The Sail BCA Awards Write-Up-Final

The Sail @ Marina Bay

BCA DESIGN AND ENGINEERING SAFETY EXCELLENCE AWARDS 2009

Page 2

1.0 SYNOPSIS

Designed to resemble a sail sculpture created by the hands of nature, The Sail @ Marina Bay

is a global waterfront landmark on Singapore’s skyline. Soaring 245 meters above sea level

at the highest point, The Sail is the first residential development in the New Downtown and

is Singapore’s tallest, and amongst the worlds top ten tallest, residential developments.

Located at Marina Bay, the two towers stand at 70 storeys (Tower 1) and 63 storeys (Tower 2)

with 1,111 units which offer panoramic views of the sea as well as seamless connectivity

with direct underground access to the Raffles Place MRT station. The total site area is

9091m2 with a permissible GFA of 118,182m

2. Construction began in 2005 and the project

has obtained TOP in 2008 (except for an underground pedestrian link to the neighboring site).

There were several major challenges that the project team had to overcome for the successful

completion of the project. These included developing a safe, rigid, buildable and functional

structural system for the unique shape and slenderness of the towers. With aspects ratios

(height to base width) exceeding 10, the two towers of The Sail @ Marina Bay are among

the most slender skyscrapers in the world. For such slender structures, in addition to

conventional considerations of strength and serviceability, dynamic structural behavior and

occupant comfort criterions need to be evaluated and addressed. The presence of existing

twin Mass Rapid Transit (MRT) subway tunnels at an angle of approximately 30 degrees

through the southern portion of the site also presented challenges for the massing, foundation

and substructure works. Added to this was the complexity posed by difficult sub-soil

conditions which included extremely soft and deep layers of consolidating marine clay,

underlain by variable strength bouldery clay.



Page 3

The above challenges were met with several innovative and safe engineering solutions as

described in the subsequent parts of this report. The design philosophy for the project

was based on taking a proactive approach to safety, i.e., taking responsibility for safety

at the design stage. This approach allows safety and health hazards to be mitigated

before a project reaches the physical construction site by considering not only the safe

end-use but also safe constructability.

2.0 STRUCTURAL DESIGN PROCESSES AND SOLUTIONS EMPHASIZING SAFETY

2.1 Innovative Features in Structural System and Materials to Address Project

Specific Challenges and Risks.

2.1.1 Structural System for one of the World’s Most Slender Skyscrapers

and elegant structural solution was adopted to meet the challenges as detailed below.

Through collaboration with the architects, the residential units were arranged on either side

of a central corridor across the transverse (shorter) building axis. This opened up the

possibility to implement several long shear walls to run across the full depth of the floor plate

with stiff coupling beams over the central corridor. These generally parallel shear walls were

placed as dividing walls between residential units.

Resistance to lateral loads under wind and earthquake is provided by a combination of these

shear walls coupled with elevator shaft / stair case walls and perimeter moment-frame-tubes

with closely spaced columns.

Both Tower 1 and Tower 2, rising 245m and 219m,

respectively, from Level 1, are not only tall but are

also extremely slender with an aspect ratio of 10.9

for Tower 1 and 10.2 for Tower 2. The analysis and

design of such tall and slender towers, classified as

dynamic structures, requires detailed and careful

considerations of both static and dynamic behavior

to ensure that the building responses are within

acceptable limits of drift and occupants’ comfort. In

addition, second order (P-Delta) effects are highly

magnified due to slenderness and needs careful

attention.

The challenge was to develop a structural system

which provides the necessary rigidity and

robustness for such slender and dynamic structures

without compromising functionality. An innovative



Page 4

Typical floor framing for both towers comprises composite floor slabs consisting of pre-cast

pre-stressed concrete slabs and pre-cast internal beams with in-situ concrete topping. The

floor slabs provide horizontal diaphragm action to transfer lateral loads from floors to the

lateral-load-resisting elements.

