MATEC Web of Conferences 162, 02033 (2018)

https://doi.org/10.1051/matecconf/201816202033
BCEE3-2017

Cost optimization for public school building projects during

design stage using value engineering
Afrah Hassan¹,* and Majid Yahya¹
¹Building and Construction Engineering Department, University of Technology, Baghdad, Iraq.

Abstract. During the past ten years, various systems of building components have been applied in public
school projects in Iraq, with no systematic method used for selection and evaluation, but only based on the
designer's experience. This paper displays evaluation and selection techniques based on value engineering
methodology to find the optimal cost for school building projects in Iraq during design stage. The most
important criteria for performance, constructability and sustainability criteria, which based on the
Leadership in Energy and Environment Design used in this assessment were obtained from a survey of 49
professional designers and consultants, adoption of the Super Decisions Software Program, which uses
analytical hierarchy process (AHP) for determining the relative importance of the main criteria and sub-
criteria, that allows the decision-makers to evaluate the suitable alternatives of design for the external wall
system in Iraq’s school buildings was built.

1 Optimizing building cost including established standards, and where it can have
access to operational and maintenance cost. This VE
When making a decision to optimize the design of the program should supplement present method and provide
building, one must specify the various criteria to judge better information on which to make design decisions.
the optimized solution. The likelihood of any one Value engineering studies applied at the design phase of
solution being the best of each criterion is remote. In project will realize a great cost saving in practice; it is
practice, therefore, one criterion is usually adapted and this stage that receives the most attention. VE plays an
this on the basis of the use of money, becomes the important role in both preliminary and detailed design.
objective of value maximizing with minimum cost. Preliminary design improvements will probably
There are three elements common in the optimization: contribute greatest to initial cost of savings. Whereas VE
1. The set of alternatives. application to detailed design can eliminate design failure
2. The value system, which assigns a numerical value for and address itself to maintenance aspects of an
"goodness" so that means "the best" can be known. engineering system.
3. The means calculating the numerical value of each Figure 1. shows the decisions that have the significant
alternative and comparing this value with each other. influence on the expense of funds during the life cycle of
Every owner would like to ensure that many available the facility. Owners and consultants are key decision
alternatives have been thoroughly investigated and that makers. To ensure the optimum results, it is necessary to
alternative selected is the most efficient and economical involve the owner and the consultant in the professional
both on short-term and long-term basis. To accomplish assessment process.
this, the design team performs life-cycle cost analysis, With regard to the total costs of the facility, consultant
and value engineering as well as model analysis. fees represent the little expenditure for all initial costs.
Consultants' decisions affect about 50% of the total costs
1.1 Value engineering applied to design of the facility. Therefore, optimal results can be expected
when resources are allocated to environmental equipment
The VE program should be established at a management at an early stage of the design process, focusing on the
level where it can effectively challenge design criteria, impact of the owner and consultant.

*
Corresponding author: bce.41593@uotechnology.edu.iq
© The Authors, published by EDP Sciences. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution
License 4.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
MATEC Web of Conferences 162, 02033 (2018) https://doi.org/10.1051/matecconf/201816202033
BCEE3-2017

Fig. 1. Cost savings potential over project duration

and to improve the decision making process for

systematically displaying all facts and ideas necessary for
1.2 Value index
an effective analysis.
General overview of Job Plans indicates that at a
Dell ‘Isola defines the Value Index as the result of the minimum, any Job Plan must be comprised of the
relationship between relative importance and relative following phases as perceived by the researcher:
cost. This output plays an important role in the
application of the value engineering methodology as it 1- Information phase.
will be a guide to the elements for which value
2- Function Analysis phase.
engineering is applied and calculated by the following
equations: 3- Creative phase.
4- Analytical / Evaluation phase.
𝑹𝑹𝑹𝑹𝑹𝑹𝑹𝑹𝑹𝑹𝑹𝑹𝑹𝑹𝑹𝑹 𝒊𝒊𝒊𝒊𝒊𝒊𝒊𝒊𝒊𝒊𝒊𝒊𝒊𝒊𝒊𝒊𝒊𝒊𝒊𝒊
𝑽𝑽𝑽𝑽𝑽𝑽𝑽𝑽𝑽𝑽 𝑰𝑰𝑰𝑰𝑰𝑰𝑰𝑰𝑰𝑰 = …..(1) 5- Development phase.
𝑹𝑹𝑹𝑹𝑹𝑹𝑹𝑹𝑹𝑹𝑹𝑹𝑹𝑹𝑹𝑹 𝒄𝒄𝒄𝒄𝒄𝒄𝒄𝒄

