IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v10y2018i12p4570-d187569.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Skeleton and Infill Housing Construction Delivery Process Optimization Based on the Design Structure Matrix

Author

Listed:
  • Xinying Cao

    (School of Civil Engineering, Department of Construction Management, Hainan University, Haikou 570228, China)

  • Xiaodong Li

    (School of Civil Engineering, Department of Construction Management, Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, China)

  • Yangzhi Yan

    (Department of Construction Management, School of Construction Management and Real Estate, Chongqing University, Chongqing 400044, China)

  • Xiang Yuan

    (School of Civil Engineering, Department of Construction Management, Hainan University, Haikou 570228, China)

Abstract

Skeleton and Infill (SI) housing system is considered as a significant path of sustainably prolonging building life by improving structural durability and infill variability for its nature that the skeleton system is fixed, while the infill system could be rebuilt to satisfy users’ changing demands in different stage without damaging the skeleton system. The application of a SI housing system involves two new characteristics compared to traditional cast-in-place housing system: components production in factories and site construction are carried out simultaneously; the skeleton system and the infill system are constructed in parallel phases, which increase enormous parallel work. Iterations and rework would increase with the improper handling of parallel works, which lead to higher construction cost and lower participant willingness of stakeholders in SI housing construction delivery process. It is essential to establish a model to clarify the dependencies among major parallel work items and recognize parallel work sets to optimize the construction sequence for stakeholders to strengthen communication and coordination on key work items in a more efficiency way. By conducting investigations into the construction delivery process of typical SI housing projects in China, this paper developed a parallel collaborative mode based on the design structure matrix (DSM) to identify the complex dependencies among major cooperative work items. Furthermore, to provide an optimized parallel collaborative process, graph theory was introduced to find parallel work sets and eliminate repetition and iteration caused by improper work execution sequences. The results provide a guide for stakeholders to make appropriate cooperation strategies in implementing major work items and promoting cooperating efficiency by reducing iteration and rework.

Suggested Citation

  • Xinying Cao & Xiaodong Li & Yangzhi Yan & Xiang Yuan, 2018. "Skeleton and Infill Housing Construction Delivery Process Optimization Based on the Design Structure Matrix," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-18, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:10:y:2018:i:12:p:4570-:d:187569
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/12/4570/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/12/4570/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Robert P. Smith & Steven D. Eppinger, 1997. "A Predictive Model of Sequential Iteration in Engineering Design," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 43(8), pages 1104-1120, August.
    2. Jelena Nikolic, 2018. "Building “with the Systems” vs. Building “in the System” of IMS Open Technology of Prefabricated Construction: Challenges for New “Infill” Industry for Massive Housing Retrofitting," Energies, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-17, May.
    3. Robert P. Smith & Steven D. Eppinger, 1997. "Identifying Controlling Features of Engineering Design Iteration," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 43(3), pages 276-293, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Luo, Jianxi & Triulzi, Giorgio, 2018. "Cyclic dependence, vertical integration, and innovation: The case of Japanese electronics sector in the 1990s," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 46-55.
    2. Nitindra R. Joglekar & Ali A. Yassine & Steven D. Eppinger & Daniel E. Whitney, 2001. "Performance of Coupled Product Development Activities with a Deadline," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(12), pages 1605-1620, December.
    3. Luo, Jianxi, 2018. "Architecture and evolvability of innovation ecosystems," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 132-144.
    4. V. Krishnan & Karl T. Ulrich, 2001. "Product Development Decisions: A Review of the Literature," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(1), pages 1-21, January.
    5. Anderson, Shannon W. & Glenn, David & Sedatole, Karen L., 2000. "Sourcing parts of complex products: evidence on transactions costs, high-powered incentives and ex-post opportunism," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 25(8), pages 723-749, November.
    6. Tyson R. Browning, 1999. "Sources of schedule risk in complex system development," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 2(3), pages 129-142.
    7. Joglekar, Nitin R. & Ford, David N., 2005. "Product development resource allocation with foresight," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 160(1), pages 72-87, January.
    8. Manuel E. Sosa & Jürgen Mihm & Tyson R. Browning, 2013. "Linking Cyclicality and Product Quality," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 15(3), pages 473-491, July.
    9. Krishnan, Viswanathan, 1998. "Modeling ordered decision making in product development," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 111(2), pages 351-368, December.
    10. Manuel E. Sosa & Steven D. Eppinger & Craig M. Rowles, 2004. "The Misalignment of Product Architecture and Organizational Structure in Complex Product Development," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 50(12), pages 1674-1689, December.
    11. Samina Karim & Chi‐Hyon Lee & Manuela N. Hoehn‐Weiss, 2023. "Task bottlenecks and resource bottlenecks: A holistic examination of task systems through an organization design lens," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 44(8), pages 1839-1878, August.
    12. Lin, Jun & Qian, Yanjun & Cui, Wentian & Goh, Thong Ngee, 2015. "An effective approach for scheduling coupled activities in development projects," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 243(1), pages 97-108.
    13. Atif Açıkgöz & Irem Demirkan & Gary P. Latham & Cemil Kuzey, 2021. "The Relationship Between Unlearning and Innovation Ambidexterity with the Performance of New Product Development Teams," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 30(4), pages 945-982, August.
    14. Thomke, Stefan H., 1998. "Simulation, learning and R&D performance: Evidence from automotive development," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 55-74, May.
    15. Annika Lorenz & Michael Raven & Knut Blind, 2019. "The role of standardization at the interface of product and process development in biotechnology," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 44(4), pages 1097-1133, August.
    16. Christopher M. Schlick & Soenke Duckwitz & Sebastian Schneider, 2013. "Project dynamics and emergent complexity," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 19(4), pages 480-515, December.
    17. Inayat Ullah & Dunbing Tang & Qi Wang & Leilei Yin, 2017. "Least Risky Change Propagation Path Analysis in Product Design Process," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 20(4), pages 379-391, July.
    18. Mohsen Jafari Songhori & Madjid Tavana & Takao Terano, 2020. "Product development team formation: effects of organizational- and product-related factors," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 26(1), pages 88-122, March.
    19. Sosa, Manuel E., 2003. "Factors that influence technical communication in distributed product development : an empirical study in the telecommunications industry," Working papers WP 4123-00., Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Sloan School of Management.
    20. Munehiko Itoh, 2004. "Modularization for Product Competitiveness - Analysis of Modularization in the Digital Camera Industry -," Discussion Paper Series 164, Research Institute for Economics & Business Administration, Kobe University.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:10:y:2018:i:12:p:4570-:d:187569. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.