Tower 1 (Aspect Ratio: 10.9)

Transverse

Axis



Page 5

Tower 2 (Aspect Ratio: 10.2)

The innovative framing system’s effectiveness can best be judged through structural

performance indicators, as tabulated below:

Structural Performance

Indicators

T1 T2 Comparison with Code/Literature

Recommendations

Fundamental Period

(eigen-value analysis)

6.4 secs 5.6 secs Around 25% to 30% stiffer than

comparable buildings with similar

heights and mass (ASCE 7-05)

Horizontal Building

Acceleration

14.1 milli-g 10.3 milli-g Around 15 to 20 milli-g

(Melbourne’s Criteria)

Building Drift height / 755 height / 1060 height /500

2.1.2 Incorporation of Seismic Design for the First Time in Singapore

Due to the unique shape, height and slenderness of the towers it was decided by the

developers and consultants team to introduce additional safety features in the design. Instead

of any arbitrary enhancement of design loads, the consensus opinion was to implement

seismic design for the development.

Transverse

Axis



Page 6

The seismic design adopted for the project

incorporates design to the requirements of the

Uniform Building Code (UBC-97, USA). A

‘moderate’ seismic zone (Zone 2A – with a

ground acceleration level of 0.15g) was

selected for seismic design of the towers in

recognition of Singapore’s distance from the

Indo-Australian tectonic plates to the

southwest and its exposure to secondary

earthquake effects.

Designing for seismic forces provides a degree of robustness and strength far exceeding the

requirements for other code specified lateral loads such as wind and notional loads. In

addition to higher lateral forces, seismic design includes designing the buildings for ductility

and toughness, i.e., the ability of the structure to sustain excursions in the non-linear range of

response without critical decrease of strength. Key seismic design features include:

� Design for up to 60% higher lateral forces than

corresponding from wind and notional loads.

� Incorporation of Dynamic Structural Analysis

which provides for more accurate reflection of

building response based on mode shapes.

� Ends of Shear Walls designed and detailed with

special Boundary Elements to resist repeated

high magnitude stresses without loss of strength.

� Coupling Beams designed and detailed with

diagonally oriented reinforcement to provide

enhanced stiffness and energy dissipation.

� Special design and detailing for Frame

Members for added ductility to prevent risks of

abrupt shear failure during earthquakes.

The Sail is the first project in Singapore to adopt seismic design as part of the structural

design philosophy. While not a mandatory requirement in Singapore, the adoption of

seismic design significantly improves safety and structural performance of the tall and

slender towers.

2.1.3 Usage of Grade 80 Concrete for the First Time for a Building in Singapore

The Sail is the first building project in Singapore wherein high strength Grade 80 concrete

has been utilized. The Grade 80 concrete was utilized for the perimeter columns, the sizes of

Shear Wall

Boundary

Elements

Wall Coupling

Beams

Frame Members



Page 7

which were a major design challenge since they affected internal layout, usable floor area

and views to the bay. The columns were therefore desired to be as small as possible.

However, the sized needed to be adequate for resisting large seismic forces and minimizing

differential shortening between vertical members. To overcome this challenge, Grade 80

concrete was decided to be used. This resulted in columns one third smaller in size

compared to the size that would have been required for conventional Grade 60 concrete.

Silica fume was used in the mix design as a partial replacement for cement in order to reduce

the heat of hydration as well as to improve the strength of the concrete. A stringent quality

control regime was implemented for the production of high strength concrete to achieve the

desired concrete strength consistently.

While only limited use of Grade 80 concrete was allowed for project and for seismic

design purposes only, the pioneering use of high strength concrete in buildings for the

first time in Singapore has paved the way for more projects to benefit in future [e.g.,

smaller member sizes, more usable space, increase of construction speed (due to lesser

reinforcement demand), less dead weight, etc.]. BCA has since allowed controlled use of

high strength concrete following the success achieved in The Sail @ Marina Bay.



