A Conceptual Method of Constructability Improvement

Abstract

Abstract-Constructability is the optimum use of construction knowledge and experience in the conceptual planning. This paper aims to illustrate the application of constructability concepts during the design stage by providing a relevant case study which is a three story residential building. The buildability score of this building is accurately calculated and then by comparing to current standard of buildability, it was found that the buildability of the building needs to be improved. Thus, the constructability concepts were implemented and it was found that if the concepts being implemented in design stage, the constructability of the building will be improved. This paper concluded by a guideline which shows relevant suggestions for improving constructability concept.

Evaluating the Existing Barriers in Implementing Constructability

“…Unawareness of Owners about benefits of applying constructability and lack of commitment and desire of them to implement it [17]. Resistance to financial investment and attempt and early presence of builders in the initial stages of the project [17,20,21] lack of coordination and cooperation in team affairs [17,[20][21][22][33][34][35][36] are also other barriers found in the previous studies, confirm that the absence of a culture of teamwork is considered as an important barrier to implement constructability.…”

“…For instance, one of the barriers was lack of mutual respect between designers and builders, which has been repeated several times in different resources in the early stage of encoding [17,21,22]. Finally, the researcher has considered a code and has classified environmental-cultural barriers in the group.…”

A Systematic Review of Prerequisites for Constructability Implementation in Infrastructure Projects

“…Each category was considered in a specific subgroup, which is presented in the following table. [24 -34, 37, 39, 40, 42, 43] Increasing communications, integration, coordination, and mutual respect among all project stakeholders managerial [24, 26 -35, 38, 39, 41, 43] Sharing and exchanging information through database, documenting previous projects and lessons learned, and fast and easy access to them by all of team members [24] Creating a strong support program and its development [27,41] Existence of a correct planning to achieve project objectives [29] Using development tools and equipment [27, 34-36, 38, 40] Knowledge of project stakeholders about constructability and its advantage [25,31,35,36,41] Enhancing team building skills [30,33,34,35,38,39] Increasing integration among all project stakeholders [38,41,42] Using new methods of information and communication technology [30,40] Preferring new contracts to traditional ones [26,33,34,36] Allocating cost for constructability training and implementation [33,40] Commitment and participation of employers and understanding their needs [23, 24, 28, 32-34, 37, 38, 41] Familiarity with and using new and creative methods of construction and new technologies Technical [26,30,33,37,40] Using experts experienced in the field of designing [28,30,42] Integrating knowledge ...…”

“…Therefore, to achieve the goals of the project, constructability studies should be conducted at the beginning of the project. This issue helps identifying the obstacles to its implementation in order to reduce wastes and prevent mistakes, delays, duplications, and consequently reduce time and cost [36]. Lack of proper communication among the employers, contractors, and designers before beginning the project and in during its implementation causes many constructability problems [45].…”

“…The scores are very good (5), good (4), medium (3), poor (2), very poor (1). Generally, their qualitative score is also classified based on a 50 score scale, as very good (41-50), good (31)(32)(33)(34)(35)(36)(37)(38)(39)(40), medium (21)(22)(23)(24)(25)(26)(27)(28)(29)(30), poor (11)(12)(13)(14)(15)(16)(17)(18)(19)(20), and very poor (0-10). According to this classification and based on the table, poor and very poor articles were deleted.…”