Labik, O; Nahmens, I; Ikuma, L and Harvey, C (2023) On-site versus in-factory installation of solar-plus-storage in modular construction. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 149(5): 05023003, ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
High initial cost, mainly due to inefficient construction processes, remains the greatest barrier for residential adoption of solar plus storage (SPS) systems. Modular construction, with a factory-controlled environment and control over the home design, is well suited to address these issues (e.g., efficiencies, waste, inventory control, and quality). Furthermore, these areas have great potential in modular construction to address the high initial cost issue. This study focused on the integration of solar-plus-storage installation upstream in modular housing. Although moving the solar-plus-storage installation process into the factory has many barriers (e.g., change of the scope of work at some workstations without affecting the whole production line, change of quality control, warehousing of solar-plus-storage in correct conditions, change in the supply chain, and required certification of workers), the great potential presented by modular construction methods warrants the study. This study analyzed on-site installation cost and in-factory installation cost through factory information modeling, as well as job safety. Results reveal that integrating solar-plus-storage installation into the production line of modular construction achieved a 37% reduction in installation time compared with onsite installation. Overall, a 21% reduction of total cost could be achieved if solar-plus-storage is installed in-factory. Furthermore, with the in-factory approach, 28% of safety hazards related to solar-plus-storage installation activities are removed. Such an approach could increase solar-plus-storage installation productivity, reduce inspection time, reduce costly on-site rework, and address the solar-plus-storage system affordability issue overall.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Index terms: | certification, rework, modular construction, integration, construction process, storage system, affordability, onsite, efficiency, inventory, productivity, information modelling, inspection, modular housing, quality control |
| Subjects: | management, economic development, performance management, inventory management, digital design, management systems, organizational analysis, building construction, administrative processes, quality assurance, operations management, economic analysis, project delivery |
| Topics: | Site Management, Organizational Design, Contract Administration, Quality Management, Supply Chain Management, Digital Applications, Urban Studies, Construction Technology, Project Management, Information Management, Business Strategy |
| Descriptive scope: | 2 PC |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here