Page 8

2.1.4 Multi-Cellular Diaphragm Wall Retention System used for the First Time for a

Building in Singapore:

The construction of the 9m deep basement under T1 for the Underground Pedestrian

Network (UPN) posed unique challenges due to the difficult ground conditions, i.e.,

reclaimed land with 6m to 8m of fill underlain by 25m of very soft marine clay. The close

proximity to the MRT tunnels and a tight construction programme required a solution that

avoided lateral struts and ground improvement works (e.g., JGP, DCM, etc).

A conventional retention system such as a rectangular

shaped and multi-level strutted Diaphragm Wall or

CBP Wall system, with DCM / JGP layers below

formation level, would have caused high lateral ground

movements. This was considered a major safety risk

given the close proximity of the site to the MRT tunnels

and the adjoining ongoing construction works for the

underground Combined Services Tunnel (CST).

These challenges were addressed through an innovative

design solution. This involved symmetrically arranged

32m diameter triple cellular, ‘Peanut’, diaphragm walls

which allowed excavation to be carried out quicker, without multi-level struts and ground

improvement works thereby leading to a safer, more constructible and highly efficient

retention system.

The entire design of the basement and foundation system was based on the key

considerations of construction efficiency and safety. The adoption of the ‘Peanut’

system saved around three months of excavation and basement construction time. The

enhanced safety of the system was manifested in the minimal lateral movement of the

‘Peanut’ which was around 10mm, compared to around 50mm that would have

resulted from a conventional strutted retention system. The success of the adopted

system was also reflected in the fact that no disruptions to MRT operations resulted

from the basement excavation and construction of these mega towers just next door to

the MRT tunnels.



Page 9

2.2 Design Solutions for Safe Construction, Buildability and Economy

2.2.1 Superstructure Framing System

The superstructure framing system adopted not only addressed the critical structural

challenges related to strength and stiffness demands for seismic design but also allowed safe

and buildable construction.

The adoption of a systematic and repetitive structural framing system with modular sizes

allowed for safe, rapid and economical construction. Thicknesses and sizes for all walls,

columns, beams and slabs were standardized with variations occurring with height over

several zones. This allowed the contractor to adopt modular customized formwork for safe

and buildable construction and achieve a floor-to-floor cycle time of only 5 days compared

with industry standards of 7 to 10 days per floor.

2.2.2 Use of Hybrid Pre-Cast and In-Situ Construction

The ultimate objective of using pre-cast structural components is to make the construction

process practical. However, pre-cast concrete is not the only way to enhance productivity,

buildability and quality. The key issue is project specific feasibility.

Hybrid construction, i.e., a combination of pre-cast and in-situ elements can provide the right

combination in which the speed and quality of precast is combined with the economy and

robustness of in-situ to give high-quality structures constructed quickly and economically.



Page 10

For The Sail @ Marina Bay, the optimum hybrid

construction comprises in-situ vertical elements

and perimeter-tube-frame-beams while the floor

slabs and internal floor beams are composite pre-

cast with in-situ topping. The choice of in-situ and

pre-cast components was essentially dictated by

weight and site logistic considerations. The

adoption of semi pre-cast slabs and internal beams

meant that the majority of the floor plate was free

of conventional formwork, utilizing less wet

concrete, less on-site labor and less loose

reinforcement. This allowed a accelerated speed

of construction, as reflected in the 5 day floor

cycle time while achieving a structural

CONQUAS score of 99.5 - one of the highest

ever score achieved.

2.2.3 Foundation System

The critical considerations for the design of the foundation system involved the close

proximity of the MRT tunnels, heavy column and wall loads from the towers and soft ground

conditions. To safeguard the safety and operation of the MRT tunnels, stringent ground

movement requirements had to be met, with maximum overall resultant movements for the

MRT tunnels not exceeding 15mm. The foundation piles for the towers and the podium were

designed to minimize total and differential vertical ground movement to prevent vertical

down-drag of the MRT tunnels. The tower foundation system generally comprises large

diameter bored piles under Tower 2 and barrettes under Tower 1 (due to heavier loads). A

thick pile raft under each tower ties the foundation elements together and ensures that

differential settlements between individual shear walls and columns are kept to a minimum.

