Journal of Sustainable Architecture and Civil Engineering 2020/2/27 40 *Corresponding author: M.azizibabani@modares.ac.ir Investigating the Impact of the Prefabrication Concept on the Design and Selection of Building Components, Case Study: Peripheral Walls in Mass Housing Projects Received 2020/05/29 Accepted after revision 2020/09/29 Journal of Sustainable Architecture and Civil Engineering Vol. 2 / No. 27 / 2020 pp. 40-52 DOI 10.5755/j01.sace.27.2.26389 Investigating the Impact of the Prefabrication Concept on the Design and Selection of Building Components, Case Study: Peripheral Walls in Mass Housing Projects JSACE 2/27 http://dx.doi.org/10.5755/j01.sace.27.2.26389 Mohammadhossein Azizibabani*, Khosro Daneshjoo Department of Architecture, Faculty of Art, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran Saeid Saharkhizan Department of Structural Engineering, International Institute of Earthquake Engineering and Seismology (IIEES), Tehran, Iran Today, Prefabrication is considered as one of the concepts of industrialization in response to the growing needs of human societies for development. It is particularly important to address this concept in mass housing projects. The most important goals in adopting the prefabrication approach are to increase construction speed and quality and reduce costs. A review of the literature on prefabrication illustrates the importance of Design for Manufacturability and Design for Assembly concepts about components of prefabricated systems. In this regard, this research has been carried out to identify the criteria and indicators for selection of prefabricated peripheral walls and to design a system based on updatable databases to select proper options according to the importance of criteria and indicators in various mass housing projects. The research method is descriptive-analytical. The results indicate the necessity of involving building material suppliers in designing the mentioned system. Therefore, it is envisaged to continuously import new material specifications in the form of suggested options by the material suppliers in the system’s database. The criteria and indicators of peripheral wall selection extracted from the literature review of prefabrication and an Analytic Hierarchy Process structure is proposed to obtain the appropriate options considering the importance of criteria and indicators. To determine the scoring criteria for options, on the one hand, the standards set for the technical specifications of materials were discussed and on the other hand, samples including materials and Peripheral wall systems were investigated based on the prefabrication criteria. Keywords: Prefabrication, Industrialization, Design for Manufacturability, Design for Assembly, Analytic Hierarchy Process. 41 Journal of Sustainable Architecture and Civil Engineering 2020/2/27 The widespread and increasing need for human societies to develop construction suggests the necessity of employing new building systems and materials and modern construction meth- ods based on these main goals; increasing construction speed as well as reduction of building weights, costs, and environmental effects. In this regard, the concept of Industrialization to meet these goals is important. Industrialization is considered as a transition from the traditional stages to optimally exploit human resources and raw materials along with maintaining the quality and value of the produced product to meet the needs of the market and economic efficiency so that using modern technologies in a systematic structure leads used resources operate at the best level of efficiency. Increasing the speed and quality of construction along with reducing the time and price of the work are the benefits of industrialization (Eghbali & Hessari, 2013). Industrialization, which has to be employed as an effective strategy in the restructuring of the con- struction system, seeks its objectives with a systematic approach by applying a chain of actions and processes as follows: _ Detailed planning and implementation of systematic monitoring of the design and construc- tion process with the help of integrated management. _ Application of modern materials and technologies and mass production of building components. _ The stimulation of demand for integration and concentration of consumption market espe- cially in new towns and worn-out urban fabrics. _ The preparation of the building site from urban design and infrastructure power of view. _ Promoting industrialization and training skilled workers and experts. _ Developing prefabrication systems. Investigating the challenges faced with prefabrication methods is particularly important especially in mass housing projects. Prefabrication refers to the process of producing components of a sys- tem outside the location of its establishment and carrying them to be assembled in the designated place. The earliest examples of prefabricated buildings in the 17th century have been built in the UK as buildings made of wooden panels that were portable and had the capability of disassem- bly (Eghbali & Hessari, 2013). Today the concept of prefabrication in the construction industry is associated with industrial manufacture and assembly. In this regard, using similar building components is of particular importance to enable mass production in the factories. Despite the advantages of prefabrication methods, using them in mass housing projects especially in less developed regions can bring some challenges in architectural design and construction and main- tenance of projects (Azman, Ahamad, Majid, & Hanafi, 2010; Manley, Mckell, & Rose, 2009). There- fore, there are many types of research in different aspects of prefabrication that can be mentioned. Goulding et al. (2015) have examined the economic challenges facing prefabricated methods. Mao et al. (2013) have examined the technical obstacles and restrictions of prefabricated methods. Blismas et al. (2006), as well as Arif and Rahimian (2012), investigated the benefits of prefabricated methods in their research. Taghdiri and Ghanbarzade (2015) investigated the benefits of prefabricated com- pared to conventional construction methods and concluded that various prefabricated benefits have different values, in this regard, better management on improving the quality of precast products has the most value. Most of the studies have achieved the conclusion that overcoming challenges facing prefabricated methods is based on the continuous cooperation among all stockholders in the design, assembly, and installation stages of building components (KPMG, 2016). Concerning the prefabrication policies in different countries, in china after the emergence of the en- vironmental crisis in the 70s, the central government considered the prefabrication approach as the main strategy to diminish the bad effects of the construction industry on the environment (Li et al., 2014; Dou et al., 2019). In this regard, the prefabrication building’s codes were published and financial incentives for prefabrication buildings were specified by the government. In the US, the prefabrication Introduction Journal of Sustainable Architecture and Civil Engineering 2020/2/27 42 approach dates back to the 30s. On that decade the production of affordable mobile houses had been industrialized. in the 70s, due to the emergence of the sustainable development