Architectural designs and Constructability Issues

AKGEC INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF TECHNOLOGY, Vol. 3, No. 1
Architectural Designs and Constructability Issues
Eng. Ali Akbar Kamari 1 and Prof. S. S. Pimplikar 2
1
No 24, Roz Alley, Rohani Ave, Mahdieh St, Hamedan, Iran
2
Department of Civil Engineering, MIT College, Paud Road, Camp, Pune 411038, Maharashtra, India
hamid.kamari@gmail.com, sunil.pimplikar@mitpune.edu.in
Abstract -- Enhancing construction abilities is a primary concern
for designers & builders. This can be examined through a
roughly-tuned concentration on the relationship between
Architectural design & constructional issues. According to
constructional issues, effective designs will lead to effective
structures as the relationship between these two is considered
synergistic. Nowadays, project teams often perform
constructability reviews to identify problematic issues that limit
constructions performance.
Problematic issues related to architectural designs occur mostly
in these areas: Civil, Structural, Mechanical, Electrical against
compatibility with Architectural design. Overall analysis of
these areas will lead to a great change in the way things have
been done in the two last decades in Architectural realm.
Importantly, the analysis of the potentials to improve
sustainability & the constructability of a project will enhance
when the issue & designs are integrated & approached in a
combined fashion.
where the design team evaluates, selects, and finalizes the
major systems and components of the project.
The design phase also includes the preparation of technical
documents, specifications, as well as the general conditions.
The project schedule and budget continue to be developed
and monitored during this phase. The project procurement
phase is the time when the project formally transitions from
design preparation into construction preparation. This phase
includes the bidding and award process. The project’s schedule
and budget are finalized in this phase. The construction phase
presents the actual physical construction of the project. This
phase begins with the mobilization to the site, then the
implementation, and finally ends by the project closeout.
This paper assesses constructability practices among designers
with high focus on Architectural design. The data is obtained
from theoretical observations as stage 1 (review & search on
previous observations) and practical observations as stage 2 (case
study & questionnaire paper).
Keywords: Phases, Types, Architectural designs, Importance of
Constructability Issues
I. INTRODUCTION
FROM start to completion, construction projects undergo a
number of phases characterized by many tasks aimed at
identifying, planning, designing, and constructing the
proposed facility. Such phases and tasks may be grouped into
two main stages as shown in Figure 1; a Preconstruction Stage
and a Construction Stage.
During the conceptual planning phase, the owner hires key
consultants to begin selecting the project site, and developing
a conceptual estimate, plan, and program. In this phase, the
owner, after gathering information about the project, makes a
decision whether or not to proceed with the project. The design
development phase comprises of: (1) the schematic designs
where the design team investigates alternate design solutions
and alternate materials and systems, and (2) the detailed design
Figure 1. Construction project phases [1].
The successful completion of a construction project requires
a thorough understanding of all stages and phases of the
project, and can be enhanced through integration of design
and construction during the pre-construction stage.
Constructability, or buildability, is a major factor in measuring
the success or failure of construction projects. Several
constructability problems or barriers to accomplish a successful
project may be addressed during the pre-construction stage,
as well as the construction stage. During the pre-construction
stage, lack of construction knowledge/experience integration
8

ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN ISSUES
in the planning and design processes is a major factor that
leads to constructability problems during the construction
stage. This is because many design professionals have little
experience in construction practices, local considerations, the
availability of different resources, and are not necessarily
experts in construction means and methods. During the
procurement phase, contractor reliance on contract documents
to visualize the construction process and decide on appropriate
construction methods is limited to 2D drawings. This approach
limits the contractor’s ability to be more familiar with the project
at this early stage and prior to the start of actual construction.
During the construction stage, constructability issues such
as safety, storage access, security, quality, and schedule
updating are major factors that influence the accomplishment
of a successful project.
II. NEED FOR STUDY
Purpose
As projects get more and more complex the issue of
constructability becomes important. Constructability infiltrates
all parts of a project, especially those related to the engineering
and architectural professions. With projects becoming more
and more complex and time frames shorter and shorter, implied
warranty and severe professional liability issues may arise.
Design professionals need to be aware of the potential issues
and claims implied by a design’s constructability or build ability
profile. When a project has inherent constructability issues,
resulting litigation can involve delay claims, change order
issues and disputes, and owner’s dissatisfaction with delivery.
