Lam, P T I; Wong, F W H; Chan, A P C; Shea, W C Y and Lau, J W S (2012) A scheme design buildability assessment model for building projects. Construction Innovation, 12(2), pp. 216-238. ISSN 1471-4175
Abstract
Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to depict the developmental process of a buildability assessment model for use at the scheme design stage of building projects, which have a priority requirement for functional performance rather than aesthetic performance. Design/methodology/approach: First, major decisions made at the scheme design stage of building projects were identified through pilot interviews and a questionnaire survey on designers. Second, these decisions were rated for their relative importance towards buildability through another questionnaire survey on contractors, analysed using the reliability interval method. Based on these results, a list of buildable and non-buildable features and their impacts is compiled by interviewing major contractors. These findings were incorporated into a modified framework of buildability assessment for complete design, substituting information available at the scheme design stage. Validation was carried out using four sample projects and feedback from practitioners. Findings: The results obtained from the Scheme Design Buildability Assessment Model have been demonstrated as reflective of actual buildability level. Buildable and non-buildable features, as exemplified by typical building projects in Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, have been identified. Originality/value: This is the first model which provides a tool for use by the design team to evaluate the buildability of their designs at an early stage, so that necessary improvements can be made without affecting the development program.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | buildability assessment; buildings; design and construction; Hong Kong; scheme design; structural analysis; structural design |
| Index terms: | Hong Kong, designer, aesthetic, design and construction, buildability, structural analysis, interview, relative importance, survey, design team, practitioner, questionnaire, validation, design stage, methodology, program, structural design |
| Subjects: | structural engineering, factor and component analysis, software systems, research methods, Geography, professional development, design efficiency, architectural engineering, risk assessment, profession, data collection methods, practitioner, contractual arrangements, professional practice |
| Topics: | Design Practice, Digital Applications, Geographical Context, Research Practice, Engineering Principles, Information Management, Procurement, Roles and Professions, Risk Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 5 PCTEA |
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