theory, prefabrica- tion was considered as one of the main strategies to diminish the bad effects of the building industry on the environment, so in 1976, the US Department of Housing and Urban Development established industry standards for prefabrication buildings (Wilson, 2012). Prefabrication construction in the UK dates back to the years between two world wars, on those years, this approach was developed due to the lack of expert workers and building materials (Howes, 2002). After the Second World War pre- fabrication construction was more prevailed due to the needs of fast reconstruction therefore in 1950 about 34% of London’s residential buildings were constructed using prefabrication methods (Ibid). In 1965 the UK government developed a five years program to build half a million houses per year, so the prefabricated approach was more prevailed (Millins et al., 2006). Peripheral walls are the basis of building facades and contain large amounts of finishing works. These components have great impacts on energy waste, so they are important in prefabrication construction. This applied research reviewed the principles and concepts related to industrialization and prefabrication and extracted the goals, criteria, and indicators of achieving them, to determine a structure for the selection of peripheral walls system in the mass housing projects in Iran. In this regard, according to the climatic, economic, cultural, and social conditions and level of available fa- cilities and technologies in each region, the importance of derived indicators in determining the type of peripheral walls may be different. Therefore, this research provides the necessary basis to design an application that contains the technical specifications of peripheral walls systems with continuous updating capability and providing the possibility of determining the importance of criteria and indica- tors to introduce suitable alternatives according to project conditions. The research questions are as follows: _ What are the goals and criteria of prefabrication in mass housing projects? _ What are the indicators of peripheral wall selection based on prefabrication goals in mass housing projects? The Importance of Prefabrication and Its Related Concepts Today, it is largely accepted that the industrialization in the construction has uncontested and sub- stantial advantages in comparison with traditional construction. Traditional methods of construc- tion may cause the following problems that can be solved by using industrialized construction. _ Waste of resources such as; energy, manpower, capital, time, and materials during the de- sign, construction, operation, and demolition cycles of the buildings. _ The lack of comprehensive and effective control of constructions. _ lack of integrity in planning and activities This shows the importance of the prefabrication concept as one of the necessities of industrialized construction. The review of literature on prefabrication and its related concepts shows the impor- tance of standardization in the process of design and production of a prefabricated system’s com- ponents. In this regard Wuni & Shen (2019) believe that standardization leads to diminishing the complexity of the design and the costs of construction, also the design of prefabricated buildings can be diversified by the customization of the component’s production line. Standardization in the prefabrication approach brings the possibility of mass production and accelerates the construction (Gao et al, 2019).). Concerning the advantages of the prefabrication approach in residential projects, Kibert (2012) and Li et al. (2014) have mentioned some items like (1) Fast return on investment for developers (2) costs reduction for residents (3) safe working conditions for construction workers and (4) waste minimization due to the high precision and repeatable production. Rod (2015) and Stein- hardt & Manley (2016) believe that It is easier to standardize the components of residential buildings. Design for Manufacturability (DFM) and Design for Assembly (DFA) are two bases of the pre- fabrication concept. DFM is the process of designing parts, components, or products for ease of 43 Journal of Sustainable Architecture and Civil Engineering 2020/2/27 Fig. 1 Typical stages in a DFMA procedure manufacturing with an end goal of making a better product at a lower cost. This would be possible by simplifying, optimizing, and refining the product design. The following are the requirements and benefits of DFM that should be considered in the design phase of the product: Source: (Boothroyd, 2005). _ Reducing the variation in system’s com- ponents _ Reducing the time and cost of the production _ Simplifying the production methods _ Simplifying and standardization where ever possible DFA seeks to simplify the product, so the cost of the assembly process is reduced. DFA also in- cludes a set of measures for combining parts to form the final product. Economical and technical justifications of using prefabricated methods in the field of the construction industry depend on technical measures in the architectural design phase (Stoll, 1986). Therefore, the assembly of the manufactured components in the building site can be done by the minimum construction operations, which causes accurate implementation, higher speed, and lower costs, so the desired goals will be more accessible (RIBA, 2013). DFM and DFA concepts should always be considered simultaneously in the prefabricated projects so the concept of Design for Manufacturability and Assembly (DFMA) has emerged in the literature of prefabrication (Bogue, 2012). The primary studies on DFA date back to the research of Boothroyd and Dewhurst (1987) which resulted in the extraction of actions during the design stages to achieve the optimal results in the assembly of the components. The main point in the design stage is to reduce the number of components types to reduce the probability of errors in the assembly stage. Every part of a prefabricated system must be in coordination with other parts during the normal operation of the system and also should be separable from other components (Emmatty & Sarmah 2012). DFM related studies are also concerned with finding materials and methods of producing prefabricated system’s components with a reduction in production costs, and ease of assembly (Ibid). Both is- sues are highly important in prefabricated projects and this indicates the necessity of addressing the concept of Design for Manufacturability and Assembly (DFMA). DFMA consists of stages shown in Fig 1.The benefits and guidelines of DFMA are presented in Table 1. Journal of Sustainable Architecture and Civil Engineering 2020/2/27 44 Table 1 General DFMA guidelines and their benefits GuidelinesBenefits Minimize the part count Improved reliability, reduced purchasing and inventory costs, simplified assembly Use standard, off-the-shelf parts rather than custom components Reduced costs, lower purchasing lead times, potentially greater reliability Minimize and standardize the use of fasteners/ design for efficient joining and fastening Reduced costs, simplified assembly, improved reliability, simplified repair and maintenance Use as few dissimilar materials as possibleSimplified jointing, fewer manufacturing processes Minimize the use of fragile parts Cost reductions due to fewer part failures, easier handling