CII, Constructability: A Primer, edited from Ryan, Robert H. Implementing Project Constructability. ... Yin, Robert K. Case Study Research Design and Methods.
The Ninth East Asia-Pacific Conference on Structural Engineering and Construction
Main Menu
Table of Contents
CONSTRUCTABILITY IMPLEMENTATION AT CORPORATE LEVEL 2
Erman Surya Bakti1 and Bambang Trigunarsyah,
ABSTRACT : Increased competitiveness in construction industry requires the improvement of a construction companies capabilities, which combine quality of materials and construction works with economic and schedule aspects. Many studies and procedures in quality improvement focus on project quality improvement technique and efficiency such as total quality management, value engineering, designability, contractibility, constructability, operability, maintainability etc. This paper focuses the study on constructability, which is the optimum use of construction knowledge and experience in planning, engineering, procurement, and field operation to achieve overall project objectives. A case study was performed at one of Indonesian construction company, who applies the design and builds type of contract for industrial plant projects such as cement & mineral, petrochemical, power plant, oil & gas projects, etc. The case study is aimed to know and analyze the implementation of constructability in planning and design stage at corporate level, that focusing in understanding, advantage measurement, barrier, and effectiveness of the implementation and recommendation and its improvement. The case study shows that the implementation of constructability during planning and design stage increases the project performance with the most of influenced factor is construction sensitive schedule. KEYWORDS: Constructability, construction knowledge and experiences, planning and design. 1.
INTRODUCTION
Increased competitiveness in construction industry requires the improvement of a construction companies capabilities, which combine a quality of materials and construction works with economic and schedule aspects. Many studies and procedures in quality improvement focus on project quality improvement technique and efficiency such as total quality management, value engineering, designability, contractibility, constructability, operability, maintainability etc. Although owners and designers do not like to hear it, the reality of construction is that probably 75% of the problems encountered in the field are generated in the design phase (Mendelsohn 1997). Early involvement of construction knowledge and experience reduce the likelihood of creating designs that cannot be efficiently built, thereby reducing design rework, improving project schedule, and establishing construction cost saving (Russell, 1994) The concept of constructability in the US (or buildability in the UK) emerged in the late 1970s. It evolved from studies into how improvements could be achieved to increase cost efficiency and quality in the construction industry. It is an approach that links the design and construction process. It became the subject of a number of research works in the 1980s (Sidwell 1996). Constructability is the capability of construction project being constructed. A Constructability program is the application of a disciplined, systematic optimization of the construction-related aspects of a project during the planning, design, procurement, construction, test and start-up phase by knowledgeable, experienced construction personnel who are part of a project team. The program’s purpose is to enhance the project’s overall objectives. (ASCE CM Committee 1991)
1
Senior engineer at PT Rekayasa Industri, formerly a Master Student in Construction Management at the University of Indonesia 2 PhD, Deputy Head of Civil Engineering Department, the University of Indonesia
Construction and Engineering Management
CEM - 88
The Ninth East Asia-Pacific Conference on Structural Engineering and Construction
Main Menu
Table of Contents
The constructability concept was born out of the realization that designers and contractors see the same project from different perspectives, and that optimizing the project requires that the knowledge and experience of both parties be applied to project planning and design processes (Gibson 1996). However many owners, engineers, and contractors are still not aware of the potential benefits of improved constructability. Opportunities to reduce the schedule, improve the functionality of the final product, and reduce costs are lost when construction is separated from planning and engineering (CII 1996). Constructability input is needed because of the high technical complexity of today’s project and the ever increasing demands for faster and lower cost delivery of finished facilities (Fischer 1997). But the collecting constructability improvement ideas are not easy tasks. It requires perseverance on the collector’s part and often alternative though processes for those providing the ideas. Designers are asked to think like constructors and constructors are asked to think like designers (O’Connor’s 1986). The most informal constructability program consists only of a set of checklist used by construction personnel to review design documents for completeness, errors, and omissions. This program is less effective than proactive formal programs because construction knowledge and experience is provided in a reactive manner. Suggestions made by construction personnel often require redesign. The required redesign can contribute to an adversarial relationship between designers and constructors, as well as increase design cost and the project’s schedule (Russell 1993). It is not uncommon that constructability is confused with value engineering. Value engineering (VE) is defined as “the systematic effort directed at analyzing the functional requirements of systems, equipment, facilities, procedures, and supplies for the purpose of achieving the essential function at the lowest total (life cycle) cost, consistent with meeting needed performance, reliability, quality, maintainability, aesthetics, safety, and fire resistance” (Kavanagh et all. 1978). Constructability and VE can be similar in effect, but differ in both scope and manner of analysis. VE tend to focus of functional analysis and life-cycle cost, while constructability is achieved by fully exploiting construction experience in a timely and structured fashion. Certainly, the two thrusts can coexist and even complement one another (CII 1996). 2.
