76-107

STUDY ON RESOURCE PRODUCTIVITY OF A HIGHWAY PROJECT

NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT AND RESEARCH Pune Campus Page 76

CHAPTER VII

DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION

7.1 DATA ANALYSIS: THE APPROACH ADOPTED

The different resources of a highway projects are generally clubbed together

according to the necessity of those resources in different activities in different phases of.

In highway projects, generally one resource for each activity plays the key role and

construction it is termed as the driving resource for that activity. The productivity of the

whole activity depends on the productivity of that equipment and the final output

becomes the output of that particular resource. The other resources (non-driving) merely

play the roles of assisting that particular (driving) resource and their logistics and proper

assistance obviously affect the production but that does not dictate the magnitude of the

final output. Often plants also play the role of driving resource. Some activities (like

concrete paving) in highway construction often have two driving resources (viz. the

batching plant and slip form paver).

In case of finding the productivity of a particular activity, stresses have been given to

determine the production rate of the driving resources and not the non-driving ones. In fact, in

practical field, the productivity of the non-driving are not even measured with great attention.

For non-driving resources, much attention is paid in the availability and utility of those resources

and their cost structure, as they can be useful in future resource planning and mobilization

purposes.

7.2 ANALYSIS OF GRADER

The grader being the driving equipment in most of the soil and granular layers

where finishing is required, the productivity of grader is very necessary. The database

gathered from highway project sites have been analyzed and their performance, cost and

seasonal variation have been interpreted.



7.2.1 PERFORMANCE OF GRADER

The performances of various graders over the period of one year (2010-11) has

been tabulated (refer Annexure A1, Table A1) and extracted in Table 7.1.

TABLE 7.1

Performance of different raders at Surat-Dahisar site

Grader

log

18 Q8 19Q8 20 Q8 21 Q8 22Q8 24Q8 26 Q8 27 Q8 28 Q8 29 Q8 36 Q8

Availablit

y (%)

97.3 97.5 93.6 94.9 96.2 87.2 98 97 98.6 97.4 96.9

Utitlity

(%)

34.9 43.6 38.7 52.7 56.5 40.3 44.3 34.5 43.7 49 51.9

Net

Production

(Cum/hr)

12.1 64.7 40.3 54.6 60.6 43 46.4 34.4 50.3 50.9 67.6

Effective

productio

n

(cum/hr)

39.5 159.3 120.6 122.4 130.1 118.6 116.8 113.9 128.1 121.1 145.8

Fig 7.1 Performance Comparison of Graders

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

18Q8 19Q8 20Q8 21Q8 22Q8 24Q8 26Q8 27Q8 28Q8 29Q8 36Q8

Net Prouction

Effective Productivity

X-Axis: Grader

Y-Axis: Production cum/Hr



OBSERVATION ON PERFORMANCE OF GRADERS

The production rates (annual average) of 10 graders (out of 11) vary from 113.9

cum/hr to 159.3 cum/hr while one grader (log no. 18 Q8; production rate 39.5

cum/hr) performs quite below the trend of the whole set (only production hours

considered for calculation).

Ignoring the performance statistic of grader 18 Q8, the average effective

production (production quantity/actual deployment hours) of the graders is found

to be 127.7 cum/hr with a standard deviation of 13.6 cum/hr.

So, the production rate of the graders is expected to lie in the range from

114.1 cum/hr to 141.3 cum/hr under the same conditions. The variation in the

production rate can be attributed to the variability in the job conditions, weather

condition and variability in the nature of the job.

The net production rate (production quantity / available hours) for the 10 graders

except 18 Q8 has a mean value of 51.3 cum/hr (with a standard deviation of 10.2

cum/hr) and ranges from 34.4 cum/hr to 67.6 cum/hr. The budgeted norm for the

grader production rate however varies from 80 cum/hr to 110 cum/hr depending

upon the material to be graded. The availability of the graders (all 11) over the

period of one year (2004 -2005) is found to vary from 87.2% to 98.6% with an

average of 95.9% and standard deviation of 3.1 %.

The high percentage availability (budgeted percentage availability of

graders is 92.07%) of the graders indicates that the graders did not face frequent

breakdowns and maintained well. The average breakdown hour of all the graders is

48.5 hr / year, which is quite impressive. Three (3) of the graders (19 Q8, 26 Q8,

28 Q8) did not undergo break down during the entire year. The average

maintenance hour of all the graders over the year is 64.5 hours / year.