and assembly Do not over-specify tolerances or surface finishEasier manufacture and reduced fabrication costs Design for ease of fabrication Cost reductions from the elimination of complex fixtures and tooling Consider modular designsReduced costs due to simplified assembly and test Aim for mistake-proof designs Cost reductions by eliminating need to re-work incorrectly assembled parts Design for simple part orientation and handling Cost reductions due to non-valueadded manual effort or dedicated fixturing Design with predetermined assembly technique in mind Cost reductions from use of proven/ known techniques Consider design for automated/ robotic assemblyPotential cost reduction over manual methods Prefabrication Approach in Peripheral Walls Today, buildings use about 40% of the total global energy consumption (Attmann, 2010). The ex- ternal envelope system of the building which Non-load-bearing peripheral walls are of its main components is a significant contributor to the corresponding energy demand and indoor comfort conditions. Non-load-bearing walls generally can be classified from the aspects of function, posi- tion in the structure, and the type of materials. These components have significant impacts on the building energy performance and its related costs and also the thermal and acoustic comfort of the occupants. Earthquake data in different parts of the world show the importance of the seismic performance of these walls and the ne- cessity of their coordination with the whole structure (Noorifard.et.al, 2016). According to the con- cepts of DFM and DFA, in the case of the possibility of defining a factory production line for the components of a wall, and predicting the necessary preparations to assemble the components at the construction site, the prefabricated concept can be allocated to the system (Gao.et.al, 2019). However, the use of any material with these conditions can not necessarily lead to the achieve- ment of the intended goals for prefabrication. Most studies have stated that the main objectives of using prefabricated systems are to increase the quality and speed and reduce the cost of con- struction (Eghbali & Hessari, 2013; Gao.et.al, 2019; Bogue, 2012; Emmatty & Sarmah, 2012; Kibert, 2012; Li et. al, 2014). Quality includes a wide range of aspects from aesthetical to functional, which according to the purpose of this study, it is important to measure the quality in the proposed ranking system, so Source: (Bogue, 2012). 45 Journal of Sustainable Architecture and Civil Engineering 2020/2/27 Table 2 Non-load-bearing walls Classification N on -l oa d- be ar in g (N on st ru ct ur al ) w al ls F u nc ti o n Peripheral Walls Fig. 2. Walls Classification base on function Shared Walls With neighbors With interior shared spaces Partition Walls P o si ti o n in t he s tr u ct u re Infill walls Fig. 3. Infill wall 6 Non-load- bearing (Nonstructural) walls Shared Walls With neighbors Figure 2: Walls Classification base on function With interior shared spaces Partition Walls Position in the structure Infill walls Figure 3: Infill wall Partition wall Type of materials Discrete Walls made of Blocks Continues Walls made of Panels These components have significant impacts on the building energy performance and its related costs and also the thermal and acoustic comfort of the occupants. Earthquake data in different parts of the world show the importance of the seismic performance of these walls and the necessity of their coordination with the whole structure (Noorifard.et.al, 2016). According to the concepts of DFM and DFA, in the case of the possibility of defining a factory production line for the components of a wall, and predicting the necessary preparations to assemble the components at the construction site, the prefabricated concept can be allocated to the system (Gao.et.al, 2019). However, the use of any material with these conditions can not necessarily lead to the achievement of the intended goals for prefabrication. Most studies have stated that the main objectives of using prefabricated systems are to increase the quality and speed and reduce the cost of construction (Eghbali & Hessari, 2013; Gao.et.al, 2019; Bogue, 2012; Emmatty & Sarmah, 2012; Kibert, 2012; Li et. al, 2014). Quality includes a wide range of aspects from aesthetical to functional, which according to the purpose of this study, it is important to measure the quality in the proposed ranking system, so the criterion for evaluation of measurable qualities are national or international standards and codes. In this framework the following factors and their evaluation criteria are important in the selection of peripheral walls in a prefabricated system:  Fire resistance (INBC: part 3; ISIRI:12055-1)  Energy performance (INBC: part 19)  Acoustic performance (INBC: part 18; ISO717-1)  The possibility of industrial production (INBC: part 11)  Seismic performance (INBC: part 6) Partition wall Ty pe o f m at er ia ls Discrete Walls made of Blocks Continues Walls made of Panels the criterion for evaluation of measurable qualities are national or international standards and codes. In this framework the following factors and their evaluation criteria are important in the selection of peripheral walls in a prefabricated system: _ Fire resistance (INBC: part 3; ISIRI:12055-1) _ Energy performance (INBC: part 19) _ Acoustic performance (INBC: part 18; ISO717-1) _ The possibility of industrial production (INBC: part 11) _ Seismic performance (INBC: part 6) _ Other indicators: Durability, Maintenance and transportation costs, Environmental impacts the ability to recycle materials, and so on. (Expert questionnaire) The criteria and indicators in Fig. 4 are considered as the decision-making basis in the selection of the peripheral walls in a prefabricated system. The method of content analysis based on the literature review was deployed to extract the indicators of the three main criteria of prefabrication. In this regard, an analytic hierarchy process (AHP) method can be used to compare the proposed options and choose the preferred option based on the importance of criteria and indicators under the structure in Fig. 5. Source: Authors. Journal of Sustainable Architecture and Civil Engineering 2020/2/27 46 Fig. 5 The hierarchical structure of comparing the proposed options in determining the type of peripheral walls The Require ments of the Proposed Ranking System 7 § Other indicators: Durability, Maintenance and transportation costs, Environmental impacts the ability to recycle materials, and so on. (Expert questionnaire) The criteria and indicators in Figure 4 are considered as the decision-making basis in the selection of the peripheral walls in a prefabricated system. The method of content analysis based on the literature review was deployed to extract the indicators of the three main criteria of prefabrication. In this regard, an analytic hierarchy process (AHP) method can be used to compare the proposed options and choose the preferred option based on the importance of criteria and indicators under the structure in Figure 5. Figure 4. Criteria and indicators of the selection of the peripheral walls in the framework of prefabrication Figure 5. The hierarchical structure of comparing the proposed options in determining the type of peripheral walls 7 § Other indicators: Durability, Maintenance and transportation