The location of barrettes and bored piles were systematically arranged through numerous

simulation runs to ensure that stress levels and settlements were within acceptable limits. All

the foundation elements are designed to carry working loads through friction only with an

appropriate safety factor. This was critical to limit the overall settlement of the towers. Base

resistance of the piles was considered for overload conditions and prevention of block shear

failure. TAM base grouting was adopted for the bases of all the barrettes and bored piles to

mitigate ‘soft toe’ concerns and increase safety.

The final building settlement for both Towers at the end of construction was less than

10mm which is testament to the exceptional performance of the foundation system. The

adopted design approach ensured not only the safety of the foundation system but also

mitigated total and differential building settlement which is critical to the performance

of such tall and slender towers.



Page 11

2.2.2 Construction over MRT Tunnels

While the towers were located away from the MRT tunnels, there was no option but to locate

the podium over the MRT tunnels. The column grids and framing of the podium, which

includes retail units on the ground floor, car parks on the upper floors and an environmental

deck on the roof, are systematically arranged to maximize efficiency of usage. The columns

over the MRT tunnels are then transferred through deep and rigid post-tensioned (PT) girders

at ground level spaced at regular intervals to span across the tunnels. The transfer system was

devised with safety of both the MRT operations and construction as prime considerations.

2.3 Collaboration between Project Team

Throughout the entire design and construction process, close collaboration was maintained

between the project team. Some examples of such collaboration are detailed below.

2.3.1 Massing of the Towers

The presence of the MRT tunnels at the south

boundary of the site presented a unique challenge to

locate the tall residential towers. The massing of the

development was therefore devised through close

collaboration with the Architect keeping safety and

buildability as prime considerations within the

constrained site conditions. The low rise podium was

located above the MRT tunnels while the two high

rise towers were positioned away from the tunnels.

This allowed the heavy tower loads and their

associated foundation system to be as far away from

the MRT tunnels as possible thereby minimizing the

possibility of down-drag forces and tilt of the MRT

tunnels.

Rigid PT Transfer Girders



Page 12

Basement construction was avoided as much as possible except for the mandatory

Underground Pedestrian Network (UPN) under Tower 1 linking the development to Raffles

Place MRT station. Given the extremely poor sub-soil condition of the reclaimed land

site, the minimization of basement construction greatly reduced construction risks and

ground and tunnels movements associated with excavation in such soil conditions.

2.3.2 Arrangement of Shear Walls

The close collaboration between the architect and structural engineer enabled the successful

adoption of a structural system to address the challenges posed by the building height and

slenderness without compromising functionality of design. This collaborative effort allowed

the residential units to be planned on either side of a central corridor which addressed

structural needs for long shear walls along the transverse axis of the towers without

compromising the unhindered functionality of space and future flexibility essential for a

luxury residential development.

2.3.3 Specification of Non-Structural Materials

Since minimizing weight of the towers was a key issue for seismic design, the architect

responded to the structural needs by adopting dry walls, in lieu of brick / block walls, for the

majority of the internal non-structural partition walls. This, along with the adoption of glass

external cladding, greatly assisted in making the structural framing more efficient with

reduction in individual column and wall sizes / thicknesses of the order of 5% to 10%. The

substitution of labor intensive brick / block works with simpler and more buildable dry wall

and curtain wall construction also enhanced safety during construction.

2.3.4 Adoption of Grade 80 Concrete

The understandable need of the architect to keep the perimeter columns as small as possible

imposed severe restrictions. The columns are part of the perimeter tube frame which resists

part of the large seismic forces. Several options were discussed amongst the consultant’s

team including steel-concrete composite columns to cater for large seismic forces. However,

evaluation of this option revealed that the critical 5 day floor cycle time planned by the

contractor would be compromised due to the complexity of installing steel sections within

the concrete columns. Through a collaborative effort initiated by the contractor, high strength

Grade 80 concrete was used to overcome the difficulty. This allowed one-third smaller

perimeter column sizes without additional site works complexity thereby leading to a 5 day

floor cycle time during construction. This reflects the solution based collaborative approach

of the entire project team.