The utility percentages of the graders (i.e. working hour / available hour), however,

are quite dismal and they vary from 34.5% to 56.5% over the period of the entire year

with an average of 44.6% (budgeted percentage utility of graders is 57.44%) and

standard deviation of 7%.

So, the utility of the graders is expected to vary from 37.6% to current

management planning procedures.



Cost break-up of Graders

Fig 7.2 Cost Break-up of graders

Observation on Graders Cost Break-up

Apart from some specific cases (24Q8, 26Q8), where expenses due to spares are

too high for repair of the equipments, the major cost component of graders

remains the HSD cost. It varies from 52% to 77% of the total cost. On average

over all the graders the HSD cost amounts to 59%, lubricants 5% & spares 20%

while the operators cost is about 11% of the total cost.

Graders 24Q8 and 26Q8 had undergone major repair and maintenance in this year

resulting in repair, spare and miscellaneous cost to rise to a quite high level and

also affected the production rate adversely.

7.3 Analysis of Roller

The roller being the equipment responsible for delivering the final product remains one of

the utmost important equipment in highway construction. Here the productivity along

with the cost components and seasonal variations has been analyzed.

7.3.1 Performance of the Rollers-

The extract of the performance of the rollers deployed in Surat-Dahisar project (refer

annexure A1, table A3) is shown in Table 7.2 and graphically represented in fig. 7.3

59%

11%

5%2%

20%

3%HSD

operation cost

lubrication

mainteneance

spares

miscellaneous



TABLE 7.2

Performance of different vibratory rollers at Surat-Dahisar site

Roller Log 45Q5 46Q5 52Q5 53Q5 54Q5 55Q5 56Q5 67Q5 68Q5 69Q5 70Q5 71Q5

Availablity

(%) 97.22 97.04 97.89 95.77 89.8 79.23 94.3 98.17 98.43 98.34 97.4 94.55

Utitlity (%) 19.84 35.72 30.1 33.43 35.82 13.04 41.06 41.1 42.12 43.86 38.2 32.6

Net

Production

(Cum/hr) 20.4 37.1 31.8 35.8 38.5 10.8 46.6 45.4 44.2 45.1 41 35.8

Effective

production

(cum/hr) 113.3 113.8 118.4 119 119.2 95 125 122.6 155.2 111.8 116 121.8

Observation on performances-

The net production rates (annual average) of 12 rollers vary from 10.8 cum/hr to

46.6 cum/hr while one roller (log no. 55Q5: production rate 10.8 cum/hr)

performs quite below the trend of whole set (only production hours considerred

for calculation).

The average effective production (production quantity/ actual deployment hours)

of the roller is found to be 126.5 cum/hr with a standard deviation

So, the production rate of the roller is expected to vary in the range of

119.1 cum/hr to 1339 cum/hr under the same conditions. The variation in the

production rate can be attributed to the variability in the job conditions, weather

conditions and the nature of the job.

The net production rate (production quantity/available hours) for the 12 rollers

except one roller (log no. 55Q5) has a mean value of 39.3 cum/hr (with a standard

deviation of 10.3 cum/hr) and ranges from 29 cum/hr to 49.6 cum/hr.

The utility of the rollers is expected to vary from 28.1% to 45.9% (budgeted

utility 68.60%) which is quite low with current management planning procedure.



Fig 7.3 Performance Comparison of Rollers

Roller Expenditures

The detailed cost componenets as we got from the Surat-Dahisar project (refer annexure

A1, Table A3) are figured out in fig. 7.4.

Fig 7.4 Cost Break-up of rollers

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

NET PRODUCTION

EFFECTIVE PODUCTION

45%

8%

30%

3%

3%

11%

HSD

operation cost

lubrication

mainteneance

spares

miscellaneous

X-Axis: Rollers

Y-Axis: Production cum/Hr



Observation on cost components

The major cost component of the roller remains the HSD cost, which varies from

31.4% to 77.36% of the total cost. On average over all the rollers, the HSD cost

amounts to 45%, lubricants 3%, and spares 11% while thw operators cost is about

3% of the total cost (in case of the roller log no.55Q5) the maintenance cost is

higher than the HSD cost of the roller.

In the case of roller log no. 55Q5, the equipment has undergone a major

maintenance work and hence it effects the net productivity of the roller (which is

10.8 cum/h) performing quite below the average of 12 rollers used at the site.

7.4 ANALYSIS OF EXCAVATOR

The hydraulic excavator being the most versatile equipment, it is used at many

activities as either driving as well as non-driving equipment. The use of excavator is

generally usually non driving kind except the task of excavation and hence the

productivity of it is not generally measure at all the time. The performance can be judge

safely from the ability and availability of equipment.

