COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF CONVENTIONAL FORMWORK AND MIVAN FORMWORK TECHNOLOGY

In terms of construction efficiency, cost, quality, and overall project performance, this study compares Mivan technology with the traditional RCC formwork method. While Mivan technology is an innovative aluminum formwork system intended for quic k and repeated construction, the standard RCC formwork system, which is commonly utilized in the building sector, uses conventional techniques including hardwood, plywood, and steel shuttering. The purpose of the study is to assess both systems' benefits, drawbacks, and applicability to contemporary building techniques. The study looks at important factors including construction speed, labor cost, material consumption, durability, surface quality, and viability from an economic standpoint. Case studies, sit e visits, and comparative study of actual building projects are used to gather data. The results show that traditional RCC formwork is labor-intensive and time-consuming, despite its flexibility and reduced starting cost. However, Mivan technology is very efficient for large-scale housing and repetitive structural paper because it offers quicker building cycles, improved quality control, and less waste. The research shows that choosing the right formwork method depends critically on factors including projec t magnitude, design complexity, and long-term economic concerns. According to the study's findings, large building projects benefit more from Mivan technology. W hereas conventional RCC formwork remains practical for smaller and customized structures. This research contributes to understanding the evolving role of innovative construction technologies in improving productivity and sustainability in the civil engineering sector.