2.4 Peer Review and Verification Tests

2.4.1 Peer Review:

In addition to detailed internal review procedures, as part of Meinhardt’s in-house QA/QC

for all projects, external Peer Review’s were carried out at several stage of the project from

Concept to Detailed Design. The reviewers included



Page 13

• Dr. Alfred Yee (Precast Design Consultants) - also involved in Concept Design.

• Dragages Singapore / Bouygues Construction / Socotec International.

• Prof Tam Chat Tim (NUS).

• Associate Prof Wong Kai Sing (NTU).

Dr Yee provided guidance on seismic design issues through his vast experience on the

subject. Dragages / Bouygues / Socotec were involved in independent verification of the

design through their own structural models. Three different structural models were

independently formulated (two models using ETABS and the 3rd

using HERCULE in

France by Socotec) and results verified from each before Detailed Design. Prof Tam

assisted with his guidance on high strength concrete matters. Prof Wong was involved in

reviewing geotechnical aspects of the project, especially on the unique design considerations

related to the ‘peanut’ diaphragm wall.

2.4.2 Verification Tests:

Wind Tunnel Tests

For tall and slender buildings, limiting the building drift alone does not satisfy necessarily

satisfy the conditions for meeting the occupants’ comfort criteria. Therefore in addition to

controlling the inter-story drift to at least height/500, it is also necessary to control the peak

acceleration under strong winds, which directly affects the comfort of the occupants.

A 1:300 scale force balance wind tunnel study was carried out in a laboratory in Melbourne,

Australia, by WindTech, to verify code prescribed wind forces and analytical building

behaviour predictions. The wind tunnel results verified that building drifts under 50 year

return period wind as well as accelerations under 5 and 10 year return period winds are all

within the acceptable limits.



Page 14

Foundation Load Tests

Since foundation systems represent the single most critical component of building safety, a

series of pile load tests were carried out to conclusively establish the foundation behavior.

This included 3 numbers of Ultimate Load Tests, 6 numbers of Working Load Tests and 10

numbers of Dynamic Load Tests. The numbers of tests were generally twice the numbers

recommended by BCA.

3.0 QUALITY APPROACH AND SOLUTIONS THAT EMPHASIZE SAFETY

The groundwork for quality and safety was established right from the concept design of the

project and carried through the schematic design, detailed design and construction

documentation phases through close coordination with all project consultants. The adopted

design went beyond the requirements of local codes and standards by incorporating

enhanced robustness and rigidity in the form of seismic design and use of high strength

concrete. The design fully complied with the requirements of two separate Codes of

Practice, i.e., CP65 (BS8110) and UBC (ACI-318).

3.1 Comprehensive Design Analysis and Checks

Detailed geotechnical site investigation was carried out to comprehensively map the soil

profile of the site. Individual foundation pile and barrette lengths were established based on

adjacent borehole information and subsequently verified at site during installation with high

degree of accuracy.

T1 = 5.6s

∆ = h/1060

ah = 10.3 m-g

T1 = 6.4s

∆ =h/755

ah = 14.1 m-g



Page 15

Detailed 3-Dimensional Finite Element Modeling was carried out to establish building

behavior and performance. Due to the elliptical shape of the towers, prevention of torsional

or twisting responses of the towers was a major challenge. Torsional responses of a building

may become the predominant vibration mode if the torsional natural frequency is close to

either of the lowest translational natural frequency. Building habitants are much more

sensitive to torsional or twisting motions as compared to translational motions. Numerous

simulations were carried out to condition the building stiffness and mass properties in order

to achieve translation in the first two modes and separate the torsional mode. The modeling

was verified through different softwares. Three different structural models were

independently formulated (two models using ETABS and the 3rd

using HERCULE in

France by Socotec) and results verified from each before Detailed Design.

