Laovisutthichai, V; Lu, W and Low, S P (2025) Design for excellence (DfX) for high-rise modular buildings: from DfX considerations to module design guidelines using the case of Hong Kong. Architectural Engineering and Design Management, 21(3), pp. 430-449. ISSN 1745-2007
Abstract
Design for excellence (DfX) presents a significant opportunity for early design to ensure the efficiency and buildability of high-rise modular buildings and realize their multidimensional benefits. Previous DfX contributions have primarily concentrated on its conception, offering various considerations from downstream construction stakeholders. Little research has integrated and transformed them into more practical, ready-to-use guidelines for upstream design professionals. This research, therefore, aims to incorporate prevailing piecemeal DfX considerations and establish module design guidelines. The guidelines were initially developed based on prior literature and case study, and their alignment with existing practices was subsequently tested. They recommend 1) a simplified rectangular module shape, 2) suggested module size, 3) standardized space across projects, and 4) dimensional coordination among modules and spaces. By utilizing them to analyze 39 high-rise module designs in Hong Kong, the results reveal some similarities between the proposed guidelines and real-world practices, affirming their concurrent validity and creating warrant assertions. This research bridges the knowledge gap between upstream and downstream practitioners, offers transformed DfX knowledge to systematically guide future implementations, and finally explains changes in architectural design. Future studies are advised to fine-tune the guidelines and incorporate findings with computational technologies to enhance generative DfX.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | design for excellence; design for manufacture and assembly; generative design; modular buildings; modular key plans; module design |
| Index terms: | buildability, generative design, architectural design, practitioner, validity, design for manufacture and assembly, modular building, efficiency, Hong Kong, case study, implementation, future study, coordination, module |
| Subjects: | data collection methods, research design and methodology, design practice, management, performance management, evaluation and assessment methods, practitioner, contractual arrangements, architectural elements, manufacturing engineering, Geography, design process, building construction, design efficiency |
| Topics: | Engineering Principles, Geographical Context, Procurement, Quality Management, Research Practice, Construction Technology, Roles and Professions, Design Practice, Organizational Design |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCEA |
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