their sites. The study of waste origins indicated
that a high percentage of construction material waste occurs within materials flow activities such as
material supply, storage, hauling and processing.
Table 8: Results of major construction materials waste percentages
Material Mean Median St. Dev. Variance Range MOHC*
Sand 12.477 12.315 1.104 1.219 4.55 10
Gravel 10.76 10.75 1.174 1.378 4.58 9
Cement 5.03 5.05 0.648 0.42 2.97 4
Reinforcement Steel 4.81 4.77 0.88 0.775 3.92 6
Bricks 15.23 15.275 1.387 1.926 5.91 15
Thermo-stone 12.77 12.7 2.01 4.044 8.81 15
Gypsum 17.25 17.4 1.328 1.785 6.4 18
Terrazzo tiles 9.45 9.265 1.466 2.151 6.25 10
Marble 9.19 9.015 1.363 1.859 5.48 7
Ceramics 10.27 9.965 2.008 4.034 8.26 7
* After reference [13].

71

8. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Through this work that covers (36) different construction projects executed by different
contractors for the benefit of different owners, It is found that construction waste management
concepts are absent in the prevailing professional culture at local scale in Karbala. In fact, the
occurrence of waste for most materials is usually the result of a combination of factors. Unawareness
of waste in pre-construction stages is among the most important causes of waste. This include lack of
modular coordination in design, poor integration of building subsystems during the design stage,
poor detailing of design, lack of resources optimization during design, imprecise specification of
components. In addition to, poor site layout planning, mistakes in materials procurement, delivery,
and distribution to the workplaces.
8.1 CONCLUSIONS
The main conclusions arrived at by this research is the following:
1. The actual waste percentages of construction materials at the local scale at Karbala are more
than the limits set by the Iraqi Ministry of Housing and Construction.
2. Local contracting companies do not seem to be concerned about material waste hence they do
not apply a systematic control of material usage.
3. High variation of wastage is found at the same project itself for different construction
materials.
4. There is a considerable variance between the waste percentages from site to site for the same
material even in similar projects.
5. A serious absence of the appropriate knowledge of construction materials waste management
to the extent that most of the contracting companies, do not know what amount of waste they
suffer.
6. Most of the generated waste can be avoided by implementing few preventive measures, mostly
related to managerial actions. Low percentages of wastage at some sites provide an indication
that high percentages are avoidable.
7. A significant ratio of waste is predominantly caused by decisions taken before the execution
stage, such as inadequate design, lack of planning, and flaws in the material supply system.
8.2 RECOMMENDATIONS
It is recommended to adopt the following in order to pass over the prevailing obsolete practice:
1. The Ministry of Environment is invited to conduct a series of studies to determine the
environmental and economic effects of the accumulation of construction waste in Iraq and to
set regulation to keep it to a minimum.
2. The Ministry of Construction and Housing is invited to issue a series of instructions to enable
construction firms to use feasible approaches in managing the construction waste in a
deliberate scientific way.

3. The Ministry of planning is invited to develop the contracts condition in order to compel
contractors to apply the approaches of construction waste management at the construction
phase.
4. The Union of Iraqi contractors is invited to conduct symposiums to raise contractors'
awareness using modern appropriate measures to lower down materials waste in the
construction sites.
5. The Iraqi Engineers League is invited to hold symposiums to raise the awareness of the
professional teams (designers, procurement committees, and site planning engineers) in the
dilemma of construction material waste.
72

8.3 FUTURE STUDIES
Construction waste management is a fertile subject that has a high potential for further
research such as:
1. Investigation of alternative waste disposal methods.
2. Design of a waste management plan suitable for the execution environment in Iraqi
construction sites.
3. Develop a waste disposal data system because of the acute demerit in the construction waste
data base at local scale.
4. Develop a software package for fully managing construction waste.
REFERENCES
[1] Shen, L. Y., Vivian, W. Y. T., Tam, C. M. and Drew, D., Mapping Approach for Examining
Waste Management on Construction Sites, Journal of Construction Engineering and
Demolition (2004), pp. (472-481).
[2] Formoso, C. T., Isatto, E. L., and Hirota, E. H., Method for Waste Control in the Building
Industry, Journal of University of California, Berkeley (1999), pp. (325-334).
[3] Teo, M. M., Loosemore, M.,A theory of waste behaviour in the construction industry.
Journal of Construction Management and Economics (2001), Vol. (19), Issue (7),
pp. (741–751).
[4] Ortiza, O., Pasqualinoa, J.C., and Castellsa, F., Environmental performance of construction
waste: Comparing three scenarios from a case study in Catalonia, Spain, Journal of Waste
Management (2010), Vol. (30), Issue (4), pp. (646–654).
[5] Formoso, C. T., M.ASCE, L. S., Cesare, C. D. and Isatto, E. L., Material Waste in Building
Industry: Main Causes and Prevention, Journal of Construction Engineering and
Management (2002), pp. (316-325).
[6] Poon, C.S., Yu, A.T.W., and Ng, L.H., On-site sorting of construction and demolition waste
in Hong Kong, Journal of Resource Conserve Recycling (2001), Vol. (32), Issue (2),
pp. (157–172).
[7] Beguma, R. A., Siwar, C., Pereira, J. J., and Jaafar, A., A benefit–cost analysis on the
economic feasibility of construction waste minimisation: The case of Malaysia, Journal of
Conservation and Recycling (2006), Vol. (48), pp. (86-98).

Investigation of material waste incurred in the construction projects at karbala province in iraq

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to Investigation of material waste incurred in the construction projects at karbala province in iraq

Similar to Investigation of material waste incurred in the construction projects at karbala province in iraq (20)

More from IAEME Publication

More from IAEME Publication (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Investigation of material waste incurred in the construction projects at karbala province in iraq