1.3.1 Information phase

This is the first phase of the value engineering
(𝑭𝑭𝑭𝑭𝑭𝑭𝑭𝑭𝑭𝑭𝑭𝑭𝑭𝑭𝑭𝑭 + 𝑸𝑸𝑸𝑸𝑸𝑸𝒍𝒍𝒊𝒊𝒊𝒊𝒊𝒊)
𝑽𝑽𝑽𝑽𝑽𝑽𝑽𝑽𝑽𝑽 𝑰𝑰𝑰𝑰𝑰𝑰𝑰𝑰𝑰𝑰 = ………..(2) methodology, in which the system under study is
𝑪𝑪𝑪𝑪𝑪𝑪𝑪𝑪
thoroughly understood in all its formal, functional and
practical aspects. It collects as much information as
The critical value of the Value Index that can be used to possible about the product or system under study and its
determine the good economic value of the product or components (for the current design). The designer, the
service is (1). If the Value Index is greater than or equal client and the project manager are required to provide the
to (1) it represents a good economic value, and if the necessary information, including the following:
value index is less than (1) it represents a weak economic 1. Design criteria (constructability, conditioning
value. and cooling, load planning)
2. Design calculations
1.3 Value engineering methodology (job plan) 3. Site conditions (topography, soil conditions,
surrounding areas,)
The Job Plan consists of several stages or phases. There 4. Detailed design drawings
is no general agreement on the number or titles of these 5. Technical Specifications
phases despite the fact that regardless of the terms used or 6. Operating schedule and its estimated costs
number of stages (which varies from 5 to 8 depending on 7. The maintenance schedule and the estimated
the source of Job Plan), they all share in the goal of VE costs
studies. In general, this goal is simply to put forward a 8. Table of power consumption rate
standard methodology of analysis that is broken down 9. Construction Cost Estimates (Bill of Quantities)
into a series of steps to assist the user in its application 10. Services available.

2
MATEC Web of Conferences 162, 02033 (2018) https://doi.org/10.1051/matecconf/201816202033
BCEE3-2017

1.3.2 Function Analysis phase 1.3.3 Creative phase

In the functional analysis, it is necessary to reach inside The goal of this phase is to generate ideas for alternative
the item details by analyzing the components of the solutions to the basic function of the item.
system under study and the knowledge of basic and The traditional alternatives are eliminated through the use
secondary functions. of all the tools of creative knowledge to solve the
The functional analysis will be completed as follows: problem, including brainstorming sessions and
1. Identify functions. conferences to solve problems used to create an open
2. Functions classification. space of free flow of information and it generates a list of
3. Link the functions to diagram (FAST Diagram). idea.
4. Select which functions can be improved. in the creative phase are not seen as appropriate.