7.4.1 Performance of Excavators

The performance of excavator at the Surat-Dahisar road project site was observed

and cumulative performance for a period of one year is summarized in table 7.3.

Excavator under analysis (Surat-Dahisar road project)

Model: ROBEX 210-7

MAKE: Hitachi.


NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT AND RESEARCH Pune Campus 3

TABLE 7.3 Performance of different Excavators at Surat-dahisar site

Log No. 119H5 711H5 174H5

Shift Hours 610 5121 3645 Maintenance Hr. 15 85 67 Breakdown Hr. 46 348 0 Available Hr. 549 4688 3578 Working Hr. 187 2224 1664 Non-production Hr 187 2224 1664 Availablity (%) 90 91.54 98.16 Utitlity (%) 34.06 47.44 46.51

Cost component of the Excavator

The components of expenditure of he excavator deployed at Surat-Dahisar road project

(refer annexure A1,Table A5) are analyzed and results shown below in fig 7.5.

Fig 7.5 Cost Break-up Of Different Excavators

Observation on cost performance

From the performance log of excavator at Surat-Dahisar Road Project it is seen

that HSD constitute the major cost of the production

The spares and cost of the operation of the equipment has almost the same

percentage of the total cost of the production (Except in the case of excavator log

76%

3%

9%

9% 3%

HSD

Lubricant

Spares

Operation Cost

Maintenance Cost



no119H5,where the lubricant cost is exceptionally higher than of other two

excavator).

The average percentage of HSD to total cost of production is 76% operation cost

and spare have almost the same percentage at around9%.lubrication and

7.5 Analysis of Wheeled Excavator

Another form of popular excavator used in the construction is the wheeled

excavator, which generally has a lower capacity but better mobility at the sites and

quicker in excavation. The performance is shown in the table 7.4 below.

7.5.1 Performance of Wheeled Excavator

TABLE 7.4 Perforrmance of different Wheeled Excavators at Surat-dahisar site

Log No. 13 H4 16 H4 17 H4 18 H4 23 H4 Shift Hours 528 4645 4100 4867 290 Maintenance Hr. 36 90 55 77 5 Breakdown Hr. 0 216 0 445 0 Available Hr. 492 4339 4045 4345 285 Working Hr. 144 2422 1453 1850 140 Non-production 144 2422 1453 1850 140 Availablity (%) 93.18 93.41 98.66 89.27 98.28 Utitlity (%) 29.27 55.82 35.92 42.58 49.12

Observation on Performance

From the performance table of the five wheeled excavator used at site, it is

observed that on the average availability of excavator ranges from around 90% to

even as high as 99%, which shows a very good performance and high degree of

availability at site

The utility of the excavator vary from 30% to 55% which shows poor

performance.



7.6 ANALYSIS OF WHEELED LOADER

7.6.1 Performance of Wheeled Loader

The Equipments under analysis

Model: 2021; Make: Hindustan Motors

TABLE 7.5

Perforrmance of different Wheeled Loader at Surat-dahisar site

Log No. 36 H8 38 H8 42 H8 43 H8 55 H8

Shift Hours 3148 1282 918 2025 5231

Maintenance

Hr. 147 23 14 362 72

Breakdown Hr. 89 5 2 0 0

Available Hr. 2912 1254 902 1663 5159

Working Hr. 1214 685 414 832 2292

Non-

production 1214 685 414 832 2292

Availablity (%) 92.5 97.82 98.26 82.12 98.62

Utitlity (%) 41.69 54.63 45.9 50.03 44.43


• From the performance chart, it is seen that the availability of the wheel loaders is quite high

(normally more than 90%).

• The utility of the loaders vary from 45% to 55%, which is a very good figure compared to

the other equipments and considering that It is used mainly as a non driving one.



Cost Component of Wheeled Loader

Fig 7.6 Cost Break-Up of Different Loaders

Observation on Cost of Performances

• From the cost of performance data of five-wheeled loader at Surat-Dahisar Site, the major

components of the cost of performance is HSD with the range of 65.67% to 81.75% and

average of 71.73%.

• The operation cost of the wheeled loader is the next major contribution of cost of

performance with an average of 10.40% with a range from 8.14% to 12.30%.

• The other costs include lubricant (avg. 4.05%), spares (avg. 6.82%) and maintenance cost

(avg. 3.43%).

7.7 ANALYSIS OF PAVER

The performance and cost components of the paver is shown below in the table 7.6 and

subsequent figure.