costs, Environmental impacts the ability to recycle materials, and so on. (Expert questionnaire) The criteria and indicators in Figure 4 are considered as the decision-making basis in the selection of the peripheral walls in a prefabricated system. The method of content analysis based on the literature review was deployed to extract the indicators of the three main criteria of prefabrication. In this regard, an analytic hierarchy process (AHP) method can be used to compare the proposed options and choose the preferred option based on the importance of criteria and indicators under the structure in Figure 5. Figure 4. Criteria and indicators of the selection of the peripheral walls in the framework of prefabrication Figure 5. The hierarchical structure of comparing the proposed options in determining the type of peripheral walls Fig. 4 Criteria and indicators of the selection of the peripheral walls in the framework of prefabrication Based on the criteria of the prefabricated approach, the proposed ranking system should include the following requirements for selecting superior choices about the peripheral walls. _ The possibility of determining the importance of different levels of criteria and applying changes in their values based on situations and desired goals. _ The possibility of loading different proposed options and introduce their technical specifica- tions to enrich the data bank of the system. _ Determining the maximum and minimum scores on quantities and qualities of the technical specifications of each option based on available standards. Therefore, the following workflow is being proposed for the ranking system. The proposed system should be available for all stockholders to select the proper option about the peripheral walls by determining the value of criteria and indicators of prefabrication based on the features of their projects. The procedure is as follows: the manufacturer of the product, after obtaining the necessary quality approvals, submit a request for registration of materials in the proposed ranking system data- 7  Other indicators: Durability, Maintenance and transportation costs, Environmental impacts the ability to recycle materials, and so on. (Expert questionnaire) The criteria and indicators in Figure 4 are considered as the decision-making basis in the selection of the peripheral walls in a prefabricated system. The method of content analysis based on the literature review was deployed to extract the indicators of the three main criteria of prefabrication. In this regard, an analytic hierarchy process (AHP) method can be used to compare the proposed options and choose the preferred option based on the importance of criteria and indicators under the structure in Figure 5. Figure 5. The hierarchical structure of comparing the proposed options in determining the type of peripheral walls 47 Journal of Sustainable Architecture and Civil Engineering 2020/2/27 Fig. 6 The workflow of the proposed system of ranking Investigation of the Common Samples base. After confirming the technical specifications based on the inquiry from the certification author- ities (Road, Housing and Urban Development Research Center of Iran), regarding the indicators for which there is a quantitative national or international standards, the system offers a point to each index by comparing technical specifications with other materials in the database. To determine the score of indicators which require experimental vision, technical specifications of materials with a questionnaire based on comparison with some of the basic materials that are addressed in the Samples, are being referred to the group of system’s partner specialist. Therefore, all the materials in the system database are ranked in terms of quality and technical specifications, and it will be possible to introduce samples that are compatible with the value set for the selection criteria, based on the AHP selection process. This part of the study deals with the Samples which include the common materials of the prefab- ricated peripheral walls. The requirements for entering any new option in the proposed ranking system are to pass quality tests and obtain approvals related to the Road, Housing, and Urban Development Research Center of Iran. Therefore, the qualitative evaluation of materials is done according to the approved technical specifications and comparison with the relevant standards. Regarding indicators for which there are no specific standards, the sources of evaluation are in- terviews with experts, including civil engineers and architects involved in construction projects. The purpose of the Investigation of the Samples is to achieve a scale to determine the score of different qualitative aspects of the proposed materials. It is more important about indicators for which no specific standards have been set. Therefore, it has been tried that Samples include a wide range of common materials in the Iranian construction market in terms of qualitative character- istics, technical specifications, methods of assembly, unit size, and price. Findings 8 The requirements of the proposed ranking system Based on the criteria of the prefabricated approach, the proposed ranking system should include the following requirements for selecting superior choices about the peripheral walls.  The possibility of determining the importance of different levels of criteria and applying changes in their values based on situations and desired goals.  The possibility of loading different proposed options and introduce their technical specifications to enrich the data bank of the system.  Determining the maximum and minimum scores on quantities and qualities of the technical specifications of each option based on available standards. Therefore, the following workflow is being proposed for the ranking system. Figure 6. the workflow of the proposed system of ranking. Source: Authors The proposed system should be available for all stockholders to select the proper option about the peripheral walls by determining the value of criteria and indicators of prefabrication based on the features of their projects. The procedure is as follows: the manufacturer of the product, after obtaining the necessary quality approvals, submit a request for registration of materials in the proposed ranking system database. After confirming the technical specifications based on the inquiry from the certification authorities (Road, Housing and Urban Development Research Center of Iran), regarding the indicators for which there is a quantitative national or international standards, the system offers a point to each index by comparing technical specifications with other materials in the database. To determine the score of indicators which require experimental vision, technical specifications of materials with a questionnaire based on comparison with some of the basic materials that are addressed in the Samples, are being referred to the group of system’s partner specialist. Therefore, all the materials in the system database are ranked in terms of quality and technical specifications, and it will be possible to introduce samples that are compatible with the value set for the selection criteria, based on the AHP selection process. Investigation of the common Samples Source: Authors. The investigation of Samples aimed to achieve a suitable scale to determine the weights