Comparison of Design Risk Factors of Multistory Commercial Office Buildings Vineeth DHARMAPALAN 1 and John A. GAMBATESE 2 1 School of Civil and Construction Engineering, Oregon State University, 220 Owen Hall, Corvallis, OR 97331-3212; email: d.vineeth@gmail.com 2 Professor, School of Civil and Construction Engineering, Oregon State University, 220 Owen Hall, Corvallis, OR 97331-3212; Phone: (541) 737-8913; Email: john.gambatese@oregonstate.edu ABSTRACT The risk associated with constructing multistory commercial buildings can take many forms, with significant risk associated with construction site safety hazards. The type and magnitude of risk present on construction sites depends to a great extent on the permanent design features. A project’s design forms the basis for the means and methods used during construction. If the risk factors associated with design features are known, risk management can take place during the design stage to select design alternatives which minimize construction safety risk. As part of a recent research study, design risk factors were quantified for all of the construction activities and equipment necessary to construct the shell of a multistory commercial office building. The risk factors were developed through detailed input from general contractor superintendents, general contractor safety managers, and trade contractor personnel. For cast-in-place concrete, for example, the research results indicate that there is no evidence of a difference in risk perception between general contractor superintendents and general contractor safety managers in terms of risk ratings for the activity risk, severity, and total risk. The construction and removal of formwork and pouring of concrete show moderate to suggestive evidence of a difference in the sample mean risk perceptions for the three group comparisons. There is moderate to suggestive evidence of a difference for medium severity, high severity, and total risk for the three group comparisons. There is no evidence of a difference in the way the groups perceive near miss risks. The research results allow for comparison between different design alternatives as well. For example, for steel stud versus concrete masonry unit (CMU) block partition walls, there is moderate evidence that on an average, the construction of CMU block wall has a larger cumulative risk of medium severity and high severity injuries. This paper presents comparisons of risk perception between the three sample groups for different design alternatives, along with comparisons of the perceived risk between different design alternatives, to illustrate the differences in construction safety risk expected during construction. INTRODUCTION The construction industry statistically remains one of the most dangerous industries (Baradan and Mumtaz 2006; Carter and S. D. Smith 2006; Imriyas et al. 2007) with the construction site being a very hazardous environment for workers. The industry is beginning to realize that the safety practices of the constructor during construction alone are inadequate and there is a need for increased involvement by the entire project team. Past research has shown that the designer is one such team 299 Construction Research Congress 2012 © ASCE 2012 Construction Research Congress 2012 Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by East Carolina University on 09/21/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.