In extreme situations, direct claims may be made against the
design principal for poor plans, specifications or estimates, or
schedules that have made the project difficult to build, or more
costly or time consuming than anticipated.
The issue is well recognized in the construction industry, but
what is not so well recognized is when to do constructability
reviews, who should do them and how they should be done.
This Practice Note provides suggestions and a methodology
for conducting constructability reviews of projects of all types
and sizes. Constructability issues not only involve issues of
build ability, but also the sequence of construction and
integration of systems in a logical sequence using standard
substructures.
There are two purposes for the formation of the collecting of
Constructability issues. These include:
• To create an ongoing forum for the definition of a
constructability body of knowledge through the
compilation of case studies related to architectural
designs
• To provide a case study data set for academic education
in architectural engineering
Features
Constructability is a project management technique for
reviewing construction processes from start to finish during
the pre-construction phrase[13]. It will identify obstacles before
a project is actually built to reduce or prevent error, delays and
cost overruns. The term “constructability” is referred to as:
• The extent to which the design of the building facilitates
ease of construction, subject to the overall requirements
for the completed building[13]
• A system for achieving optimum integration of
construction knowledge and experience in planning,
engineering, procurement and field operations in the
building process, and balancing the various project and
environmental constraints to achieve overall
objectives[13]
• A system for achieving optimum integration of
construction knowledge in the building process and
balancing the various project and environmental
constraints to maximize achievement of project goals and
building performance[13]
III. LITERATURE REVIEW
Following points emerged from the literatures review:
1. Constructability improvement strategies: Several strategies
and concepts have been presented to improve the project
constructability during the different phases of the preconstruction
stage. Tatum recommended the use of the
“backward pass” approach to planning to ensure that the
schedule is driven by the construction needs. Galvanic
described two methods for improving constructability and
decreasing design-related problems during the construction
process: (1) Design Phase Scheduling, and (2) In-House
Design-Phase Constructability Review. O’Connor et al
identified seven concepts for improving constructability
during the design/procurement phases of a project: (1) a
Construction-Driven schedule, (2) Simplified Design, (3)
standardization of design, (4) Pre-assembly work should be
scoped in advance and pre-assembly designs should be
prepared to facilitate fabrication, transport, and installation,
and thus to enhance project constructability. (5) Accessibility,
(6) Adverse Weather, (7) Specifications.[1]
2. Constructability improvement solution models: Different
solution models for constructability improvement were
implemented to assist the project team in integrating
construction knowledge/experience during the preconstruction
stage. Fischer presented a Construction
Knowledge Expert (COKE) that guides designers towards
designing structures that are more constructible. Patty et al.
presented a computer tool that utilizes a multimedia to give the
designer the capability of accessing constructability
information at the point of design. Moore and Tunnicliffe
described aspects of the production of an Automated Design
Aid (ADA) that provides the designer with useful decision
9

AKGEC INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF TECHNOLOGY, Vol. 3, No. 1
support regarding design corrections and adaptations.
Kupernas et al introduced a methodology to use a computer
aided drafting (CAD) 3D model of a project to review design
layouts and to identify design conflicts as part of a preconstruction
constructability review. Within this methodology
two reviews are performed. Constructability improvement
solution models as explained in up made by Kupernas has
shown in Figure 2.[1]
Figure 2. Constructability improvement solution models[1].
3. The maximum benefits of constructability reviews, measured
by their ability to influence cost, are obtained in the design
phase. Therefore, the study reported here surveys design firms
to assess the current practice of constructability reviews
conducted in the design of buildings and engineering works.
The major findings and the conclusions of the research are
summarized as follows:
A. Most design professionals are aware of constructability as
a quality indicator of their finished product. About 96% of the
respondents are familiar with the concept of constructability,
B. Slightly more than half of the designers indicated that they
have a documented, formal corporate policy to conduct
constructability reviews in their organization,
C. There is evidence that designers are abandoning the
traditional, physical small-scale models in favor of computer
generated 3D models,
D. Peer reviews and feedback systems are the most prevalent
tools used to achieve high levels of constructability,
E. Most designers conduct constructability reviews in both
the preliminary and developed design stages.,
F. Design professionals believe that project complexity is an
essential factor that affects the way a constructability review
is conducted in the design stage. Project complexity
technology, materials, and methods of construction!
