Constructability Concepts and Principles

  • Alan Griffith
  • Tony Sidwell
Chapter
Part of the Macmillan Building and Surveying Series book series (BASS)

Abstract

Better value for money, improved quality of service and quite significant savings in both project cost and time are clearly possible through the detailed analysis not only of the individual phases of the total construction process but also of the interaction between those phases. In any building or engineering project, seeking improvement through the careful consideration of procurement, design, construction techniques and management approach should make implementation easier, quicker and cheaper. ‘Constructability’, in the broadest sense, embodies a conscious attempt to recognise in each constituent phase of a construction project that those facets can promote improvement both to that phase and also to the total construction process. Constructability identifies the opportunities for maximising the route of procurement, design input, design-construction collaboration and use and upkeep of the finished product. However, it must be emphasised that constructability is not a concept that should be invoked as an imposition; rather, it must become an implicit and accepted characteristic of the construction process, to which all the various construction professionals contribute. Furthermore, the use of constructability to reduce costs and simplify construction implies neither lower quality nor compromise in design.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Business Roundtable, Integrating Construction Resources and Technology into Engineering, Business Roundtable, New York, November 1982, Report B-1.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    H. Emmerson, Survey of Problems Before the Construction Industry, a report prepared for the Ministry of Works, London, 1962.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    H. Banwell, The Placing and Management of Contracts for Building and Civil Engineering Work, HMSO, London, 1964.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Economic Development Council, Action on the Banwell Report, HMSO, London, 1967.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Tavistock Institute of Human Relations, Communication in the Building Industry: The Report of a Pilot Study, Tavistock Publications, London, (1963).Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    R. Smith, ‘Collaboration: A Civil Engineering Contractor’s Viewpoint’, Construction Technology, (June) pp. 24–5.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    J. D. Nasmith, ‘Collaboration in Building’, Construction Technology (June) pp. 19–21.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    J. Cowan, ‘Collaboration: As a Civil Engineer Sees It’, Construction Technology (June), pp. 23–4.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    National Economic Development Office (NEDO) The Wood Report: The Public Client and the Construction Industry, HMSO, London, 1975.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Construction Industry Research and Information Association (CIRIA), Buildability: An Assessment, CIRIA Publications, London, 1983, Special Publication no. 26.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    S. Adams, Practical Buildability, CIRIA/Butterworths, London, 1989Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    A. Griffith, Buildability: The Effect of Design and Management on Construction, A Case Study SERC/Heriot-Watt University, Edinburgh, 1985.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    National Economic Development Office (NEDO), Achieving Quality on Building Sites, NEDO, London, 1987.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    National Economic Development Office (NEDO), Faster Building for Industry, HMSO, London, 1983.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Construction Industry Institute (CII), Constructability — A Primer, Publication 3-1, CII University of Texas, Austin, July 1986.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    C. B. Tatum, J. A. Vanegas, and J. M. Williams, Constructability Improvement during Conceptual Planning, CII, University of Texas, Austin, 1986.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    J. T. O’Connor, S. E. Rusch, and M. J. Schulz, Constructability Improvement during Engineering and Procurement, CII, University of Texas, Austin, (1986).Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    J. T. O’Connor, and J. S. Davis, ‘Constructability during Field Operations’, Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, vol. 114, (1988), no. 4.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Construction Industry Institute (CII), Constructability Concepts File, CII, University of Texas, Austin, 1987.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Construction Industry Institute (CII), ‘Guidelines for implementing a constructability program’, CII, University of Texas, Austin, July 1987, Publication 3-2.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), ‘Professional Construction Management Services’, Journal of Construction Services (1974).Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    R. Gyles, Report of the Royal Commission into the Building Industry, Government Secretariat, NSW, Australia, (1992).Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    V. Ireland, ‘The Role of Managerial Actions in the Cost, Time and Quality Performance of Commercial Building Projects’, PhD Thesis, University of Sydney, unpublished, (1983).Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    V. Ireland, ‘The Role of Managerial Actions in the Cost, Time and Quality Performance of High-Rise Commercial Building Projects’, Construction Management and Economics, vol. 3, (1985).Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    V. Ireland, ‘A Comparison of US, UK and Australia Management Practice with Special Reference to Lost Time’, The Building Economist, vol. 26 (1987) no. 3.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    V. Ireland, ‘Management Efficiency and the Constructor’, The Building Economist, vol. 27 (1988), no. 1.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    S. L. Hon, D. A. Cairns and Wilson, O. D. ‘Buildability: A Review of Research and Practice’, Australian Institute of Building Papers, vol. 3 (1988/9).Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    S. L. Hon, ‘A Study of Buildability within a Project Management System’, Master of Building Thesis, University of Melbourne (1988), unpublished.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    V. E. Francis, ‘Implementation of Constructability into Australian Construction Projects’, Master of Applied Science in Project Management Thesis, University of South Australia, 1994, unpublished.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    D. McGeorge, S. E. Chen, and M. J. Ostwald, The Development of a Conceptual Model of Buildability which Identifies User Satisfaction as a Major Objective’, Paper, CIB Conference, Rotterdam, 1992.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    New South Wales Government Construction, Policy Steering Committee, Capital Project Procurement Manual, NSW, Australia, October 1993.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Construction Industry Institute (CII), Australia, Constructability Principles File, CII, University of South Australia, Adelaide, Australia, 1993.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Alan Griffith and Tony Sidwell 1995

Authors and Affiliations

  • Alan Griffith
    • 1
  • Tony Sidwell
    • 2
  1. 1.Hong Kong Polytechnic UniversityHong Kong
  2. 2.University of South AustraliaAustralia

Personalised recommendations