For the excavation works, 3D finite element softwares were used in the analysis to predict

retention wall stresses and deflections along with water table drawdown, settlement and

movement of adjoining MRT and CST structures.

The major softwares used for analysis and design in the project included:

• ETABS (3-D building analysis and design)

• HERCULE (verification of 3-D building analysis)

• PLAXIS (Analysis of Diaphragm -Wall Retention System)

• WALLAP (Lateral Load Analysis of Piles/Barrettes)

• SAFE (Interaction Analysis of Piles/Barrettes and Pilecaps)

• RAPT (Element verification analysis and design).

43 BH’s



Page 16

Tower 1 Stress Plots

Tower 2 Stress Plots

Interaction Analysis for Barrettes / Piles and Pile-Caps

Mode 1 (Y-Axis) Mode 2 (X-Axis) Mode 3 (Torsion)

T1 Modes Shapes

Mode 1 (Y-Axis) Mode 2 (X-Axis) Mode 3 (Torsion)

T2 Modes Shapes



Page 17

PLAXIS FEM Modeling of ‘Peanut’ D-Wall and MRT Tunnels

3.2 Project Specific Details and Specifications

The structural details for the project were specifically done to comply with seismic detailing

requirements. Comprehensive and customized Specifications to cover all aspects of

construction to achieve the design intent formed part of contract documents. These included

Specifications for General Works, Particular Works, Bored Piling, Diaphragm Wall,

Excavation, Waterproofing, Basements, In-situ and Pre-cast Concreting, Pre-stressing, Steel

Works, Pre-cast, Structural Steel, etc.

4.0 DESIGN FOR SAFE OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE

4.1 Provisions of Safe Inspection / Maintenance of Building Elements after Completion

The track supports for Building Maintenance Unit's (BMU) have been designed integrally

with the structural framing at the roof which allows for easy maintenance and façade

cleaning of the towers. The BMU’s allow permanent and safe access for maintenance and

cleaning of facades. Also most structural members are internally exposed and accessible

allowing safe inspection and periodic maintenance, if required.

The structural performance of the towers after completion is monitored through permanently

installed sway measurement devices. Monthly measurements of building acceleration,

frequency and displacement in response to major events like high wind and distant

earthquakes are recorded and reviewed to monitor building performance.



Page 18

4.2 Design for Durability

For all concrete in contact with ground, Portland Blast Furnace Cement (PBFC) Concrete,

made with Ground Granulated Blast Furnace Slag (GGBFC), has been used to increase

durability against chloride penetration, resistance to sulfate attack and minimize alkali-silica

reaction.

In addition to the above, waterproof-concrete with the waterproofing admixture, Penetron,

(which is an integral crystalline capillary concrete waterproofing system) was used for

basement construction. This reduces the risk of corrosion to reinforcement and ultimately

produces a more durable concrete with minimal maintenance during the life-cycle of the

buildings. All secondary steel structures, such as the architectural features at the roof of the

towers, incorporate high zinc rich coating for corrosion protection.



Page 19

5.0 CONSTRUCTION QUALITY AND SAFETY

Detailed risk analyses were carried out for the various stages of the construction process

identifying the key risk issues and steps taken to control and mitigate the risks.

Comprehensive instrumentation and monitoring were implemented to detect problems early

and fully executable contingency plans were put in place.

5.1 QP’s Design Management of Erection Methods, Construction Sequence and Temporary

Works

Construction methodology and sequences of all major temporary works were independently

verified by the QP for suitability of the works and safety during construction. Some of the

key items reviewed included:

• Comprehensive ground instrumentation monitoring during foundation and sub-structure

works with defined Alert and Work Suspension Levels, monitoring of temporary D-Wall

retention system, real time MRT tunnel monitoring throughout construction period, etc

• Installation methodologies for foundation elements, e.g., suitability of rigs to achieve

required depths, density of bentonite stabilizing fluid, base grouting pressure and volume,

etc.