G. Design practices and philosophy usually determine the
approach followed in analyzing the constructability of a design,
H. Faulty working drawings and incomplete specifications are
the major constraints working against constructability of
design; on the other hand, owner resistance and budget
limitations are perceived by designers as having a trivial effect
on constructability,
I. Designers consider developing good relationships with
contractors and clients and avoiding litigation to be the best
rewards of a highly constructible design. This finding supports
the involvement of construction personnel in the design phase,
which presumably improves the mutual understanding among
the parties involved in the construction project, consequently
reducing the chances for future disputes and potential litigation,
J. Value engineering can be a complementary process to
constructability, but cannot replace it [2].
4. Many constructability issues exist that can influence
implementation of constructability reviews on transportation
projects. These issues were identified and then categorized
into three areas related to project execution processes, project
planning and technical design documents, and project
resources. Based on the analysis of issues within each
category, senior management within state transportation
agencies should consider a number of strategies. First, they
must recognize the favorable benefit/ cost ratio of
implementation. Similarly, they should develop an agency
policy specifically for constructability. Next, a process for
incorporating constructability reviews into the planning,
design, and construction phases must be implemented. This
process should incorporate the use of a constructability team,
a constructability consultant/ engineer, lessons learned,
alternate contracting approaches, and constructability tools.
The process should ensure feedback to designers and feedback
from maintenance and operations personnel. Ultimately, the
process must enhance plans, specifications, and contract
documents for constructability. Managers within state
transportation agencies can focus on these strategies to aid in
the development of a successful constructability program [5].
5. Constructability Review Manual: The basic steps to
preparing a Constructability review are:
‣ Study the construction documents, read the
specifications, understand the program or design
parameters, the Owner’s needs and concerns including
the initial budget. This will allow one understand the
make-up of the project, the critical items, the areas of
concern, and possible value engineering issues.
‣ Most Architects should appreciate comments to improve
the quality of the documents. One need to should be
careful not to offend the Architect with comments.
Architects should realize that this review would reduce
the number of Bulletins, design clarifications, RFI’s and
Contract Administration during construction.
‣ During the Constructability Review one should also note
potential scope issues and gaps that are discovered in
the detail review and collect these by trade to allow the
items to be incorporated into the Additional Provisions.
10

ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN ISSUES
‣ The Constructability review session should be planned
and organized to produce the best results possible.
Depending on the complexity of the project, there may
be different methods used during the session. Some
methods may include the following:
• Focus review on specific areas of the building, or by
floor.
• Assign certain trades to different people so they can
focus on one type of trade (i.e. door issues, wall types,
ceiling heights, foundation conflicts, roofing details,
etc.).
• Review the building by major discipline, such as structure,
site work, exterior envelope, architectural, mechanical,
electrical, and plumbing.
One must perform a separate review of the building
envelope and its details, since this is usually a
source of post-construction problems.
• Architectural review should be done so that all portions
of the drawings are completely reviewed, such as floor
plans, interior elevations, ceiling plans, finish schedules,
sections, and details [9].
6. Constructability Session:
‣ When planning a Constructability Review session,
different Consultant’s staff representing all disciplines
of the work should be invited. The review may be divided
into areas or by discipline, i.e. Architectural, Structural,
Mechanical, Electrical, etc. and include the following
invited attendees:
- Operations Manager (Optional)
- Project Executive
- Project Manager (if assigned)
- Pre-Construction Manager or Architectural Estimator
- Mechanical Estimator
- Electrical Estimator
- Project Superintendent (if assigned)
- Project Engineer (if assigned)
‣ An individual with a good grasp of the entire project
should spearhead the review process, and act as a
collecting point for comment, suggestions, etc. This team
may provide different areas of expertise and a wellrounded
review of the Documents focused on past
experience and design coordination.
‣ In most instances, the architect, consultants, and/or
owner’s representative should be invited to attend, if
the Project Executive believes that their presence will
facilitate the Constructability review session.
‣ Involving other Consultant’s employees not assigned
to the specific project is also helpful, especially if that
individual(s) has experience with a particular building
type, building product, or architect.
‣ In certain situations, where unique or special construction
and systems are part of the design, it may be appropriate
to solicit subcontractor and vendor input.