of the in- dicators in the AHP process for the selection of the peripheral walls system. The literature review shows the importance of three criteria of construction speed, costs, and quality in the prefabrica- tion approach which include the mentioned indicators in Table 4. To adapt the different conditions existed for building projects, the importance of criteria and resulting indicators may be different and this affects the selection of systems for the building components. In the following table, the proposed domain of scores is given to indicators that can be the main source of the decision- making regarding the selection of the peripheral walls. These scores are determined based on the necessities of national building codes and standards and expert questionnaire. Journal of Sustainable Architecture and Civil Engineering 2020/2/27 48 Sa m pl e Ti tle Description Advantages Disadvantages Related Images L ig ht w ei gh t p er lit e bl oc ks These blocks are produced using mineral or artificial material as coarse material and cement base materials as a sticky one. The important advantages of these blocks can be attributed to their thermal insulation properties, which in some regions of Iran provide the requirements of the national codes without the need for additional layers. The most important disadvantages of this option can be pointed out to the multiplicity of the later stages (finishing work), high water uptake and ultimately slow execution rates. _ Thermal and Acoustic insulation _ Low Weight _ Fire resistant _ Needs to later stages _ Assembly Speed _ High Amount of Mortar and plaster _ Recyclability _ High Dis- posal Value Fig. 7. Lightweight perlite blocks 9 This part of the study deals with the Samples which include the common materials of the prefabricated peripheral walls. The requirements for entering any new option in the proposed ranking system are to pass quality tests and obtain approvals related to the Road, Housing, and Urban Development Research Center of Iran. Therefore, the qualitative evaluation of materials is done according to the approved technical specifications and comparison with the relevant standards. Regarding indicators for which there are no specific standards, the sources of evaluation are interviews with experts, including civil engineers and architects involved in construction projects. The purpose of the Investigation of the Samples is to achieve a scale to determine the score of different qualitative aspects of the proposed materials. It is more important about indicators for which no specific standards have been set. Therefore, it has been tried that Samples include a wide range of common materials in the Iranian construction market in terms of qualitative characteristics, technical specifications, methods of assembly, unit size, and price. Table 3: Descriptive and analytic features of samples Sample Title Description Advantages Dis advantages Related Images Lightweigh t perlite blocks These blocks are produced using mineral or artificial material as coarse material and cement base materials as a sticky one. The important advantages of these blocks can be attributed to their thermal insulation properties, which in some regions of Iran provide the requirements of the national codes without the need for additional layers. The most important disadvantages of this option can be pointed out to the multiplicity of the later stages (finishing work), high water uptake and ultimately slow execution rates. Thermal and Acoustic insulation Low Weight Fire resistant Needs to later stages Assembly Speed High Amount of Mortar and plaster Recyclability High Disposal Value Figure 7: Lightweight perlite blocks. Source: Authors Autoclaved aerated concrete (AAC) blocks These blocks are made of a specific type of porous light concrete, which is mainly made of silica, cement, and lime. This product consists of two main processes; forming porosity in grout (a mixture of cement, lime, and silica powder) and curing. Sticky materials (mainly cement and lime) react in an autoclave with silica materials and give hydrated calcium silicate. These blocks are fire resistant with low thermal conductivity. The use of these materials leads to a no- diffusion of the flame (Bastani & Ilani, 2011). AAC blocks are insulated against sound and heat due to their low special weight, so it is not necessary to use additional insulation layers and this can reduce the cost of construction and prevent waste of capital. High compressive strength Thermal and Acoustic insulation Low Weight Fire resistant Needs to later stages Assembly Speed High Amount of Mortar and plaster Recyclability High Disposal Value Figure 8: The thermal resistant comparison between AAC blocks wall and other walls. Source (Bastani & Ilani, 2011) Source: Authors. A ut oc la ve d ae ra te d co nc re te (A A C) b lo ck s These blocks are made of a specific type of porous light concrete, which is mainly made of silica, cement, and lime. This product consists of two main processes; forming porosity in grout (a mixture of cement, lime, and silica powder) and curing. Sticky materials (mainly cement and lime) react in an autoclave with silica materials and give hydrated calcium silicate. These blocks are fire resistant with low thermal conductivity. The use of these materials leads to a no- diffusion of the flame (Bastani & Ilani, 2011). AAC blocks are insulated against sound and heat due to their low special weight, so it is not necessary to use additional insulation layers and this can reduce the cost of construction and prevent waste of capital. _ High com- pressive strength _ Thermal and Acoustic insula- tion _ Low Weight _ Fire resistant _ Needs to later stages _ Assembly Speed _ High Amount of Mortar and plaster _ Recyclability _ High Dis- posal Value Fig. 8. The thermal resistant comparison between AAC blocks wall and other walls 9 This part of the study deals with the Samples which include the common materials of the prefabricated peripheral walls. The requirements for entering any new option in the proposed ranking system are to pass quality tests and obtain approvals related to the Road, Housing, and Urban Development Research Center of Iran. Therefore, the qualitative evaluation of materials is done according to the approved technical specifications and comparison with the relevant standards. Regarding indicators for which there are no specific standards, the sources of evaluation are interviews with experts, including civil engineers and architects involved in construction projects. The purpose of the Investigation of the Samples is to achieve a scale to determine the score of different qualitative aspects of the proposed materials. It is more important about indicators for which no specific standards have been set. Therefore, it has been tried that Samples include a wide range of common materials in the Iranian construction market in terms of qualitative characteristics, technical specifications, methods of assembly, unit size, and price. Table 3: Descriptive and analytic features of samples Sample Title Description Advantages Dis advantages Related Images Lightweigh t perlite blocks These blocks are produced using mineral or artificial material as coarse material and cement base materials as a sticky one. The important advantages of these blocks can be attributed to their thermal insulation properties, which in