mdh.sePublications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Design for construction: Utilizing production experiences in development
KTH.
Lund University.
Mälardalen University, School of Innovation, Design and Engineering.ORCID iD: 0000-0002-8309-7367
KTH.
2013 (English)In: Construction Management and Economics, ISSN 0144-6193, E-ISSN 1466-433X, Vol. 31, 135-150 p.Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

The design process has a significant impact on the performance and profitability of a housing project. Therefore, decisions made during the design process should take into consideration knowledge and experience from other processes in previously accomplished projects, specifically from the production phase. How to capture and use production experience in housing has not gained enough interest, possibly leading to sub-optimal improvements during the construction process. This motivates research on how onsite production experience from similar previous projects can be captured and used to improve constructability without risking customer values. Based on the concept of constructability, ’design for manufacturing and assembly’ and the theory of waste, the method ’design for construction’ (DFC) has been developed. The four-step model complements the conventional construction process, and consists of the following steps: (1) specify customer values and similar previous projects; (2) identify onsite waste and cost drivers in previous projects; (3) develop criteria to evaluate constructability; and (4) evaluate constructability of the design. The DFC method is exemplified and tested through a case study, in which it was shown that the method facilitated identification of all problems that were considered in the investigated project. The method also highlighted other project obstacles that potentially could have been solved to improve constructability. © 2013 Copyright Taylor and Francis Group, LLC.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2013. Vol. 31, 135-150 p.
National Category
Engineering and Technology
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:mdh:diva-18266DOI: 10.1080/01446193.2012.756142Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-84873724767OAI: oai:DiVA.org:mdh-18266DiVA: diva2:607302
Available from: 2013-02-22 Created: 2013-02-22 Last updated: 2017-09-27Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text

Other links

Publisher's full textScopus

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Bjelkemyr, Marcus
By organisation
School of Innovation, Design and Engineering
In the same journal
Construction Management and Economics
Engineering and Technology

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

Altmetric score

Total: 22 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf