Coding the circularity. Design for the disassembly and reuse of building components

Abstract

The architecture design today has new expressive features due to the parametric and computational modelling software, which greatly amplify the potential of language. This condition makes it possible to generate customised elements and systems through a process of cyber-physical interaction between design and architectural production. As well as the geometric constraints, dictated by manufacturing and assembly processes of materials, they can be incorporated in the generative design codes. The article examines the possibility to also include the main conditions that enable the selective disassembly of the elements and their reuse at the end of life, avoiding the generation of parts that are not remanufacturable or reusable.

Re-NetTA Project: organizational models for promoting re-manufacturing chains of building products in the Lombard manufacturing district

“…Strategies such as modularity and readily available spare parts contribute to the durability and re-workability of products. By addressing design considerations upfront, re-manufacturing processes can be streamlined, making it more feasible to extend product lifecycles [51,52] .…”

Taxonomy supporting design strategies for reuse of building parts in timber-based construction

“…Even though unproven at this time, an upcycling approach in the design process for future buildings could provide significant results toward sustainable development (Fatourou-Sipsi and Symeonidou, 2021). Importantly, the practice of reversible design , where buildings can be assembled, disassembled and reassembled over time, is crucial to improve reuse supply chains, while ensuring that a building part retains its value at the end of its first lifecycle (Kunic et al , 2021; Viscuso, 2021; Klinge et al , 2019b).…”

“…dismantled elements and connectors) in new buildings. As such, it could be named reversible construction, reversible building design or reversible architecture (Arisya and Suryantini, 2021; Dams et al , 2021; Fatourou-Sipsi and Symeonidou, 2021; Viscuso, 2021; Akbarieh et al , 2020; Klinge et al , 2019a). Up to this point, both deconstruction and disassembly are listed as strategies, meaning that deconstruction refers to the selective, systematic dismantling of building parts belonging to a building neither designed nor built for disassembly; while on the other hand, a disassembly activity implies the total dismantling of each building part in a building conceived and constructed for future disassembly and reuse.…”

“…Reducing the amount of construction waste and extending the life of building parts through reuse are the goals of DfD (Arisya and Suryantini, 2021;Paduart et al, 2011;Crowther, 1999, as cited in Arrigoni et al, 2018. Reuse of assembly units in DfD is enabled by means of modularity, standardization and digitally controlled fabrication and contributes to the achievement of sustainability goals (Anastasiades et al, 2021;Arisya and Suryantini, 2021;Viscuso, 2021;Nußholz et al, 2019, as cited in Dams et al, 2021Eckelman et al, 2018;Minunno et al, 2018;Hosey et al, 2015). Better knowledge on the part of stakeholders about appropriate design approaches and awareness of the residual value of building parts is among the scope of current protocols on DfD, as reported by Dams et al (2021).…”