some regions of Iran provide the requirements of the national codes without the need for additional layers. The most important disadvantages of this option can be pointed out to the multiplicity of the later stages (finishing work), high water uptake and ultimately slow execution rates. Thermal and Acoustic insulation Low Weight Fire resistant Needs to later stages Assembly Speed High Amount of Mortar and plaster Recyclability High Disposal Value Figure 7: Lightweight perlite blocks. Source: Authors Autoclaved aerated concrete (AAC) blocks These blocks are made of a specific type of porous light concrete, which is mainly made of silica, cement, and lime. This product consists of two main processes; forming porosity in grout (a mixture of cement, lime, and silica powder) and curing. Sticky materials (mainly cement and lime) react in an autoclave with silica materials and give hydrated calcium silicate. These blocks are fire resistant with low thermal conductivity. The use of these materials leads to a no- diffusion of the flame (Bastani & Ilani, 2011). AAC blocks are insulated against sound and heat due to their low special weight, so it is not necessary to use additional insulation layers and this can reduce the cost of construction and prevent waste of capital. High compressive strength Thermal and Acoustic insulation Low Weight Fire resistant Needs to later stages Assembly Speed High Amount of Mortar and plaster Recyclability High Disposal Value Figure 8: The thermal resistant comparison between AAC blocks wall and other walls. Source (Bastani & Ilani, 2011) Source: (Bastani & Ilani, 2011). H A YA T w al l P an el s The middle layer of these panels is made of polystyrene foam which is a product of the petrochemical industry and is composed of small crystals that expand under pressure and vapor. The side layers of these panels are attached to the center using special lace, which increases the strength and adhesion between the layers. The outer layers of these panels are made of lightweight concrete with special properties such as thermal and sound insulation, frostbite resistance, and a reduction of damage caused by the earthquake. _ Low weight _ Thermal and Acoustic insulation _ Low Amount of debris _ Fire resistant _ As- sembly Speed _ Recyclability _ High Dis- posal Value Fig. 9. Details of HAYAT wall panels 10 Sample Title Description Advantages Dis advantages Related Images HAYAT wall Panels The middle layer of these panels is made of polystyrene foam which is a product of the petrochemical industry and is composed of small crystals that expand under pressure and vapor. The side layers of these panels are attached to the center using special lace, which increases the strength and adhesion between the layers. The outer layers of these panels are made of lightweight concrete with special properties such as thermal and sound insulation, frostbite resistance, and a reduction of damage caused by the earthquake. Low weight Thermal and Acoustic insulation Low Amount of debris Fire resistant Assembly Speed Recyclability High Disposal Value Figure 9: Details of HAYAT wall panels 3D Panels with concrete cover These panels have an intermediate core of polystyrene or polyurethane, and two layers of steel mesh are placed on either side. After the installation, the sides of these panels would be sprayed by concrete. Assembly Speed Low Amount of debris Thermal and Acoustic insulation Needs to later stages Recyclability High Disposal Value High Weight Fire resistant High Amount of Mortar and plaster Figure 10: Details of a 3D panel EASYWALL Light Weight Panels These panels are made of fiber cement board for the panel facings with an interior composite core material of lightweight concrete mix made from ordinary Portland cement, additives, aggregates, admixtures and Expanded Polystyrene Assembly Speed No plaster needs Thermal and Acoustic insulation Fire resistant Low Amount of debris Resistance to lateral forces Recyclability Figure 11: EASYWALL Detail. Source: Authors Table 3 Descriptive and analytic features of samples 49 Journal of Sustainable Architecture and Civil Engineering 2020/2/27 Sa m pl e Ti tle Description Advantages Disadvantages Related Images 3D P an el s w it h co nc re te c ov er These panels have an intermediate core of polystyrene or polyurethane, and two layers of steel mesh are placed on either side. After the installation, the sides of these panels would be sprayed by concrete. _ Assembly Speed _ Low Amount of debris _ Thermal and Acoustic insulation _ Needs to later stages _ Recyclability _ High Dis- posal Value _ High Weight _ Fire resis- tant _ High Amount of Mortar and plaster Fig. 10. Details of a 3D panel 10 Sample Title Description Advantages Dis advantages Related Images HAYAT wall Panels The middle layer of these panels is made of polystyrene foam which is a product of the petrochemical industry and is composed of small crystals that expand under pressure and vapor. The side layers of these panels are attached to the center using special lace, which increases the strength and adhesion between the layers. The outer layers of these panels are made of lightweight concrete with special properties such as thermal and sound insulation, frostbite resistance, and a reduction of damage caused by the earthquake. Low weight Thermal and Acoustic insulation Low Amount of debris Fire resistant Assembly Speed Recyclability High Disposal Value Figure 9: Details of HAYAT wall panels 3D Panels with concrete cover These panels have an intermediate core of polystyrene or polyurethane, and two layers of steel mesh are placed on either side. After the installation, the sides of these panels would be sprayed by concrete. Assembly Speed Low Amount of debris Thermal and Acoustic insulation Needs to later stages Recyclability High Disposal Value High Weight Fire resistant High Amount of Mortar and plaster Figure 10: Details of a 3D panel EASYWALL Light Weight Panels These panels are made of fiber cement board for the panel facings with an interior composite core material of lightweight concrete mix made from ordinary Portland cement, additives, aggregates, admixtures and Expanded Polystyrene Assembly Speed No plaster needs Thermal and Acoustic insulation Fire resistant Low Amount of debris Resistance to lateral forces Recyclability Figure 11: EASYWALL Detail. Source: Authors E A S YW A L L L ig ht W ei g ht P an el s These panels are made of fiber ce- ment board for the panel facings with an interior composite core material of lightweight concrete mix made from ordinary Portland cement, additives, aggregates, admixtures and Expanded Polystyrene _ Assembly Speed _ No plaster needs _ Thermal and Acoustic insulation _ Fire resistant _ Low Amount of debris _ Resistance to lateral forces _ Recyclability Fig. 11. EASYWALL Detail 10 Sample Title Description Advantages Dis advantages Related Images HAYAT wall Panels The middle layer of these panels is made of polystyrene foam which is a product of the petrochemical industry and is composed of small crystals that expand under pressure and vapor. The side layers of these panels are attached to the center using special lace, which increases the strength and adhesion between the layers. The outer layers of these panels are made of lightweight concrete with special properties such as thermal and sound insulation, frostbite resistance, and a reduction