A model for implementing product modularity in buildings design

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to examine the fundamental underpinnings of product modularity and how these can be adapted to construction and its specificities (e.g. one-off products delivered by temporary supply chains) to create a model to design modular buildings. Design/methodology/approach This research adopts a design science research approach. Explanation I (substantive theory devising based on the analysis of an artefact ‒ a low-income housing project) is used, followed by Solution Incubation (a model to implement product modularity in buildings design). Findings The model allows product modularity to be implemented at distinct levels (i.e. building, systems and components) at a single stage (building design), different from manufacturing where each level is considered at a distinct stage. This is in line with the project investigated: modularity was considered for house layouts, roof types and gable formats. Practical implications The model provides a hands-on tool for practitioners to design modular buildings. The low-income project is also extensively detailed: three-dimensional models, floor plans and conceptual diagrams (outlining how fundamental underpinnings were applied at each level) are presented. There is a lack of comprehensive accounts such as the one presented here to demonstrate the application of product modularity in real-world projects. Originality/value This paper identifies and adapts the fundamental underpinnings of product modularity to construction, and it details how these were applied to a low-income housing design at distinct levels. Based on these two endeavours, a model to implement product modularity in buildings design is proposed.

An overall review of research on prefabricated construction supply chain management

“…The research in PCSCM also involves other aspects. For instance, Rocha et al. (2019), Kahkonen et al.…”

“…The research in PCSCM also involves other aspects. For instance, Rocha et al (2019), Kahkonen et al, (2003) and Xun et al (2019) had contributed to providing standardized PCSC processes. Arashpour et al (2017), Daget and Zhang (2019) and Han et al (2017) and others had devoted themselves to studying how to make optimal decisions in different stages of the PCSC to improve the efficiency of PC projects.…”

Why Is Product Modularity Underdeveloped in Construction?

“…The construction sector is still lagging regarding the conceptualizations discussed here, particularly regarding interfaces. Consider the two following examples: Project J examined in (da Kemmer 2013, 2018) for traditional construction (Figure 2) and the ZEMCH housing project investigated in (Gravina da Rocha et al 2019) for offsite construction (Figure 4). The interface between families of modules A and B (termed as interface AB) changes depending on the modules used ( Figure 2).…”

“…More specifically, the aim is (i) to graphically show these underpinnings in practical/real construction project cases and (ii) to detail the difficulties (at a technical level) in applying product modularity in such context. In order to do that, two projects studied by the first author of this paper and fellow co-authors reported in previous publications (da Rocha and Kemmer 2018, da Rocha and Kemmer 2013, and Gravina da Rocha et al 2019) are compared here. These empirical cases, both housing projects, involve two distinct construction methods, namely, in situ cast reinforced concrete and prefabricated timber panels.…”

PARAMTR - Enhanced generative design tools for prefabricating large-scale residential developments

“…Whilst the most efficient way to mass-produce and prefabricate would be to have identical components in identical designs, large-scale residential developments typically benefit from variety, both in owner experience and in marketing benefits. Allowing for modularity in the design at distinct levels allows for flexibility and user choice without losing the efficiency and economic benefits of economy of scale (Gravina da Rocha et al, 2019). As mentioned previously in this section, the commonality of components (with reduced unique parts) also lends to superior quality, efficiency, and cost.…”