Robinson, A; Austin, S and Gibb, A (2011) Efficiencies in design and manufacturing for construction using shipping containers. In: Egbu, C and Lou, E C W (eds.) Proceedings of 27th Annual ARCOM Conference, 5-7 September 2011, Bristol, UK.
Abstract
Shipping containers are standardised, mass manufactured re-usable products with a structural typology that lends itself to applications in construction. They can be used as offsite volumetric units for cellular accommodation, modular buildings and combined with conventional framed structures for open plan spaces. Taking findings from literature on manufacture for construction and containers, product design data, and semi-structured interviews, the use of containers has been studied to explore efficiencies in design and manufacture for construction. By reviewing literature on preassembly (CIB, 1993), customisation (Pine, 1993) and models for large technical or complex systems (Winch, 2003), the research explores the progressive shifts in design and manufacturing that have occurred for five consecutive projects using container based construction. An initial Concept to Order (CtO) project re-using existing containers led to a series of repeat projects, where design effort was progressively minimised through standard design rules for a Make to Order (MtO) product. The final product was a parametric model based on a customised container platform with variable dimensions, and a Design to Order (DtO) package created by combining analysis, design and manufacturing data. This significantly reduced design time to manufacture and led to the prototyping of a Make to Forecast (MtF) modular building product. Containerisation in construction presents a unique manufacturing model; not being tied to the domestic construction market, but supported by a mature international manufacturing base, it can produce large volumes of units over a more sustained period. Therefore a standardised, mass production model should suit this form of production more than mass customisation. However a standardised solution is more limited in its flexibility, and does not provide sufficient variability for most construction projects. An efficient customised design using a shipping container platform became the most effective model, which was based on a Make to Order solution using a Design to Order package based on parametric models.
| Item Type: | Conference Paper (Paper) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | containerisation; design; industrialisation; manufacturing; offsite; standardisation |
| Index terms: | complex system, dimension, interview, industrialization, variability, platform, mass customization, open plan, construction project, package, product design, efficiency, standardization, domestic construction, prototyping, modular building, customization |
| Subjects: | contractual arrangements, digital design, performance measurement, economic development, health monitoring assessment and metrics, systems engineering, performance management, statistical analysis, design concepts, production management, innovation and technology management, building construction, construction manufacturing, construction type, manufacturing engineering, data collection methods |
| Topics: | Health and Safety, Construction Technology, Project Management, Quality Management, Business Strategy, Procurement, Design Practice, Research Practice, Digital Applications, Engineering Principles, Sustainability |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCE |
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