of damage caused by the earthquake. Low weight Thermal and Acoustic insulation Low Amount of debris Fire resistant Assembly Speed Recyclability High Disposal Value Figure 9: Details of HAYAT wall panels 3D Panels with concrete cover These panels have an intermediate core of polystyrene or polyurethane, and two layers of steel mesh are placed on either side. After the installation, the sides of these panels would be sprayed by concrete. Assembly Speed Low Amount of debris Thermal and Acoustic insulation Needs to later stages Recyclability High Disposal Value High Weight Fire resistant High Amount of Mortar and plaster Figure 10: Details of a 3D panel EASYWALL Light Weight Panels These panels are made of fiber cement board for the panel facings with an interior composite core material of lightweight concrete mix made from ordinary Portland cement, additives, aggregates, admixtures and Expanded Polystyrene Assembly Speed No plaster needs Thermal and Acoustic insulation Fire resistant Low Amount of debris Resistance to lateral forces Recyclability Figure 11: EASYWALL Detail. Source: Authors Source: Authors. E U R O P A N E L S ys te m These panels consist of two galva- nized steel that the space between them is filled with high-density poly- styrene (20 kg/m3) inside a special device and form an integrated panel. These panels are produced in two forms (Normal and Special) based on the position of the studs. _ Assembly Speed _ Resis- tance to lateral forces _ Thermal and Acoustic insulation _ Low Amount of debris _ Low Weight _ Fire resis- tant _ High Amount of Mortar and plaster _ Recyclability Fig. 12. Section of the Europanel 11 Sample Title Description Advantages Dis advantages Related Images EUROPANEL System These panels consist of two galvanized steel that the space between them is filled with high-density polystyrene (20 kg/m3) inside a special device and form an integrated panel. These panels are produced in two forms (Normal and Special) based on the position of the studs. Assembly Speed Resistance to lateral forces Thermal and Acoustic insulation Low Amount of debris Low Weight Fire resistant High Amount of Mortar and plaster Recyclability Figure 12: Section of the Europanel. Source: Authors Findings The investigation of Samples aimed to achieve a suitable scale to determine the weights of the indicators in the AHP process for the selection of the peripheral walls system. The literature review shows the importance of three criteria of construction speed, costs, and quality in the prefabrication approach which include the mentioned indicators in Table 4. To adapt the different conditions existed for building projects, the importance of criteria and resulting indicators may be different and this affects the selection of systems for the building components. In the following table, the proposed domain of scores is given to indicators that can be the main source of the decision- making regarding the selection of the peripheral walls. These scores are determined based on the necessities of national building codes and standards and expert questionnaire. Table 4. Determining the scores of the indicators of prefabrication for peripheral walls in residential use. Criteria Indicators Assigned Scores for AHP Process Score reference 0,1 2,3 4,5 Construction Speed Need for later stages High (Finishing and hard Works) Moderate (Finishing works) Low Expert Questionnaire Amount of wet working High Moderate Low Assembly speed (M2/Day) 10-29 30-59 60 and upper Costs Unit price (M2) The scores are determined based on the minimum and maximum price of materials in the data bank List Price of the current year Disposal Value (%) 10 and upper 5-9 1-4 Expert Questionnaire Need for insulation Sound and Thermal insulation Sound or Thermal insulation No need INBC (part 18 & 19); ISIRI: 8568-3, 11058, 8621 Quality Compressive strength (Kg/cm2) 10-19 20-39 40 and upper INBC (part 6) Weight of every square meter of the wall (Kg/ m2) 120 and upper 50-119 Less than 50 Source: Authors. Journal of Sustainable Architecture and Civil Engineering 2020/2/27 50 Criteria Indicators Assigned Scores for AHP Process Score reference 0,1 2,3 4,5 C on st ru ct io n S pe ed Need for later stages High (Finishing and hard Works) Moderate (Finishing works) Low Expert Questionnaire Amount of wet working High Moderate Low Assembly speed (M2/Day) 10-29 30-59 60 and upper C o st s Unit price (M2) The scores are determined based on the minimum and maximum price of materials in the data bank List Price of the current year Disposal Value (%) 10 and upper 5-9 1-4 Expert Questionnaire Need for insulation Sound and Thermal insulation Sound or Thermal insulation No need INBC (part 18 & 19); ISIRI: 8568-3, 11058, 8621 Q u al it y Compressive strength (Kg/cm2) 10-19 20-39 40 and upper INBC (part 6) Weight of every square meter of the wall (Kg/ m2) 120 and upper 50-119 Less than 50 Resistance to lateral forces (Kg/cm2) 20-40 40-60 60 and upper Service life (Year) 10-19 20-39 40 and upper Expert Questionnaire Thermal resistance (m2.k/w) Less than 1 1-2 More than 2 INBC (part 19) Recyclability (%) 10-39 40-79 80 and upper Expert Questionnaire Disposal Value (%) 10 and upper 5-9 1-4 Expert Questionnaire Fire – resistance (Minute) 60-179 180-239 240 and upper INBC (part 3) Amount of debris in case of destruction High (Winning parts) Moderate (Non- winning parts) Low (Non- winning parts) Expert Questionnaire Weighted Sound Reduction Index (rw) 30-39 40-49 50 and upper INBC (part 18) Table 4 Determining the scores of the indicators of prefabrication for peripheral walls in residential use. The review of theoretical foundations and literature shows that the prefabrication approach as one of the basic requirements of industrialization contains three main criteria; quality, construction speed, and reduction of costs. Based on the prefabrication literature if necessary arrangements for industrial manufacturing and assembly of different components of the building were forecasted, the prefabrication concept would be assigned to the manufacturing process of each component of the system and consequently the whole construction system theoretically. However, an investiga- tion of the peripheral wall samples shows that if the components of the system are larger, lighter, and needless of finishing or mortar to be assembled, it is practically more in line with the nature of prefabrication concept. The importance of prefabrication criteria may be different due to the Conclusion 51 Journal of Sustainable Architecture and Civil Engineering 2020/2/27 project type, scale, financial resources, the place of the construction site, and so on. The existence of a wide range of different materials and systems based on the prefabricated approach in many cases, especially mass housing projects, has made the optimal selection for project participants a complex matter. This indicates the necessity of the development of a systematic order of the selection of materials and methods of construction and the various components of prefabricated systems based on the importance of prefabrication criteria. In this research, the conceptual design of this system regarding the selection of peripheral walls in the form of an updatable database is presented. Due to the possibility of differences in the value of criteria related to prefabrication, a selection approach based on AHP has been adopted in the system. It is possible to generalize this system to the other components of the building in future research. ReferencesArif, M., Goulding, J., & Rahimian, F. P. Promoting off-site construction: Future challenges and op- portunities. Journal of Architectural Engineering, 2012; 18(2): 75-87.https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE) AE.1943-5568.0000081 Attmann, O. Green architecture: advanced technol- ogies and materials, New York: McGraw Hill; 2010 Azman, M., Ahamad, M., Majid, T., & Hanafi, M. The common approach in off-site construction industry. Journal of basic applies science, 2010; 4(9): 4478-4482. Bastani, H. & Ilani, Gh. Investigating the profits of using AAC Blocks in comparison with Pressed bricks. 