住宅楼传统和工业化深度改造方案的成本比较分析

Q1 Engineering
S. Avesani, Martino Gubert, Jamal Abdul Ngoyaro, Miren Juaristi Gutierrez, R. Pinotti, Davide Brandolini
{"title":"住宅楼传统和工业化深度改造方案的成本比较分析","authors":"S. Avesani, Martino Gubert, Jamal Abdul Ngoyaro, Miren Juaristi Gutierrez, R. Pinotti, Davide Brandolini","doi":"10.47982/jfde.2023.2.a3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In this paper, the economic competitiveness for deep retrofit actions between the industrialised off-site and the traditional on-site approaches are discussed by using a comparative Life Cycle Costing (LCC) analysis. This assessment was based on a deep analysis of all renovation-related cost and timing processes, from design to operation and maintenance phases. The study was based on three retrofit scenarios for an existing building in Italy undergoing a deep renovation. The Life Cycle Inventory (LCI) was developed starting from real costs and a list of bills collected by the design team and the industrialised technologies developers. Afterwards, the LCC modelling was performed for all scenarios. The results show that the two deep retrofit approaches (traditional and industrialised) are comparable in terms of investment costs, even if a gap of around -7% and +16% still exists. This highlights a potential for technological optimisation. Moreover, the operation and maintenance phase has shown to be key to transforming the expected higher quality of the industrialised components into a prolonged life expectance, hence highly impacting the whole cumulated Net Present Value. Finally, the analysis of the End of Life (EoL) phase in case of possible reusing of some dismantled components in the industrialised scenario resulted in contributing in a relevant way to increase the final value of such an approach.","PeriodicalId":37451,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Facade Design and Engineering","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparative cost analysis of traditional and industrialised deep retrofit scenarios for a residential building\",\"authors\":\"S. Avesani, Martino Gubert, Jamal Abdul Ngoyaro, Miren Juaristi Gutierrez, R. Pinotti, Davide Brandolini\",\"doi\":\"10.47982/jfde.2023.2.a3\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In this paper, the economic competitiveness for deep retrofit actions between the industrialised off-site and the traditional on-site approaches are discussed by using a comparative Life Cycle Costing (LCC) analysis. This assessment was based on a deep analysis of all renovation-related cost and timing processes, from design to operation and maintenance phases. The study was based on three retrofit scenarios for an existing building in Italy undergoing a deep renovation. The Life Cycle Inventory (LCI) was developed starting from real costs and a list of bills collected by the design team and the industrialised technologies developers. Afterwards, the LCC modelling was performed for all scenarios. The results show that the two deep retrofit approaches (traditional and industrialised) are comparable in terms of investment costs, even if a gap of around -7% and +16% still exists. This highlights a potential for technological optimisation. Moreover, the operation and maintenance phase has shown to be key to transforming the expected higher quality of the industrialised components into a prolonged life expectance, hence highly impacting the whole cumulated Net Present Value. Finally, the analysis of the End of Life (EoL) phase in case of possible reusing of some dismantled components in the industrialised scenario resulted in contributing in a relevant way to increase the final value of such an approach.\",\"PeriodicalId\":37451,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Facade Design and Engineering\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-12-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Facade Design and Engineering\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.47982/jfde.2023.2.a3\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Engineering\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Facade Design and Engineering","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.47982/jfde.2023.2.a3","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Engineering","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文通过比较生命周期成本(LCC)分析,讨论了工业化异地改造与传统现场改造之间的经济竞争力。该评估基于对从设计到运行和维护阶段的所有改造相关成本和时间流程的深入分析。研究基于对意大利一栋正在进行深度翻新的现有建筑的三种改造方案。生命周期清单(LCI)是根据设计团队和工业化技术开发商收集的实际成本和账单清单编制的。随后,对所有方案进行了生命周期成本建模。结果表明,两种深度改造方法(传统方法和工业化方法)在投资成本方面不相上下,但仍存在约 -7% 和 +16% 的差距。这凸显了技术优化的潜力。此外,运行和维护阶段是将工业化组件的预期高质量转化为延长预期寿命的关键,因此对整个累积净现值有很大影响。最后,如果在工业化方案中对某些拆卸部件进行再利用,对寿命终结(EoL)阶段的分析有助于提高这种方法的最终价值。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparative cost analysis of traditional and industrialised deep retrofit scenarios for a residential building
In this paper, the economic competitiveness for deep retrofit actions between the industrialised off-site and the traditional on-site approaches are discussed by using a comparative Life Cycle Costing (LCC) analysis. This assessment was based on a deep analysis of all renovation-related cost and timing processes, from design to operation and maintenance phases. The study was based on three retrofit scenarios for an existing building in Italy undergoing a deep renovation. The Life Cycle Inventory (LCI) was developed starting from real costs and a list of bills collected by the design team and the industrialised technologies developers. Afterwards, the LCC modelling was performed for all scenarios. The results show that the two deep retrofit approaches (traditional and industrialised) are comparable in terms of investment costs, even if a gap of around -7% and +16% still exists. This highlights a potential for technological optimisation. Moreover, the operation and maintenance phase has shown to be key to transforming the expected higher quality of the industrialised components into a prolonged life expectance, hence highly impacting the whole cumulated Net Present Value. Finally, the analysis of the End of Life (EoL) phase in case of possible reusing of some dismantled components in the industrialised scenario resulted in contributing in a relevant way to increase the final value of such an approach.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Facade Design and Engineering
Journal of Facade Design and Engineering Engineering-Architecture
CiteScore
1.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
3
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Facade Design and Engineering presents new research results and new proven practice in the field of facade design and engineering. The goal is to improve building technologies, as well as process management and architectural design. This journal is a valuable resource for professionals and academics involved in the design and engineering of building envelopes, including the following disciplines: Architecture Façade Engineering Climate Design Building Services Integration Building Physics Façade Design and Construction Management Novel Material Applications. The journal will be directed at the scientific community, but it will also feature papers that focus on the dissemination of science into practice and industrial innovations. In this way, readers explore the interaction between scientific developments, technical considerations and management issues.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信