7.7.1 Performance of Pavers

The Equipments under analysis:

Modal: Super 1800; Make: Vogele

72%

4%

7%

10%4% 3%

HSD

Lubricant

Spares

Operation Cost

Maintenance Cost

Miscellaneous



TABLE 7.6 Performance of different Pavers at Surat-dahisar

site

Log No. 7Q9 8Q9

Shift Hours 489 1753

Maintenance Hr. 7 21

Breakdown Hr. 206 0

Available Hr. 276 1732

Working Hr. 90 621

Production Hr. 55 458

Non-production Hr. 36 163

Production Qty. 5083 58417

Availablity (%) 56.44 98.8

Utitlity (%) 32.61 35.85


• From the performance data of the two pavers at the Surat-Dahisar site, it is observed

that one paver (log no. 7 Q9) has a breakdown hr of 206 hrs as it undergoes a major

overhaul of its chassis.

• It is also reflected on the availability and utility percentage of the two pavers. That

paver (log no. 7 Q9) has availability and utility percentage of 56.44% and 32.41%

compared to the other one (log no. 8 Q9), which has availability and utility of

98.80% and 35.85%.



Paver Expenditures

The detailed break-up of the cost components of paver is shown in fig 7.7.

Cost Component of Pavers


• Under the normal working condition, HSD is the major part in the cost of performance of

pavers. It constitutes around 58% of the total cost of the performance. Operation and

maintenance cost takes about 20% and 13% normally of the total cost of the performance.

• In case of breakdown, as in the case of Paver Log no. 7 Q9, major spares overhaul is the

main cost component. In this particular case, it is about 85% of the total cost of

performance

Fig 7.7 Cost Components of Pavers


• Under the normal working condition HSD, is the major part in the cost of performance of

pavers. It constitutes around 58% of total cost of performance.

• In case of break-down as in the case of paver log no 7Q9, major spares overhaul is the main

cost component in this particular case it is about 85% of the cost of performance.

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

120%

7 Q9 8 Q9

HSD

Maintenance Cost

Operation Cost

Lubricant

Major Overhaul Spares

X-Axis: Pavers

Y-Axis: Cost



7.8 ANALYSIS OF SLIPFORM PAVER

Slipform paver is the driving equipment in the PQC layer of rigid pavement and the performance of

the whole activity depends on the performance of it.

7.8.1 Performance of Slipform Pavers

Observation on Performances

The net production rate (Production Qtty. / Working hr.) shows a seasonal variation of

ranging from 37.32 cum/hr. to 99.45 cum./hr. with a mean of 58.52 cum/hr.

The production rate decreased in the monsoon from July to October with a production rate

of around 40 cum/hr., which then rises to reach the maximum production rate of around

99.45 cum/hr. in the month of January.

7.9 ANALYSIS OF BATCHING PLANT

Batching Plants do the work of producing the raw material for concreting; the principle

function is to initiate the supply chain of the process of concreting. For a continuous supply

chain to maintain, the quick and uninterrupted processing of the plant ia necessary.

7.9.1 Time Cycle of Batching Plant

Batching Plant under analysis

Make/Type of plant: Simen (SPA ITALIA); Plant Capacity: 90 cum/hr.

Observations on Time Cycle Study of Batching Plant Production

• The cycle time of the Batching plant (producing 9 cum/cycle) mainly ranges from 6

min/cycle to 9 min/cycle with an average cycle time over a day around 8 min. The cycle

time can increase abruptly up to around 20 min. if proper logistic arrangement is not

planned.

• The time gap between consecutive cycles (producing 9 cum/cycle) mainly ranges from 5

min to 12 min with an average time gap between cycles over a day around 8 min. The time

gaps increase abruptly up to even around 30 min due to lack of proper logistic arrangement.



7.9.2 Performance of Batching Plant

Make of plant: Stetter CP30 Plant Capacity: 30 cum/hr

Observation on Cost Breakup of Manpower for Production

TABLE 7.7

Cumulative performance of

Batching Plant

Shift Hr. 3528

Maintenance Hr. 345

Breakdown hr. 0

Available Hr. 3183

Working Hr. 1081.4

Idle Hr. 2101.6

Total Quantity (MT) 23227.5

Production rate

(MT/hr) 21.48

From the table of the cumulative performance of the batching plant for the

season, it is observed that the plant is slightly running at a low productivity rate

of 21.24 MT/Hr. than its budgeted capacity of 25 MT/Hr.