RESEARCH METHOD AND MEASURED PARAMETER
The aim of this research is to study the implementation of constructability at the corporate level. Early involvement of construction knowledge and experience (constructability aspect) at planning and design phase will increase a project performance is used as hypotheses of this research. Case studies was the preferred method of this research, as it studied contemporary events, but with the relevant behavior unable to be manipulated (Yin 1994). PT Rekayasa Industri, an Indonesian state owned construction company, which specializes in industrial type construction projects, has been selected as the case study as the follow up to the constructability research conducted by Trigunarsyah (2001). PT Rekayasa Industri involvement in construction projects includes conceptual planning, engineering design, procurement, construction (or EPC) construction and project management services. The project size that this company experienced ranges up to US$ 250 millions for EPC projects. Implementation of constructability improvement performed by PT. Rekayasa Industry was based on the concepts of constructability developed by the CII USA. In the US, the CII (Construction Industry Institute 1998) has developed 17 Constructability Concepts, which are grouped under the three main phases of Project Life Cycle, viz. conceptual planning, design and procurement, and field operations. Those concepts were based on the experience of the owners and contractors represented on the CII Constructability Task Force, and the findings of researchers directed by the task force. The main purpose of the concept is to stimulate thinking about constructability and how to make it work. The second CII Constructability Task Force appended three additional concepts, two for the planning phase and one for the design and procurement phases (Russell, Gugel et al. 1992). O’Connor (1987) performed the research and explored the CII constructability concepts for the design phase. The format for each concept is comprised of three parts: (1) Statement of the concept; (2) discussion of the concept and (3) specific application of the concept. The simplified concepts are focusing in (1) construction driven schedules, (2) simplified design configurations, (3) standardization of the elements, (4) module/ preassembly designs which facilitate fabrication, transport, and installation, (5) accessibility and adverse weather.
Construction and Engineering Management
CEM - 89
The Ninth East Asia-Pacific Conference on Structural Engineering and Construction
Main Menu
Table of Contents
Project performances are measured from constructability benefit parameter that presented by Russell (1994), where the benefit can be either quantitative or qualitative as seen Figure 1. Constructability Constructability Benefits Benefits
Quantitative
- Reduce engineering cost - Reduce schedule duration - Reduce construction cost (labor, material, equipment)
Qualitative
- Increase problem avoidance - Improve site accessibility - Reduced disruption to current production - Improve safety - Reduced amount rework - Increase focus on common goal - Increase of understanding of purpose/ effect of individual's involvement - Increase commitment from team members. - Increase communication - Enhance team building and cooperation -Increase construction flexibility - Reduce maintenance cost - Protected equipment - Smoother start-up - Shortened ofsite leasing - Reduce amount of material handling of inventories - Improved production efficiencies - Accounted for future expantion on site/ building - Sales tool for constructor to receive additional work.