1.3.2.1 Identify functions

1.3.4 Evaluation phase
The application of a function in a value engineering study
is a function analysis, the project or product is evaluated In this phase, the team examine creative phase and
by identifying what the item does. The verb is an action evaluate the feasibility of each idea by identifying its
verb and the noun, a measurable noun, for example: a advantages and disadvantages.
light bulb function is a lighting area. In the order of ideas, the following should be considered
[22]:
1.3.2.2 Functions classification  Did you meet the requirements of aesthetics,
performance, quality and reliability?
The classifications of function includes the following:  Does the proposed idea meet the required
1. Basic Function: Is that which is essential to the functional requirements?
performance of a user function, or the function describing  Will a redesign or excessive delay be created for
the primary utilitarian characteristic of a product or the project?
design to fulfil a user requirement.  Is there an improvement in operation and
2. Required Secondary Function: A required maintenance?
secondary function is any function that must be achieved  Will life cycle cost savings be achieved?
to meet codes, standards, or mandatory owner  Does the idea have a reasonable chance of
requirements. acceptance and implementation?
3. Secondary Function: If secondary functions are  Was the proposed design used in the past?
removed from the design, both the basic and required  Does the idea fundamentally affect the aesthetics
secondary functions can be realized. As such, their worth of the building or project?
is zero. Top ideas rated are selected by the team.

1.3.2.3 Functional Analysis Systems Technique

(FAST) Diagram 1.3.5 Development phase
At the development phase, the best ideas from the
Using FAST involves a function block diagram based on evaluation phase are developed into proposals that can be
answers to what? why? What?. applied. The team develops initial designs, life cycle cost,
FAST is an effective way to get good answers for three comparisons of original designs and suggested alternative
logical reasoning questions: ideas.
What is the problem? During this phase, the team's technical expertise becomes
Why is the solution necessary? very important.
How can the solution be achieved? Often, it is necessary to consult external experts, vendors
and reference sources for additional assessment
information before developing available alternatives.

1.3.5.1 Life-Cycle Cost (LCC)

LCC is a method used to compare and evaluate the total
cost of competition solutions to meet identical functions
based on the expected life of the facility or product to be
obtained. In conducting a value study, the LCC analysis
is what was carried out in the development phase of the
VE Plan to select the least expensive alternative.
The LCC relates to total construction costs over the
economic life of the project.
Figure 2 shows how total building costs were incurred.
Fig. 2. FAST Diagram.

3
MATEC Web of Conferences 162, 02033 (2018) https://doi.org/10.1051/matecconf/201816202033
BCEE3-2017

There are many ways to bring life cycle costs to a significance than other parts of buildings that consist the
comparable time base; present value, interest rate and frame, exterior and interior walls, exterior & interior
annual equivalent. finishes, roofs for the application of the Value
Engineering methodology.
Any job plan must consist of the following phases as
envisioned by the researcher:
1. Information phase.
2. Creative phase
3. Analytical phase.
4. Evaluation and development.
5. Recommendation phase.

Fig.3. Life cycle cost elements

1.3.5.2 Weighted Evaluation

As a last step, economic cost data should be mitigated
with human factors such as comfort, appearance,
performance, safety and costs (initial operation,
maintenance, replacement and rescue).
A weighted evaluation is used to formalize the process. A
weighted assessment ensures optimal decisions. Good
decisions are made by properly focusing on all criteria. It
is important during the evaluation process to discuss and
weigh the following areas:
Fig. 4. Weighted evaluation matrix
A) Needs versus desires
B) Important vs. unimportant 2.1 General information about the building
C) Designing the exchange for the required jobs Brief of description as follows:
• A12 class's school with the area of 1400 square
The weighted evaluation procedure has been divided into
meters.
two parts: the criteria -weighted process and analysis
• The yard area is equal to 3000 square meters in
matrix. The weighted process of criteria is designed to
isolate important criteria and establish them weight and / average (50x60 or 40x75) m².
or relative importance. Figure 4 shows a typical weighted • 20 cm prefabricated light weight concrete fence.
valuation for example of a car purchase. • The school has been designed for three stories
(ground +1st. +2nd floor), as shown in the Fig.5.
The Client, Ministry of Education intends to further
develop the 12 classes' schools in Baghdad city, seeking
2 Case study for value engineering for the PC contractor who has the ability for the rapid
application in schools design installation.
Contract is on a Lump-sum basis due to the Bill of
The researcher selected steel-structure school building
quantities, and the itemized break down of the lump sum
to consider as the case study for this research, which was
price- unpriced cleared by weight factor chart.
implemented by the Iraqi Ministry of Education /
According to a contract signed between the Engineering
Directorate General for school buildings in the previous
Consultancy Bureau of AL-Nahrain University and The
years and some have been under implementation, and
General Directorate of School Projects for checking of
will be the evaluation of a suitable alternatives for
the 12 Classroom Primary School Steel Structure.
selection model to achieve optimal cost for constructional
parts of the building .
From the researcher point of view an important part of
the building was studied in terms of cost, different
construction methods, materials and other basic
functions.
Super-structure (primary elements) was of a greater