7.9.3 Cost Analysis of Batching Plant

Fig 7.8 Manpower Cost Break-up of Batching Plant Production

35%

47%

18%Officer

High Skilled

Semi Skilled



Observation on cost break-up of Manpower for production

It is observed from the cost breakdown that High skilled manpower constitute the largest

percentage of 47%. The other components of the manpower breakup are officer 35% and

Semi-skilled components 18%.

Fig 7.9 Cost Break-Up of Batching Plant Production

Observation on Cost breakup of Operation and Maintenance for Production

From the cost break-up of production, it is evident that the energy constitutes a major

percentage of the total cost (81%).

The aggregate feeding cost constitutes the next major cost in the production with an

annual average percentage of 13%. The cost of production includes spare (4%), stores

(2%) and lubricant (0.1%)

7.10 ANALYSIS OF HOT MIX PLANT

The analysis of the data (refer Table A16 of Annexure A1) collected from the Surat-Dahisar

Project Site is shown in the following Table 7.8 and the subsequent figures.

7.10.1 Performance of Hot Mix Plant

Hot Mix Plant Under Analysis:

Make/Type of Plant: Parker/T2300/Ad

Plant capacity: 200 TPH

Budgeted Capacity: 171.60 TPH

Number of Shifts/Month: 38

81%

4%2%0%

13%Energy Cost

Spares

Stores

Lubricant

Aggregate Feeding Cost



TABLE 7.8

Cumulative Performance of

Hot Mix Plant at Surat-

Dahisar Site

Shift Hr. 450

Maintenance Hr. 22

Breakdown hr. 7

Available Hr. 421

Working Hr. 223.8

Idle Hr. 197.2


Production rate

(MT/hr) 79

Observation on Performance of Hot Mix Plant

• It is observed from the cumulative performance of the Hot mix Plant that the actual

production rate of the hot mix plant of 79 TPH is quite lower (46%) than the budgeted

norm of 171.60 TPH.

7.10.2 Cost Analysis of Hot Mix Plant

Fig 7.10 Cost Break-up of Manpower for Production

Observation on Cost Break-Up of Manpower for Production

• From the cost break-up analyse of Manpower for production, it is observed that cost of Officer

has the largest percentage contribution of 41%.

• High Skilled percentage of manpower cost is about 17% of the total cost of the production.

44%

17%

11%

16%

12%Officer

High Skilled

Skilled

Semi Skilled

Unskilled



• The other cost components of the manpower cost are skilled (11 %), semiskilled (16%), and

unskilled (12%).

Fig 7.11 Cost Break-up of 0& M for Production of Hot Mix Plant

Observation on Cost Break-Up of 0& M for Production

• From the cost break-up of O&M for production, it is observed that energy cost is the

largest contribution with a percentage of 75% to the total cost of operation and

maintenance for production.

• Lubricant cost constitutes 14% and spares have a share of 8% of the Operation and

maintenance cost.

• The other costs include aggregate feeding cost (2%) and store cost (1 %).

7.11 ANALYSIS OF WET MIX PLANT

The analysis of the data (refer Table A17 of Annexure A1) collected from the Surat-

Dahisar Project Site is shown in the following Table 7.9 and the subsequent figures.

7.11.1 Performance of Wet Mix Plant

Wet Mix Plant under analysis

Make/Type of Plant: Gujarat/Apollo/WM-200

Plant capacity: 200 TPH; Budgeted Capacity: 151.20 TPH

14%

8%

1%

0%

75%

2%

Energy Cost Spares Stores Cost Lubricant HSD Cost Aggregate Feeding Cost



TABLE 7.9

Cumulative Performance of

Wet Mix Plant at Surat-

Dahisar Site

Shift Hr. 1976

Maintenance Hr. 120

Breakdown hr. 2

Available Hr. 854

Working Hr. 606.02

Idle Hr. 566.51


Production rate

(MT/hr) 130.87

7.11.2 Cost Analysis of Wet Mix Plant

Fig 7.12 Cost Break-up of Manpower for Production of Wet Mix Plant

Observations on Cost Break-Up of Manpower for Production

• The cost break-up of manpower for production indicates equal contribution of Unskilled and

Officers' cost at around 33%.

• The cost components of semi-skilled and high skilled manpower are 19% and 15% of the total

cost respectively.

33%

15%19%

33%

Officer High Skilled Semi Skilled Unskilled



Fig 7.13 Cost Break-Up of O&M Production

Observation on Cost Break-Up of O & M for Production

The major components of cost O & M for production are energy cost with 49% and

aggregate feeding cost with 45% contribution respectively.

