Prospects of Developing Prefabricated Masonry Walling Systems in Australia

Abstract

Prefabrication has been shown to be an effective way of construction in the modern-day context. Although much progress has been made in developing reinforced concrete (RC), timber and steel prefabricated elements/structures, prefabrication of masonry walling systems has received limited attention in the past. Conventional masonry construction is labour-intensive and time-consuming; therefore, prefabrication can be an effective solution to accelerate the masonry construction to make it more cost-effective. Therefore, in this paper, an attempt has been made to evaluate the effectiveness of prefabricated masonry systems (PMS) in terms of their structural characteristics and sustainability perspectives in an Australian context. Subsequently, the available studies related to PMS and the prospects of developing prefabricated masonry walling systems were appraised and reported. In order to assess the applicability of PMS, a case study was carried out by designing four types of prospective prefabricated masonry walling systems for a typical housing unit in Australia. It was shown that the reinforced (RM), post-tensioned (PT) and thin layered mortared (TLM) masonry systems are better suited for prefabrication. Later, in order to assess the sustainability of the considered masonry walling systems, life cycle energy analyses were carried using the Environmental Performance in Construction (EPIC) database. It was found that there can be nearly 30% and 15% savings, respectively, in terms of energy saving and CO2 emissions in prefabricated construction than the conventional masonry construction. Finally, the prospects of developing PMS and the need for future research studies on these systems are highlighted.

A framework for the evaluation of the decision between onsite and offsite construction using life cycle analysis (LCA) concepts and system dynamics modeling

“…Due to its energy and environmental benefits, modular construction has attracted increased attention [21]. In the modern-day context, prefabrication has been shown to be an effective method of construction [35]. A previous work [36] investigates whether a greater adoption of modern methods of construction (i.e., offsite construction) can help to achieve the UK's 2025 four key targets (reduction in the duration of construction projects, level of greenhouse gas emissions, operational cost, and import/export trade gap).…”

“…According to the extent of prefabrication, off-site construction (OSC) can be categorized into sub-assembly, non-volumetric pre-assembly, volumetric pre-assembly, and modular construction [37]. Some scholars [35] noted that although much progress has been made in the development of prefabricated steel, timber, and reinforced concrete elements/structures, the prefabrication of masonry wall systems has not received a lot of attention in the past. When compared to traditional masonry construction, prefabricated masonry systems can have nearly 15% and 30% savings respectively as regards CO2 emissions and energy savings [35].…”

“…Some scholars [35] noted that although much progress has been made in the development of prefabricated steel, timber, and reinforced concrete elements/structures, the prefabrication of masonry wall systems has not received a lot of attention in the past. When compared to traditional masonry construction, prefabricated masonry systems can have nearly 15% and 30% savings respectively as regards CO2 emissions and energy savings [35]. The study noted that some of the benefits of prefabrication include consistent quality at a competitive cost, speedy construction, and high-volume output.…”

Selecting a Suitable Sustainable Construction Method for Australian High-Rise Building: A Multi-Criteria Analysis

“…Off-site construction (OSC) is not a novelty, and the original concept can be traced back thousands of years. Today, OSC involves designing and fabricating standardised structure components away from the work site, usually in a controllable factory environment, and then transporting them to the site for assembly [13,[34][35][36]. Gibb [37] classified OSC into four levels: component manufacture and sub-assembly, non-volumetric pre-assembly, volumetric pre-assembly, and modular buildings.…”

“…A study by Bock [4] highlighted five possible aspects of future automation construction: robot-oriented design, robotic industrialisation, construction robots, site automation, and ambient robotics. In addition to robotic construction, currently, other innovative technologies are used for building construction, such as 3D printing [12], prefabricated building systems [5,13], digital twin technology [14] and drone technology [15]. These tech trends have gained advantages regarding time, cost, safety, and quality in the construction industry.…”