4
MATEC Web of Conferences 162, 02033 (2018) https://doi.org/10.1051/matecconf/201816202033
BCEE3-2017

Table 1 Functional analysis for current system

Project: Steel-structure school building Item:

Exterior wall system

Original
Function Function Cost per
NO. Component
Verb Noun Level m²($)

C studs
1 (100mm Framing Basic 15
thickness)
Sandwich
Thermal
2 panel(45mm Basic 10
comfort
thickness)
Gypsum
board high
Fig.5 The shape of school building.
density ,
3 Sheathing Secondary 17
moisture 2
Layer 12.5
2.2 Proposal alternatives for external walls non- mm
load-bearing of School building
All required data and information in this proposal were
derived or taken from the bill of quantities for steel 2.2.3 Speculative Phase
structure schools (records, calculations, documentation,
and opinions of specialist engineers). Brainstorming sessions were led by VE team. Several
The current system used to provide external walls for the ideas were recorded for various aspects of the external
building is a metal-framed sandwich panel with walls for the building. Table shows a list of some of the
insulation system. ideas for the exterior wall system of
the building; these proposals are:
1. Solid brick wall Brick cavity wall
2.2.1 Information phase 2. Solid block wall
3. Precast concrete wall panel
External walls for the steel-structure school building 4. Light Weight Block Wall
constructs from (Composite material, Sandwich panel,
studs and high density, moisture, scratch and heat resist
Gypsum board) as indicated in the drawings and finishing Table 2. Brainstorming list of Exterior wall system proposals
material table as shown in Fig. 6.
Study Title: Exterior wall Team:
system VE team
Generate as many ideas as possible to fulfil the
basic function of the item understudy. Do not
evaluate the ideas here at all. List everything,
judge later.
System
NO System assemblies
Consist of brick
masonry units. All
1 Brick cavity wall
joints are filled
with mortar.
Block masonry
Light Weight Block
units.
2 Wall
All joints are filled
)THERMOSTON(E
with mortar.
Precast concrete
Precast concrete wall
Fig. 6. External wall section. 3
panel
wall panels, cured
off-site.

2.2.2 Functional Analysis Phase

2.2.4 Analytical Phase
The researcher evaluated building components to search
for any potential changes for the items of the project. The first part of this phase was used to refine the list of
Next, a functional analysis was performed for the exterior ideas. Possible ideas were identified and retained, while
wall system for the current system (composite materials), other ideas were ignored. Ideas with potential were
as shown in Table 1 studied more closely, so that they could be incorporated
with their advantages and disadvantages, as shown in
Table 3.

5
MATEC Web of Conferences 162, 02033 (2018) https://doi.org/10.1051/matecconf/201816202033
BCEE3-2017

Table 3 Advantages and disadvantages of proposed systems for Exterior Wall.