The other cost of O & M for production include spare (3%), Stores cost (2%) and lubricant

cost (1%).

7.12 ANALYSIS OF CRUSHER

The analysis of the data (refer Table A19 of Annexure A1) collected from the Surat-Dahisar Road

Project site..

7.12.1 Analysis of Working Shift Hour

Observation on Working (Shift) Hrs of Crushers

• In the month of April, the average working hrs of all type of crushers in day shift is 5.38 hrs

and in the month of May, the average working hrs, in day shift goes as low as 3.89 hrs per

shift. This low performance can be attributed to high wear and tear, maintenance and adverse

climatic conditions at the project site.

49%

3%2%0%1%

45%

Energy Cost Spares Stores Cost

Workshop Expenses Lubricant Aggregate Feeding Cost



• The average working hrs for all toe crushers during night shift goes as high as 7.53 hrs in toe

month of April and 7.18 hrs in toe month of May. This high performance can be achieved due

to presence of relatively better climatic condition during night

Fig 7.14 Production Break-up (Day, April) Fig 7.15 Production Break-up (Night, April)

Fig 7.16 Production Break-up (Day Shift, May) Fig 7.17 Production Break-up (Night Shift, May)

Observations on Production Break-Up

• From the total aggregate fed in the crusher, around 18- 20% of the total gravimetric quantity

is wasted as the raw boulders contain high amount of vegetation, soil and other deleterious

material, which is generally washed away before feeding into the main crusher.

• Out the remaining boulder fed into the crushers, around 11%-13% comes out as GSB

material, 24%-28% as 20mm down aggregate, 20%-21% as 10mm down aggregate, 28%-

34% as crushed sand (4.75 mm down), while 9%-15% comes out as silt (which is wasted).

12%

24%

21%

28%

15%

GSB Prod. 20 mm

10 mm 4.75 crushed sand

Silt

13%

24%

21%

27%

15%

GSB Prod. 20 mm

10 mm 4.75 Cushed Sand

Silt

11%

26%

20%

34%

9%

GSB Prod. 20 mm

10 mm 4.75 Crushed Sand

Silt

12%

28%

21%

29%

10%

GSB Prod. 20 mm

10 mm 4.75 Crushed Sand

Silt



7.12.2 Production of Crusher Plants

Observation on Working (Shift) Hrs of Crushers

The production hours of the crushers per month varies in the range from 155 hrs

to 472 hrs with a mean of around 333 hrs (i.e. around 11 hrs per day). This

production hrs is varied throughout the year according to the requirement of

production and meeting the supply of raw material (boulders). Generally, the

production rate is low in the monsoon months (August and September) and quite

high in the winter season.

The production rate of the crusher plant as a whole varies from 135 TPH to 173 TPH with a mean

of around 150 TPH, which shows a very consistent production rate. The manufacture rated capacity

of the plant is 200 TPH. This indicates an average performance efficiency of around 75% and it can

go up to 85%, if properly managed.

7.12.3 Cost Analysis of Crusher

Fig 7.18 Cost Break-up of Crusher Expenditure

Observations on Cost of Production

• From the break-up of the cost of production, it is very clear that the bulk of the expenses

of crusher can be attributed to the energy and lubricants (around50%). The rest of the

cost component is shared by manpower and operating cost (around 40%) and repair and

maintenance (10%).

37%

52%

11%

Manpower Energy+Lub Repair & maintenance



CHAPTER VIII

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

8.1 INDUSTRY PRACTICES

The visits to different highway project sites and study of the available database in the

project sites reveal that the Construction Companies in India have either yet realised the

necessity of detailed study of their own resources nor have developed their accounting

system for research and development purposes as evident from the lack of useful and

relevant data from the site.

The present industry practice in the construction business in India is still carrying the

attitude of 'as and when required' resource management. Lack of professionalism leading

to lack of detailed and meticulous planning and irrational decision making as per as the

site management is concerned leads to underutilisation of the resources to a great extent.

Till now, project planning is limited to only 'planning and scheduling the activities with

time', but resource 'mobilisation and usage' planning according to their capacity and

availability, ahead of time - in the planning stage, is still nobody's concern in the

industry.

The problem of not maintaining proper database is partially attributed to temporary

and ephemeral nature of the job, which brings unwillingness to the site management to

keep proper and detailed record and database for further analysis. In the process, the

company looses its opportunity to examine its own strengths and weaknesses. This

attitude of lack of concern about self-improvement among the big companies has further

been enhanced due to absence of too many equally competitive competitors.

