Trade labor shortages. Thinner margins. Tighter schedules. Quality control issues. Weather events. Increased complexity. Safety concerns. There is a laundry list of reasons why general contractors, construction managers, and subcontractors should be jumping in with both feet to adopt prefabrication on projects.
Many of the nation’s largest contractors, including Gilbane, Mortensen, Skanska, and Turner, have been utilizing prefab techniques on select projects for a decade or more. Mortensen, in a 2014 study, even quantified the cost and schedule savings from select prefab approaches—exterior panel walls, bathroom pods, multi-trade racks, patient room headwalls—implemented on a Denver hospital project. The company’s conclusion: For every dollar it spent on prefab, 13% of the investment was returned as a “quantifiable benefit to the project”—through schedule and cost certainty, improved productivity, fewer safety incidents, and manpower consistency. That’s a 1.13 benefit-to-cost ratio. Not too shabby.
Yet the prefab movement—while growing—has been relatively slow to take hold in a big way in the U.S. construction market, especially among GCs and CMs, according to a newly released joint study by FMI and BIM Forum.
Of the 156 firms surveyed for the report, nearly three-quarters (74%) indicated that they use some level of prefab on select projects. Solid adoption rate, right?
Now look at the numbers based on the volume of project work. Just 23% of respondents use prefab assemblies on more than half of their projects, and less than a third (32%) utilize the process on 21-50% of their firm’s projects.
Shockingly, among the firms that have adopted prefab construction, the overwhelming majority (86%) admit that the process is either “not effective” or “needs improvement.”
Even the most ardent users of prefab concede that the movement, for most firms, is still in the R&D phase. Construction teams don’t have the luxury of repetition. Each project comes with a different set of circumstances—location, client, project team, building program requirements, cost restraints, and schedule demands.
Trial and error testing requires multiple projects spanning several years to see what works and what doesn’t. Early prefab adopters like Birmingham, Ala.-based Golden Construction are just coming out of that cycle. “Ten years ago, we were just trying to prove that prefabrication worked,” the firm’s President Geoffrey Golden told FMI. “Today, the conversations have shifted to, ‘Just how much can we impact projects’ bottom line and schedule?’”
Mastering prefab, say the authors of the FMI/BIM Forum report, requires a top-down commitment to the process, a willingness to fail and try again, and an “all or nothing” mindset. Dabbling in prefab often turns into an expensive mistake.
Related Stories
| Nov 16, 2010
Calculating office building performance? Yep, there’s an app for that
123 Zero build is a free tool for calculating the performance of a market-ready carbon-neutral office building design. The app estimates the discounted payback for constructing a zero emissions office building in any U.S. location, including the investment needed for photovoltaics to offset annual carbon emissions, payback calculations, estimated first costs for a highly energy efficient building, photovoltaic costs, discount rates, and user-specified fuel escalation rates.
| Nov 9, 2010
12 incredible objects being made with 3D printers today
BD+C has reported on how 3D printers are attracting the attention of AEC firms. Now you can see how other creative types are utilizing this fascinating printing technology. Among the printed items: King Tut’s remains, designer shoes, and the world’s smallest Rubik’s Cube.
| Nov 5, 2010
New Millennium’s Gary Heasley on BIM, LEED, and the nonresidential market
Gary Heasley, president of New Millennium Building Systems, Fort Wayne, Ind., and EVP of its parent company, Steel Dynamics, Inc., tells BD+C’s Robert Cassidy about the Steel Joist Manufacturer’s westward expansion, its push to create BIM tools for its products, LEED, and the outlook for the nonresidential construction market.
| Nov 3, 2010
Sailing center sets course for energy efficiency, sustainability
The Milwaukee (Wis.) Community Sailing Center’s new facility on Lake Michigan counts a geothermal heating and cooling system among its sustainable features. The facility was designed for the nonprofit instructional sailing organization with energy efficiency and low operating costs in mind.
| Nov 3, 2010
Virginia biofuel research center moving along
The Sustainable Energy Technology Center has broken ground in October on the Danville, Va., campus of the Institute for Advanced Learning and Research. The 25,000-sf facility will be used to develop enhanced bio-based fuels, and will house research laboratories, support labs, graduate student research space, and faculty offices. Rainwater harvesting, a vegetated roof, low-VOC and recycled materials, photovoltaic panels, high-efficiency plumbing fixtures and water-saving systems, and LED light fixtures will be deployed. Dewberry served as lead architect, with Lord Aeck & Sargent serving as laboratory designer and sustainability consultant. Perigon Engineering consulted on high-bay process labs. New Atlantic Contracting is building the facility.
| Nov 2, 2010
11 Tips for Breathing New Life into Old Office Spaces
A slowdown in new construction has firms focusing on office reconstruction and interior renovations. Three experts from Hixson Architecture Engineering Interiors offer 11 tips for office renovation success. Tip #1: Check the landscaping.
| Nov 2, 2010
A Look Back at the Navy’s First LEED Gold
Building Design+Construction takes a retrospective tour of a pace-setting LEED project.
| Nov 2, 2010
Wind Power, Windy City-style
Building-integrated wind turbines lend a futuristic look to a parking structure in Chicago’s trendy River North neighborhood. Only time will tell how much power the wind devices will generate.
| Nov 2, 2010
Yudelson: ‘If It Doesn’t Perform, It Can’t Be Green’
Jerry Yudelson, prolific author and veteran green building expert, challenges Building Teams to think big when it comes to controlling energy use and reducing carbon emissions in buildings.