6th International congress of Civil Engineer- ing,2011; Semnan: Semnan university. Blismas, N., Pasquire, C., & Gibb, A. Benefit evalua- tion for off-site production in construction. Construc- tion Management and Economics, 2006; 32(2): 112- 118.https://doi.org/10.1080/01446190500184444 Bogue, R. Design for manufacture and assembly: Background, capabilities and applications. Assem- bly Automation,2012; 32(2): 112-118.https://doi. org/10.1108/01445151211212262 Boothroyd, G. Assembly automation and product design. Wakefield, Rhode Island: CRC Press; 2005. https://doi.org/10.1201/9781420027358 Boothroyd, G., & Dewhurst, P. Product design for as- sembly. Wakefield, RI: Boothroyd Dewhurst; 1987. Dewhurst, N. P. DFMA the product, then lean the process. Proceedings from International Forum on Design for Manufacture and Assembly; 2010. Dou, Y., Xue, X., Wang, Y., Luo, X., & Shang, S. New media data-driven measurement for the development level of prefabricated construction in China. Journal of Cleaner Production.2019 https://doi.org/10.1016/j. jclepro.2019.118353 Eghbali, S., & Hessari, P. Modular Approach and Pre- fabrication in Flexible Housing. Journal of Housing and Rural Environment. 2013; 32 (143): 53-68 Emmatty, F. J., & Sarmah, S. Modular product devel- opment through platform-based design and DFMA. Journal of Engineering Design, 2012; 23(9): 696-714. https://doi.org/10.1080/09544828.2011.653330 Gao, S., Jin, R., & Lu, W. Design for manufacture and assembly in construction: A review. Building Research & Information, 2019; 48(5), 1-13.https://doi.org/10.10 80/09613218.2019.1660608 Goulding, J. S., Rahimian, F. P., Arif, M., & Sharp, M. D. New offsite production and business models in con- struction: Priorities for the future research agenda. Architectural Engineering and Design Management, 2015; 11(3): 163-184.https://doi.org/10.1080/17452 007.2014.891501 Howes, R. Industrialized housing construction-the UK experience. In Advances in building technology. (pp. 383-390). Elsevier.2002https://doi.org/10.1016/ B978-008044100-9/50050-4 Institute of Standards and Industrial Research of Iran (ISIRI), Fire resistance: part 1. No 12055-1, 2010. International Organization for Standardization (ISO), No 717-1 Acoustics - Rating of sound insulation in build- ings and of building elements- Part 1: Airborne sound insulation, 2013. Kibert, C. J. Sustainable construction: green building design and delivery. Hoboken: Wiley; 2012. KPMG. Smart construction - how offsite manufac- turing can transform our industry. London; 2016. Li, Z., Shen, G. Q., & Xue, X. Critical review of the research on the management of prefabricated con- struction. Habitat International.2014; 43: 240-249. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2014.04.001 Manley, K., Mckell, S., & Rose, T. Innovative practices in the Australian built environment sector: an infor- mation resource for industry. Brisbane, Queensland: CRC Press; 2009. Mao, C., Shen, Q., Pan, W., & Ye, K. Major barriers to off-site construction: The developer’s perspective in China. Journal of Management in Engineering, 2013; 31(3): doi:04014043. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE) ME.1943-5479.0000246 Journal of Sustainable Architecture and Civil Engineering 2020/2/27 52 MHUD. Iranian national building code (INBC: part 3): Building Fire Protection, Ministry of Housing and Urban Development, Tehran, Iran; 2016. MHUD. Iranian national building code (INBC: part 6): Design Loads for Buildings, Ministry of Housing and Urban Development, Tehran, Iran; 2013. MHUD. Iranian national building code (INBC: part 11): Industrialized Construction, Ministry of Housing and Urban Development, Tehran, Iran; 2013. MHUD. Iranian national building code (INBC: part 18): Acoustics and sound Control, Ministry of Hous- ing and Urban Development, Tehran, Iran; 2017. MHUD. Iranian national building code (INBC: part 19): Energy Conservation, Ministry of Housing and Urban Development, Tehran, Iran; 2010. Millins, D., Murie, A., & Leather, P. Housing policy in the UK. Palgrave.2006.https://doi.org/10.1007/978- 0-230-80268-1 Noorifard A, Mehdizadeh saradj F, Vafamehr M. Conceptual assessment of seismic performance of nonstructural walls in conventional medium rise buildings according to the experiences of past earthquakes. BSNT. 2016; 6 (3) :38-50. RIBA. RIBA Plan of work 2013 designing for man- ufacture and assembly. London: Royal Institute of British Architects (RIBA); 2013. Rod, S. Why Sweden beats the world hands down on prefab housing. The Chartered Institute of Building; 2015. Steinhardt, D. A., & Manley, K. Adoption of prefabri- cated housing-the role of country context. Sustain- able Cities and Society, 2016; 22, 126-135.https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2016.02.008 Stoll, H. W. Design for manufacture: An owerwiew. Applied Mechanics Reviews, 1986; 39(9), 1356. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.3149526 Taghdiri, A., & Ghanbarzade, S. Advantages of Pre- fabrication Construction in Comparison with Con- ventional Construction. Armanshahr Architecture & Urban Development journal, 2016; 8 (15): 18-25. Wilson, B. An examination of electricity consump- tion patterns in manufactured housing units. Hous- ing Policy Debate. 2012: 22(2), 175-199. https://doi. org/10.1080/10511482.2011.648204 Wuni, I. Y., & Shen, G. Q. Critical success factors for modular integrated construction projects: A review. Building Research & Information, 2019. https://doi. org/10. 1080/09613218.2019.1669009. About the Authors MOHAMMADHOSSEIN AZIZIBABANI Ph.D. Student Architecture, Department of Architecture, Faculty of Art, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran Main research area Affordable Housing Design, Sustainable Design. Address Faculty of Art, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran Tel. +989120929844 E-mail: M.azizibabani@modares.ac.ir KHOSRO DANESHJOO Assistant Professor The Department of Architecture, Faculty of Art, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran Main research area Technical architecture, Architectural structures. Address Faculty of Art, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran Tel. +982182883753 E-mail: khdaneshjoo@modares.ac.ir SAEID SAHARKHIZAN Ph.D. Student Earthquake Engineering and Seismology, International Institute of Earthquake Engineering and Seismology, Tehran, Iran Main research area Structural Engineering. Address Tel. +989127188946 E-mail: saeid.saharkhizan@stu.iiees.ac.ir This article is an Open Access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0) License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).