‣ The session should be long enough to allow sufficient
time to review all of the documents, which in most cases,
will require at least a whole work day, or more. A list of
responsibilities should be prepared in advance. Try to
arrange for the session to take place in a place where
there will be the least amount of distractions and phone
calls for the participants, which are disruptive [9].
7. The sponsor or champion is the driving force behind
constructability reviews on projects by: (1) setting project
objectives, (2) selecting the contract strategy, (3) selecting
which outside consultants or contractors will participate if
needed, and (4) funding constructability resources during
planning and design [11].
8. (A) Identify Constructability Features: The first module
identifies design-relevant constructability problems in the input
IFC-based product model and instantiates them as
constructability features. Product features are used extensively
in manufacturing to describe the geometric forms or entities in
a product model that are important in some aspect of the
manufacturing process, (B) Identify Construction Implications:
The second module identifies the construction implications
for the project-specific constructability features. They currently
represent construction implications generically in terms of
activities, resources, and resource productivity rates and
classify constructability features accordingly. Hence, the
system identifies the appropriate construction implication
based on the type of the constructability feature, (C) Calculate
Costs: The third module calculates the costs of constructability
features based on the associated construction implications.
At this stage in the reasoning process, calculating the
construction costs is straightforward because the system
understands how the constructability features affect activities,
resources, and resource productivity rates. The output of the
third module is a set of prioritized project-specific
constructability features and their associated costs [3].
IV. OBJECTIVES AND TOOLS OF THE STUDY
In the study, the following objectives are envisaged are fallows:
1) The objective of the research is to accelerate the use of
constructability programs through the identification of
common architectural constructability issues and
identification of key constructability check strategies in
related with architectural designs.
2) Changing industry needs have take big leaps in the past
two decades. Design and construction practices and
project delivery systems have moved into the direction
of integration. This has strongly encouraged many
practitioners to consider design processes and
construction processes concurrently in consecutive
phases. By narrowing the gap between design and
construction, thru integration, project constructability
can be greatly improved. This white paper attempts to
11

AKGEC INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF TECHNOLOGY, Vol. 3, No. 1
present the author’s views on how the design process
can be further enhanced thru direct integration with the
construction process. The paper first presents a brief
summary of several recent research efforts that address
this issue. The paper then presents a model for integrating
the design and construction processes during the preconstruction
stage for improved constructability.
In the study, the following tools are envisaged:
• Collection of data with search in existing observations
and studies (Stage 1)
• Collection of data based on actual site observations
(Stage 2)
• Collection of data through a questionnaire paper survey
(Stage 3)
V. METHODOLOGY OF THE STUDY
In order to achieve the objectives set, data was collected from
the field practices which are being followed in the building
construction and from the different project sites and different
locations, also form the professional consultant companies by
submitting the questionnaires and abundant meeting with
engineers who are forefront in the four field of construction,
Architectural, Civil, Mechanical, and Electrical fields.
The companies from where data is collected are listed below:
• Construction Engineering Sservices(I) Pvt.Ltd
• Vedanta Engineering Consultancy Services
• Nucon Products Pvt.Ltd
• Construction Catalysers Private Limited
The type of data collected for stage 3 is based on the
information presented in questionnaire:
• The questionnaire contains project name, location,
building type, date of completion, type of contract,
etc; A sample questionnaire is presented in
Appendix A.
- An attempt is made to explore some Constructability
Issues which have been experienced by professional
Engineers and Architects, during their lifetime
- The information and data collected is analysed in order
to achieve the aforementioned objectives based on which
few recommendation are made; in order to improve
constructability.
Constructability Issues and Area of Occurrence: Typical
constructability problems from the following disciplines:
- Structural
- Civil
- Mechanical
- Electrical
- Architectural
This excerpt from abstruse projects illustrates the sort of
problems that routinely occur “inside” a discipline - in this
case and according to the result of first diagram in the area of
Figure 3. Constructability Issues and Area of Occurrence
in related with architectural designs.
Civil and Structural (Figure 3)- where only someone actively
looking for discrepancies within the disciplines will find them.
As with all similar problems, these (and many others so have
discovered) delayed the project for months.
Projects status occasionally were as follows when asked to
review the project:
Majority of field constructions were not building and
completing projects as expected.