In the present globalized business scenario, the Indian construction companies have

also started facing stiff competition from the foreign competitors.

In this tight rope situation, even the big companies from India have to assess their own

strength and weakness according to the situation. In order to assess their own capabilities,

the companies should keep a track on their own productivity status. The first step for

analysing their resource productivity should ideally be to keep and maintain real time

record and build a database from the on-going projects.



Then the companies should analyse those data, find out the productivity of the resources,

compared them with expected/budgeted norms and take improvement initiatives as

applicable to the respective companies.

The companies should not only concentrate on activity oriented planning, but also at

the same time should plan the mobilization and usage of the resources well before the

execution work is started.

8.2 RESOURCE PRODUCTIVITY

Equipments deployed in the highway project sites are generally found to be of two

categories, viz., driving and non-driving. The productivity of the driving equipments

(such as grader, roller, paver etc.) could only be quantified as they give the final product,

whereas the productivity of the non-driving / associative equipments could not be figured

out as they are not directly connected with the production of end product.

The average production rates of the earthmoving equipments were found to be very

low. The average production rate of the graders in a site is found to be around 51 cum/hr

and that of the rollers is 36 cum/hr, if available hours are considered as total time frame

of production, but is goes up to 127 cum/hr and 116 cum/hr when only production hours

are considered as total time frame, whereas the budgeted production norm of the

earthmoving equipments varies from 90 cum/hr to 110 cum/hr depending upon the soil

and working conditions. The production rate of the paver, in the same way, is found to be

only 33 cum/hr, if available hour is considered as the time frame but it goes up to 94

cum/hr if only the production hours are considered.

The gap of such performance difference becomes obvious while studying the

availability and utility aspects of the equipments. The availability of the equipments, in

general, show a very high percentage for almost all the equipments (which ranges from

90% to 98%), which indicates that the equipment are generally kept well organised,

properly maintained and within the site. But the surprisingly low trends of the utilities

(ranging from 35% to 45%) of all equipments (both driving and non-driving) indicate that

the equipments are not utilized according to a chalked out plan and are used haphazardly,

on an "as and when required" basis. This appalling statistics of low utility in spite of the



high availability boils down to the fact that even though the equipments are kept well

maintained, they are not properly mobilized and used in the site.

The total cost of the equipments is mostly proportional to the energy cost (though it

varies from equipment to equipment) and due to high diesel price at present; it takes the

biggest share (on an average 60% to 70%) of the total expenditure.

The seasonal variation clearly reveals lowering of productivity level of all the

equipments during monsoon and shaping the peak during the winter season. The

productivity trend takes another stumble during the closure of the financial years. This

fluctuation in production trend is usually attributed to the budgetary constraints.

Apart from different technical factors affecting the productivity, the logistical

arrangement at the sites plays a major role in the production rate. For major equipments,

like Slipform paver, batching plant, hot mix plant etc., the logistics is the key factor for

determining the productivity.

In nutshell, the main reason behind the apparently low productivity of the equipments is

found to be low utility rate. A proper resource planning (mobilisation and usage) can

increase the utility of the equipments in site and can reduce the delay and cost increment

due to frequent relocation from one location to another. This can increase the utility and

hence the productivity of the equipments. Due to the soaring price of fuel and power, the

share of energy cost has become a major and alarming cost component of the equipments.

So, while bidding for a contract, special care should be taken to monitor the price trend of

the fuel in the local as well as in the international market and quote accordingly. As the

total production quantity during the monsoon season drops down heavily, some of the

major equipments can be demobilised or major overhaul and maintenance can be carried

out during this period. For the complicated jobs like concrete or bituminous paving where

lots of plants and equipments are involved and the productivity of the activities is directly

linked with a proper sequence and continuity of flow of operations, highest priority

should be given to the proper logistics arrangements and that should be chalked out well

before the actual operation is started. In these cases, proper working of the plants-hauler-

equipment working chain with efficient material and equipment supply chain can lead to

better result.



The efficiency level of the major plants were found to vary between 60% to 70% (hot

mix plant = 60%, batching plant = 70%) while that of crusher was 75% (budgetary norm

for all plants ~ 80%), which indicates a lower efficiency level. The average productive

shift hours for crushers at night shift was found to be quite higher than that in the day

shift in the summer season. This can be attributed to the hostile and unfavourable weather

condition at daytime during summer. The same fact is expected to be revealed in case of

other machineries also, if production is carried out in night shift for other activities too.