• Method statements for installation of pre-cast slabs including design requirements during

lifting and propping stages.

• Concrete placement and curing methods specially for Grade 80 concrete

• Formwork striking times and back-propping requirements for floors

• Optimum location for installation of tower cranes and design review of tower crane

supports.

• Sequence of construction to avoid temporary unstable conditions

• Early completion of permanent stairs for usage during construction

5.2 QP’s Supervision, Inspection Regime, QA/QC Plan Testing and Monitoring

Programme

For site supervision and control, two senior Resident Engineers and three Clerk-of-Works

were stationed full time at site. In addition, during the foundation works, full-time

geotechnical engineers verified soil layers and the founding level of each pile. All the

appointed site staff had good construction and site supervision experience.

Supervision of works was carried out in progressive and pre-emptive manner in tandem with

the contractor’s team to ensure safety, quality and meeting progress targets. Regular site

meetings were held with the contractor to review and eliminate safety issues prior to the

work activities. Inspection, testing and monitoring were carried out through standardized

checklists from Meinhardt’s ISO Manual. The checklists are comprehensive guides

explaining



Page 20

• roles and responsibilities of site staff

• procedures for work inspections for all structural works

• schedule and type of tests required

• monitoring and recording instrumentation and test records

• QA/QC of materials sources, material testing results, etc.

Structural specifications were issued to the resident site team and detailed briefings were

conducted to ensure full compliance with specifications and drawings. Approved shop

drawings were circulated to all relevant parties prior to construction and inspection was only

allowed to be carried out based on approved drawings. The resident site staff reported any

deviations from approved shop drawings and design changes due to site conditions were

reviewed by QP (as well as AC) prior to implementation. The QP and resident site team

conducted regular site meetings / walks to ensure QA/QC.

The diligent effort by the contractor in conjunction with detailed supervision by the QP and

the resident site team resulted in the project achieving a structural CONQUAS score of 99.5

– one of the highest scores ever achieved.



Page 21

6.0 PUBLIC SAFETY

6.1 Provision to Manage Safety and Clean Environment to Minimize Public Feedback

Public safety and clean environment were managed through close collaboration with the

contractor. A wide range of issues were covered including,

• Review of risk assessment for each stage of work.

• Proper and extensive site monitoring instrumentation for excavation works.

• Site utilization and layout during construction planned to prevent accidents from flow of

traffic, pedestrian and equipment.

• Prevention of falling debris through safety screen to the external building envelope.

• Provision of site hoardings and temporary walk-ways.

• Providing water treatment tank to treat water before discharge to external drain.

• Constructing proper and effective silt traps to improve water quality before discharge to

the public/external drain.

• Usage of silent generator sets to reduce noise pollution.

• Installation of noise and vibration monitoring meters.

• Proper management of construction debris by segregating into recyclable/non recyclable,

organic waste.

• Providing washing bay at site to clean all vehicles before leaving site.

• Minimizing dust generation through regular water spraying



Page 22

6.2 Adoption of Structural Systems that Minimize Impact to Neighborhood during

Construction

The structural systems adopted for the project were all conceived to create minimum impact

to the neighborhood during construction while addressing the projects needs and challenges.

The adopted foundation and retention system utilized bored piles and diaphragm walls to

minimize ground movement, noise and vibration during the works.

Pre-cast and pre-fabricated construction was used wherever feasible, i.e., slabs, staircases and

bathrooms. These, along with prefabricated rebar cages for walls, columns and beams and

mesh rebars for slabs, reduced labor intensive site works thereby reducing noise, waste

generation and site congestion.

Generally no adverse comments were received from neighbors on the contractor’s efforts to

maintain a safe, clean and pollution free environment.

The Sail BCA Awards Write-Up-Final

Documents

Transcript of The Sail BCA Awards Write-Up-Final