Average of the construction cost were more than Rs 5 million,
with the local relevant financing majority.
Although a routine Interdisciplinary Coordination Review had
been conducted prior to construction, it failed to highlight the
serious problems. What was missing A thorough review of
each discipline.
Figure 4. Rating Contract types with respect to their usage in field
of construction(out of 100 %).
Contract types: The type of contracting is related to volume of
constructability issues(Figure 4), most and best usage were
BOT(Build-Operate-Transfer) and DB(Design-Build); In
12

ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN ISSUES
general volume of constructability problems were lesser vis as
vis rest(for the mentioned contract types, BOT had minimum
constructability issues against the other types.
Constructability Issues Into project Phases: The projects
considered had some times over 950 drawings - and majority
used the Metric system. The review took five weeks to complete.
An overview of the report follows:
- In geotechnical sector there were populous observed
problems in Detail-Design and Construction phases(5.7,
7.2)
Meanwhile as a results, problems suggest itself in Construction
phase majority; All components of course, would depend on
the main area of occurrence but engineers should high focus
and also high conciliation in foregoing phase.
Figure 6. Timing of constructability reviews: A, conceptual planning
stage; B, preliminary design stage; C, developed design stage; D,
after finishing the design [2].
Figure 5. Constructability Issues Into project Phases.
With respect to project phases(Figure 5) volume of
constructability issues in related to each field of construction
are different and for each field respect to figure 3 engineers
must focus seriously on the life cycle aspects of the projects
as:
- In architectural sector there were many issues in the
Detail-Design and Pre-Concept Planning phases(9.2 , 6.5)
- In civil sector there were many observed problems in
Detail-Design and Construction phases(8.6 , 8.9)
- In structural sector there were numerous problems in
Detail-Design and Construction phases(8.6 , 7.8)
- In mechanical sector there were high issues in Contract
Award and Construction phases(6.7 , 5.2)
- In electrical sector there were many problems in Concept-
Design and Detail-Design phases(8.4 , 7.5)
Timing of Constructability Reviews: The responses plotted in
figure 6 show that the developed design stage is where most
constructability reviews are conducted (87%). It was also found
that 25% of the respondents perform constructability analysis
throughout the entire design process conceptual planning,
preliminary design, developed design stages, and after
finishing the design. This means that one quarter of the design
firms surveyed treats constructability improvement as part of
an overall continuous project improvement process, which is
the recommended practice by most researchers.
It is generally thought that constructability reviews should be
conducted after plans are completed to a certain level in order
for reviewers to have something to work with. An alternative
process emphasizes that construction expertise must be
brought in before any design is put onto paper. This way,
opportunity is provided to the designers to begin their work
with certain key issues in mind, issues that can frequently be
accommodated without adverse cost to the design.[2]
If the sum of the respective bars in figure 6 is considered, it can
be observed that 51% of the firms start performing
constructability reviews as early as the conceptual planning
stage, and 80% as early as the preliminary design stage. Four
percent stated that their firms conduct constructability reviews
only after finishing the design. Only one respondent (0.8%)
indicated that his/her firm never performs constructability
reviews. These findings indicate that there is a tendency to
13

AKGEC INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF TECHNOLOGY, Vol. 3, No. 1
perform constructability reviews early in the design process in
order to obtain maximum benefits. This finding supports
recommends that the constructability review process must
begin at the earliest conceptual stage to be fully effective.[2]
A constructability review process developed by the
Washington State Department of Transportation (WASHDOT)
is very similar to the practice reported by the respondents.
The WASHDOT process is composed of four constructability
reviews performed at various stages during the course of a
project. The first review is performed at the completion of the
draft project definition report, a comprehensive project report
developed during the project definition stage at which time a
value engineering study is performed. Then successive reviews
are conducted at various points during development of plans,
specifications, and estimate [2].
Factors That Enhance Constructability: The factors that were
rated in the survey by the designers are all project related. The
factors are plotted in figure 7 according to their mean score,
which ranges from 0 to 90 (0 being the least influential and 90
the most influential).
Figure 7. Rate the following factors with respect to their effect on
constructability (A-Project delivery system, B-Project complexity,
C-Project size, D-Design standards and codes,
E-Project location, F-Client type, G-Design practices and
philosophy, H-After finishing the design).