Figure. 1. Framework for Determining Constructability Benefit (Russell 1994)
The quantitative project performance is measured by comparing the actual project performance with the project plan, which is then scored from 1 (very poor or 15% over budget) to 6 (excellent or 15% under budget). The parameters of constructability for this research are combination of the implementation of CII constructability concepts at planning (eight concepts), design and procurement (eight concepts) stage only, and focusing in specific application of constructability that already studied by O’Connor (1987). The parameters are as follows: (1) Early involvement of construction personnel (or knowledge and experiences), (2) Overall project schedules are construction sensitive, (3) Modularization and preassembly, (4) Standardization, (5) Simplified design configuration, and (6) Construction method and innovation. The example of constructability implementation were developed from constructability improvement classifications by O’Connor (1986). The main method of data collection in the case studies was the questionnaire from 82 respondents with 12 years average of experience in multi discipline engineering works. The questionnaire was conducted using structured questions following the constructability survey. Most of the questions were based on the previous research in the constructability improvement conducted by the Construction Industry Institute (CII). This study is the continuation of the constructability research performed by Trigunarsyah (2001) at the same company. Data collected were analyzed using SPSS 11 software. The relation is shown in Figure 2.
Construction and Engineering Management
CEM - 90
The Ninth East Asia-Pacific Conference on Structural Engineering and Construction
Project Peformance
Main Menu
Table of Contents
Y Yp = f(X) Xi,j,k,l Constructability Implementation
Figure 2. Project Performance and Constructability Implementation Note:
Y is a project performance Xi,j,k,l is a constructability implementation
3. DATA ANALYSIS The result of survey indicated that when engaged in the proposal or planning and design phases, PT Rekayasa Industri involves personnels from their construction division. PT Rekayasa Industri use of 3D (three dimension) plant design system (PDS) software in developing multidisciplines engineering drawings and construction methods and accelerating problem solving in design process. The planning and design phase a model of the facility to be build is developed using PDS to provide a good perception of the facility. Lessons learned from completed projects are presented by related project managers to their peers, record lessons learned in electronic database and make them accessible to all staff through company’s intranet, and mentor scheme-for junior engineers During implementation of constructability, capability and experiences of personel and clearly description of project goal have a significant factor for improvement on project performance. The relationship of project performance and capability of personnel/ project goal . The independent variables (x) were grouped according to constructability type of variables. Factor analysis were used to do this process, with criteria and used value if of extraction score more than 0.1, Measure of Sampling Adequacy (MSA) less than 0.5, and Keiser Meyer Olkin Measure of Sampling (KMO) more than 0.5 (Sharma, 1996). Project performance variables measured are: operation and cost; quality and safety; benefit of constructability and constructability lesson learned And independent constructability implementation variables are grouped as shown as Table 1:
Construction and Engineering Management
CEM - 91
The Ninth East Asia-Pacific Conference on Structural Engineering and Construction
Main Menu
Table of Contents
Table 1. Constructability Independent Variable No 1
Description of independent (X) Variables Early involvement of construction personnel 1.1. 1.2
Variable Code X.1
From engineering personnel From Construction Personnel
2
Overall project schedules are construction sensitive 2.1 The design schedule should be construction driven 2.2 Constructability will improve the schedule if construction driven
X.2
3
Modularization and preassembly 3.1 Modularization and preassembly in basic design 3.2 Constructability will improve performance if modularization and preassembly
X.3
4
Standardization
X.4
4.1 4.2 5
6
Constructability will improve if design standardization Simply of design
Simplified design configuration
X.5
5.1
Constructability is enhance when design are configure to enable efficient construction
5.2 5.3 5.4
Design are consider for construction efficiency Site accessibility Design consider site condition and weather
Construction method and innovation
X.6
Multiple linear regression result from the above independent constructability implementation variables, the linear regression model of project performance is described below: Y = -0.014 + 0.369 X1 + 0.523 . X4
(1)
Where : Y = Project performance X1 = Early involvement of construction experience and knowledge X4 = Standardization With adj R2 =0.419 or 41.9%. Durbin Watson d = 1.558 where dl= 1,27 dan du = 1.65, 4-du= 2.35, jadi dl t 0.05 (34) = 1.697 and sig = 0,002 < 0.05. The above equation indicates that the early involvement of construction experience and knowledge in planning design phase and standardisation of design are the most influence constructability variables in increasing project performance. Result of simple linear regression from project performance and all constructability variables then find the model as described below: Y = -0.617 + 0.548 . X
(2)
Where: Y = Project performance X = Constructability implementation. With R2 =0.32 or 32%, Durbin Watson d = 1.694, where dl= 1.27 and du = 1.65, 4-du= 2.35, dl t 0.05 (34) = 1,697 and sig = 0,000 < 0.05. The above equation indicates that the constructability implementation in planning and design phase can increase project performance. Lesson learned has a significant effect for contributing of project performance. The implementation of constructability in planning and design phase are proven to increase of project performance, lesson learned are indicatd as a primary in implementation of constructabilty.