For plants, the upward trend of productivity and shift hours in the nighttime during

summer season recommends shifting of activities to nighttime for more productive

output.

In Highway Projects, most of the activities now-a-days are equipment oriented and

require only very meagre amount of participation from the unskilled and semi-skilled

labourers. Only high skilled manpower and operators of the equipments are required to

execute the job and the productivity of the operators can be determined from the

productivity of the respective equipments. In highway projects, most of the activities are

done "team-wise" and hence productivity of individual labourers cannot be determined

and the team's productivity is again dependent on the productivity of the driving

equipments.

It was also found during the research work that the companies do not record and

maintain any statistics of operators' productivity and extend of involvement in the work.

Most of the labour oriented works in highway projects are generally subcontracted to

local sub-contractors as PRW items leading to lack of necessity and interest in

maintaining a proper database of the labour productivity of big companies.

In order to determine the labour productivity, especially the operators and skilled

labourers, the companies should concentrate more on keeping the records and analysing

the database from time to time to determine actual productivity.



8.3 FUTURE SCOPE OF RESEARCH

• A detailed work method and time motion study on each of the equipments used in

the each type of activities in different site and environmental conditions.

• The productivity studies of the non-driving resources, so that the planning and

allocation of the non-driving resources can be done optimally and economically.

• A detailed study on the material supply chain and work chain management of the

plant - hauler - equipment link and the logistic arrangement at site for major activities

(like concrete paving) where a large number of resources are involved and time is the

essence of the productivity.

• Study of effect of training, experience, age and ergonomics on the operator's

performance and productivity.



BIBLIOGRAPHY



BOOKS

1. Chitkara, K K, “Construction Project Management”, Tata McGraw Hill, New

Delhi, 2004.

2. Barnes Ralph M., “Motion and Time Study”, New York, John Willey and Sons

Inc., 1961.

3. Peurifoy Robert L, Schexnayder C. J., “Construction Planning, Equipment and

Methodology”, Tata McGraw Hill, New Delhi, 2003.

4. Nunnaly S.W, “Construction Methods and Management”, Pearson Prentice Hall,

New Jersey, 2004.

5. Horner, Malcolm. Duff, Roy. MORE for LESS: A Contractor’s Guide to

Improving Productivity in Construction.

6. Prokopenda, Joseph.”Productivity Management- A Practical Handbook”, ILO,

Geneva,1992.

7. Abramson, Robert, Halset, Walter, ”Planning for Improved Enterprise

Performance- A guide for Managers and Consultants”, ILO, Geneva, 1979.

8. Drewin, F J, “Construction Productivity”, Elsevier Science, New York, 1982.

9. McCullough, David, “The Path Between the Seas”, Simon and Schuster, 1977.

10. Julian E. and Daniel Quinn Mills, “The Construction Industry”, Lexington

Books,1979.

JOURNALS

1. Indian Highway.

2. Indian Infrastructure- Road Sector.

3. Civil Engineering Construction Review.

4. Construction World.



PREVIOUS RESEARCH WORK

1. Mitra, Krishnanendu, “Modelling for Equipment Planning in Highway Projects”,

NICMAR, Pune, 1996.

2. Rao Ramkoteshwar k, “Productivity of Resource in Construction of L&T (ECC)

Rourkela- Sambalpur Highway”, NICMAR, Pune, 1998.

3. Kulkarni Nikhil, “Selection and Planning of Equipment for Highway

Construction”, NICMAR, Pune, 2002.

4. Haskell, Preston H. Construction Industry Productivity: Its History and Future

Direction, December, 2004.

5. Lipsey Richard G., Carlaw kenneth, “What does total productivity measure? ”,

Internation Productivity Monitor, Number One, Fall 2000.

WEB LINKS

http://www.ogrady.on.ca/Downloads/Papers/Productivity%20in%20the%20Constructio

n%20Industry.pdf

http://www.sde-us.com/docs/emailblasts/JetBlue/LostLabor.pdf http://www.beknowledge.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/341.pdf

http://www.ogrady.on.ca/Downloads/Papers/Productivity%20in%20the%20Construction%20Industry.pdf

http://www.ogrady.on.ca/Downloads/Papers/Productivity%20in%20the%20Construction%20Industry.pdf

http://www.sde-us.com/docs/emailblasts/JetBlue/LostLabor.pdf

http://www.beknowledge.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/341.pdf



ANNEXURE

76-107

Documents

resource productivity

productivity of grader

particular driving resource

role of driving resource

resources nondriving

nondriving resources

highway construction

q8 production rate