The most significant factor selected by the respondents is
project complexity, which reinforces the results of the
Construction Industry Cost Effectiveness project, which
indicated that the number of construction experts involved in
a constructability program should depend on project size and
complexity. Indeed, the likelihood of constructability problems
occurring in the design/construction of industrial facilities such
as a petrochemical plant is much higher than in civil engineering
projects such as laying a pipeline.
The factor that has the second highest influence on
constructability is design practices and philosophy, which
shows that constructability is affected largely by the designer’s
approach to the problem. Constructability can be enhanced
by a corporate culture that includes meticulous attention to
construction detail, values practical site experience, takes pride
in a track record of projects completed with minimum redesign,
and rewards architects/ engineers who produce constructible
designs.
The third factor that impacts constructability is the project
delivery system. Whether a constructability program is
administered by the constructor or the owner makes a difference.
As mentioned previously, design-build practices are also
expected to reduce constructability problems as the interface
between the constructor and the designer in this delivery
system is more rigorous than in the traditional design-bidbuild
system. Partnering allows long-term relationships
between constructors and designers, and as a result, it minimizes
constructability problems, because the designer knows well
what the partnering constructor requires in the design.[2]
Not surprisingly, the least important factors were marked as
project location and design standards. Indeed, design
standards are to be adhered to and do not affect constructability
as these are universal and have been in the books for a long
time. As to project location, the only factor that can be of
consequence in constructability would be the designer’s
ignorance of local construction practices and/or local materials.
Given the uniform training of unionized labor and the
widespread use of national material brands, it is not surprising
that this factor is at the bottom of the respondents’ list.
Factors that Constrain Constructability: All the constraints
listed in the questionnaire were project related. The factors are
plotted in figure 8 according to their mean score, which ranges
from 0 to 100 (0 being the least influential and 90 the most
influential).
Faulty, ambiguous, or defective working drawings, incomplete
specifications, and adversarial relationships were found to be
the three major factors that cause constructability problems.
Working drawings are an essential element of construction,
bridging the gap between the design set forth in the
specifications and the details necessary to fabricate material
and install the work in the field. Any faults or ambiguity in
working drawings can lead to cost overruns, delays, disruption
of construction progress, and consequently, litigation between
the designer and other parties involved in the process. This
finding reinforces technical contract documents are very
important and effective tools in achieving a highly
constructible design. Specifications can be set as design or
performance specifications, design specifications being the
‘‘recipe’’ the contractor is required to follow; whereas,
performance specifications dictate what the end result should
be without telling the contractor how to accomplish that result.
14

ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN ISSUES
The incomplete specifications factor is the second most
important factor shown in diagram 6 that causes
constructability problems. If construction personnel are
involved in the preparation of specifications, many on-site
conflicts can be avoided. The construction industry is a
fragmented industry where different parties such as the owner,
contractor, designer, and subcontractors have differing and
sometimes conflicting objectives. This fragmentation is
particularly prevalent in the traditional designbid-build project
delivery system where adversarial relationships among the
parties has become the norm. The lack of trust, the existence of
conflicting objectives, and the common expectation of frequent
disagreements result in a general lack of communication which
in turn creates constructability problems [2].
The respondents listed budgetary limitations, resistance of
the owner to formal constructability programs, and
nonstandardization of design to be the least influential
constraints that hinder constructability (Figure 8). This finding
challenges the common perception that owners constitute a
barrier to formal constructability programs because
constructability programs add a highly visible extra cost to
projects, and benefits are less tangible. The findings suggest
that there is no tendency on the part of the owners to prevent
constructability programs, probably because of their proven
cost savings.
Benefits of constructability reviews: A constructability program
introduces a cost that is usually added to the design fee and
might harm the competitiveness of the firm. Some firms absorb
that cost into their indirect expenses to stay competitive, so
there should be some benefits to the design firms in return for
their investment in a more buildable design.
The most significant benefits listed by respondents are
developing better relationships with clients and contractors,
being involved in fewer lawsuits, and building a good
reputation(Figure 9).
This finding indicates that long-term public relations, litigation
free jobs, and the building of a good reputation are crucial
considerations for design professionals, possibly because
design work is typically not awarded through lowest offer
bidding but by a client who approaches a reputable and
competent designer and negotiates an agreement.