Construction and Engineering Management
CEM - 92
The Ninth East Asia-Pacific Conference on Structural Engineering and Construction
Main Menu
Table of Contents
4. CONCLUSION Clear description of project goal to all personnel of project, updated lesson learned and capability of constructtion personnnel are significant factors to support the project performance. Lessons learned are indicated as primary factors in implementation of constructabilty. The case study, shows that constructability implementation can increase and improve project performance. Early involement of construction knowledge and experience personnel, and standardization of design are the most influence factors of constructability implementation in increasing project performance. 5.
REFERENCES
CII, Constructability: A Primer, edited from Ryan, Robert H. Implementing Project Constructability. Participant Handbook, CII 1998 Fisher, Martin. Characteristics of Design- Relevant Constructability Knowledge. ASCE Journal of Construction Engineering & Management, Vol 123. No 3, September, 1997 Gibson Jr, GE., at all., Constructability In Public Sector, ASCE Journal of Construction Engineering & Management, Vol 122. No 3, September, 1996. Gugel, John G., at all. Model for Constructability Approach Selection. ASCE Journal of Construction Engineering & Management, Vol 120 no 3, September 1994. Mendelsohn, Roy. The Constructability Review Process: a Constructor’s Perspective. ASCE Journal of Management in Engineering. May/ June 1997. O’Connor, James T, Collecting Constructability Improvement Ideas, ASCE Journal of Construction Engineering, Vol 112, No 4, December 1986 O’Connor, James T., at all. Industrial project Constructability Improvement. ASCE Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, Vol 112, No 1, June 1986. O’Connor, James., at all. Constructability Concepts for Engineering and Procurement. ASCE Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, Vol 113, No 2, June 1987. O’Connor, J, at all, Constructability programs, Method for Assessment and Benchmarking, Journal of Performance of Constructed Facilities, vol 8, no 1, Feb 1994. Russell, Jeffrey S., at all. Comparative analysis of Three Constratability Approaches. ASCE Journal of Construction Engineering & Management, Vol 120. No 1 Mar, 1994. Russell, at all, Constructability related to TQM, Value Engineering & Cost/ Benefit, Journal of Performance of Construction Facilities, Vol 8, no 1, February 1994. Sharma, S, Applied Multivariate Techniques, John Willey and Son, Inc, New York, 1996. Sidwell, A.C. and V.E. Francis. The Application of Constructability Principles in The Australian Construction Industry. Shaping Theory and Practice (Vol 2), E &FN Spon, 1996. The CM Committee, of ASCE Construction Div. Constructability and Constructability programs: White Paper. ASCE Journal of Construction Engineering & Management, Vol 117, No 1, March 1991. Trigunarsyah, B. Implementation of Constructability Improvement into the Indonesian Construction Industry. The University of Melbourne, Australia, 2001. Yin, Robert K. Case Study Research Design and Methods. Sage publication, California, 1994.
Construction and Engineering Management
CEM - 93