A reduction in the number of potential claims and lawsuits
against the design firm was marked as the second reward of
constructability. This finding can be explained by the fact that
design errors (lack of constructability) are the most common
cause for contract claims [2].
The construction business is extremely risky. Much of the
preparatory paperwork that precedes construction projects can
be viewed as the formulation of risk allocation between the
Figure 9. Rate the following with respect to benefits of
constructability reviews to the design firm (A. Reduction in number
of claims & lawsuits against designer, B. Better reputation and more
workload, C. Improved efficiency of design, D. Professional
satisfaction, E. Better relationship with contractor and client).
owner, contractor, and designer. As claims and disputes
increase, the construction industry struggles to find a way to
equitably and economically resolve them. A study indicated
that fees paid to lawyers and experts in litigation had increased
425% between 1979 and 1990; whereas, settlements and verdicts
had increased only 309%. As a result, the threat of litigation
stifles innovation in engineering design. Even as they assess
risk carefully on a project-by-project basis, many designers
turn down work because of the threat of liability. This shows
that the threat of litigation is an important factor in the design
profession.
Constructability issues & Architectural aspects: It was
logical, then, there be a survey done related to architectural
designs and constructability issues directly; The findings
presented in figure 10 are most important Datas in the
questionnaire so indicate rate of architectural aspects against
the type of constructability problems respectively and the
respondents using these aspects in firms and organizations.
In this part a list of constructability problems which are the
most important related to architectural problematic aspects are
collected.
The most significant factor selected by the respondents is
area of architectural drawings(95%), which problems happen
mostly in the Construction Industry, which indicated that the
number of construction problems involved in a constructability
program are depend on process of providing the drawings,
and as a result this is depend out on the lack of details and 3d
shaping and forming of the concepts. In this area architectures
must focus favorably.
15

AKGEC INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF TECHNOLOGY, Vol. 3, No. 1
Figure 10. Rate the following constructability issues with respect to Architectural aspects(A-Architectural drawings, B-Shape of structure C-
Materials chosen by Architects D-Procedure of architectural designs E-Procedure of developing architectural designs F-Architectural designs &
compatibility with site of project G-Compatibility between interior and exterior designs H-Compatibility between Architectural designs and
Climate I-Disregard effects of the land type J-Design dependant on wrong survey information K-Efficacies of low execution knowledge in
Architects L-Architectural designs & direct affinity to costs & prices M-Architectural designs & procedure of insulation N-Architectural
designs & acoustic solutions O-Architectural new styles & shortage of enough knowledge P-Architectural designs & Energy saving problems Q-
Lack of 3D drawings for more explanation R-Lack of 3D drawings for more explanation S-Lack of 4D or even 5D drawings for more information).
The factors that has the second highest influence on
constructability issues related to architectural design respect
to figure 10 are compatibility between interior and exterior
designs and Architectural new styles & shortage of enough
knowledge(75%), which shows that architects have to make a
plan to show the in and out of each concept together also
whenever want to go through the designing new styles first
should finish theoretical information perfectly and for each
concept of new designs have to draw necessary details.
The third factor that impacts constructability is the procedure
of developing architectural designs and Acoustic
solutions(65%).
Other factors are also important that engineers should achieve
them and focus on them with percent of respondents sequence
and find adequate solutions to elimination perfectly.
Not startlingly, the least important factors were marked as
problems depending on surveying issues(10%) or climate
mutability(15%) or land type(20%) which shows that the
procedure of solving these type of problems are acceptable.
VI. CONCLUSION
This paper highlights the need for the study of only
constructability issues not with respect to the architectural
design but also with respect to various other factors which are
a part of the project life cycle.
The literature review and the various findings analysed through
questionnaire survey clearly indicate that if projects must
achieve their pre-fixed targets of time, quality, economy, then
construction risks, construction claims, and disputes need to
be minimized, if they cannot be eliminated. It is this domain,
which bears a direct co-relation between the constructability
issues and the project success/failure aspects.
An integrated approach towards project management, based
on Total Quality Management(TQM) principles may provide
the necessary solution. A micro-level approach incorporating
all the macro variables affecting the project and a synergistic
co-ordination, communication during the entire project life cycle
is suggested. Especially, the right/wrong decision made during
project pre-planning will improve/worsen the constructability
issues.
VII. REFERENCES
[1] Design/Construction Integration thru Virtual Construction for
Improved Constructability (Paper by Walid Thabet, Virginia
Tech)
[2] Constructability Analysis in the Design Firm(Paper by David
Arditi, M.ASCE;Ahmed Elhassan; Y. Cengiz Toklu)
[3] Providing Cost and Constructability Feedback to Designers
(Paper by Sheryl Staub-French)
[4] Integrating Constructability Tools Into Constructability
Review Process (Paper by Deborah J. Fisher, Stuart D.
Anderson, Suhel P. Rahman, Associate Members, ASCE)
16

ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN ISSUES
[5] Constructability Issues For Highway Projects (Paper by Stuart
D. Anderson, Deborah J. Fisher, Associate Members, ASCE,
and Suhel P. Rahman, Student Member, ASCE)
[6] Computer Visualization Support for Constructability (Paper
by G. Aouad, A. Lee and S. Wu)
[7] BIM Concepts and Benefits (Paper by Dr. Ulrich)
[8] Procurement and Constructability Issues (Paper by William
Bianco,)
[9] Constructability Review Manual (Paper by Gary R. Smith)
[10] Practical Soil Nail Wall Design and Constructability Issues
(Paper by Walter G. Kutschke, Fred S. Tarquinio, William K.
Petersen)
[11] Constructibility Issues on KyTC Projects (Paper by Donn E.
Hancher, Joseph J. Thozhal, Paul M. Goodrum)
[12] Metaphors in Design Problem Solving: Implications for
Creativity (Paper by Hernan Pablo Casakin)
[13] Constructability(Paper by IPENZ Engineering New Zeland)
[14] Concrete Examples: Why You Need AccuCheck
Constructibility Reviews(Paper by The ACR Group)
[15] An Analysis of Constructability Strategies in Project
Delivery(Paper by Kraig Lothe).
[16] United States Department of the Interior Cafeteria
Modernization (Paper by Michael Gorman).
[17] A BETTER WAY TO BUILD, Lower Costs and Higher
Quality(Paper by Wilis A. Smith).
[18] Preliminary Assessment of Construction Method and
Constructability Issues(Paper by Samuel Juan)
[19] Enterprise Architecture Framework And Methodology For
The Design of Architectures in the Large (Paper by Michael
Rohloff, Siemens AG).
[20]- Design methods and design theory for architectural design
management(Paper by Dr.ir. Henri Achten)
[21]- Move to Integrated Project Delivery and the 2007 AIA Contract
Documents(Paper by Terry Brennan).
[22] ASCE-CIConstructabilityCaseStudy
- http://www.itcon.org/
- http://www.bdcnetwork.com/
- http://www.bdcnetwork.com/
- http://www.biperusa.com/
- http://www.ASCE.com/
- http://www.experiencefefectival.com/
- http://www.restorationdesigngroup.com/
- http://www.worldarchitecturenews.com/
- http://www.construction-institute.org/
- http://www.constructioninst.org/
- http://www.kba-ips.com/
- http://enr.construction.com/
- http://www.the-acr-group.com/
Ali Akbar Kamari obtained B.Arch. Engg
in Architectural Design and Engineering
from Hamedan Azad University, Hamedan,
Iran in 2009. He has experience in a consultant
company with four fields of engineering
(Architectural, Civil, Mechanical
and Electrical) of around two years.
Since last two years, he is a student of the
postgraduate program at Construction and
Management, Department of Civil Engineering,
Maharashtra Institute of Technology,
Pune.
His research interests are in construction materials, energy efficiency of
building, architectural designs, intelligent green building, building information
model(BIM) and project management. He is a member of Iran
Engineers Union. Presently, working on ME dissertation.
Dr. S.S. Pimplikar is presently Professor
and Head of the Department of Civil
Engineering, Maharashtra Institute of Technology,
Pune.
His subject areas in which he is teaching,
are: Project Management, New
Construction Materials, Accident Studies,
Statistical Methods, Estimation and
Tendering and Financial Management.
His research interests are in construction
materials, transportation engineering,
green buildings, and project management.
Presented papers in international conferences and published technical
papers in National and International Journals. He is a member of the
Indian Road Congress, Indian society of Hydraulics and Indian Society of
Technical Education, Rotary club Pune.
17