No Idea Advantages Disadvantages

Require skilled labor
Better aesthetics
Metal-framed sandwich High initial cost of material
1 Thermal comfort
panel Long construction time
Frequent maintenance
Best aesthetics
Permanent materials Transportation arrangement
2 Precast concrete wall
Fast construction time Thermal heat gain
Best quality control
Less maintenance
Brick cavity wall Large material wastage
3 Low initial cost
system Large construction time
Materials are available
Better aesthetics
Durable material
Light Weight Block Large material wastage
4 Thermal comfort
wall Transportation arrangement
Acoustic insulation

when analyzing the subject of safety. The Hazard: is the

recipe for the product that can lead to harmful results the
2.2.5 Development Phase
Risk: It is the possibility of injury because of the hazard
when the product is turned on by the user.
The best ideas and proposal alternatives are used to reach 3- Maintainability
the optimal decision in the following steps: It can be defined as "the function of the design and
installation characteristics that affect the programme or
under environmental operating conditions Maintenance".
2.2.5.1 Identifying the main criteria and sub-criteria
c). At present, strategies have emerged to achieve high
for external wall systems of school building design
performance in the major areas of environmental health
Three basic concepts of building design were adopted as and to incorporate the principles of sustainability into the
follows: development of construction elements. In 1993 a non-
a). There are several concepts concerning the profit organization was established that adopted a
constructability which can be applied in the design and voluntary program called “Leadership in the environment
configuration, these concepts are aimed at: and energy design”. From it Indoor environmental
1. Choose the design to enable an efficient creation quality, including control of thermal and acoustic systems
process. and finally the criteria of use of materials and resources,
2. Use of parts, materials and work tools available locally including emphasis on the use of local materials and
as much as possible. construction waste management.
3. Flexibility: Going to determine the design desired
results and is not required for ways to reach those results 2.2.5.2 Assessment of criteria importance (Weights)
so as to give flexibility to the port to get to the result in
the best way. For the purpose of determining the importance of criteria
4. Skills of available labor: The absence of one of two (weights), and also to choose the best alternative from a
factors, the availability of labor or degree of skilled labor number of alternative proposals, this research has relied
will be very expensive, so the results should be the on the field questionnaire, and the improved AHP
introduction of this factor in the early design stages. program (Analytic Hierarchy Process) method is used to
There are requirements of the performance in the design determine the weight for different indicators (criteria).
phase. The program will identify these important criteria
b). Performance means "interest of origin after the through the pairwise comparison between criteria; as will
completion of its creation." So there are several be explained later, for access to indicators (indexes) for
requirements to improve the quality of performance to be the comparison.
considered during the design phase and these Where selected sample respondents are asked to assess
requirements: the importance of criteria for buildings design according
1-Durability to a scale ranging from 9 to 1 (9 degree = high
It is the ability of an item, product or building to maintain importance of criterion) 1 degree = low importance of the
its intended function of life expectancy with the intended criterion.
maintenance levels in the intended use conditions.
2- Safety
2.2.5.3 Build an AHP decision model
Safety is, in any case, of great importance in all stages of
the life cycle of the building and starting from the design Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) is one of the most
stage. The terms of danger and risk are frequently used versatile decision-making methods and is one of the most

6
MATEC Web of Conferences 162, 02033 (2018) https://doi.org/10.1051/matecconf/201816202033
BCEE3-2017

used algorithms for selecting the optimal alternative. This 2.2.5.4 Use Super Decisions Software to build AHP
method was designed by Professor Thomas L. Saaty at decision model
the University of Pittsburgh in the mid-1970s and can be
defined as a method of arranging decision alternatives
A Super Decisions model consists of clusters of elements
and selecting the best alternative when a decision maker
(or nodes) arranged in levels. The simplest hierarchical
has multiple objectives or criteria on which the decision
model has nodes connected by lines in them, the clusters
is based. While Wang (Et. 2004) defines it as the
contain goal, criteria elements and the alternatives of the
decision-making tool that analyzes or disassembles the
decision as shown in Figure 7.
complex problem into a multi-level hierarchical structure
of goal, criteria and alternatives. The basic idea of this
approach is to transform objective estimates of relative 2.2.5.5 Weighted evaluation matrix Using Super
importance into a set of degrees or total weights. By Decisions Software (AHP)
having this method of fundamental property, which is
based on the Pairwise Comparison, it complements the After the results of the questionnaire are analyzed, the
various quantitative and qualitative measures to combine weights of criteria are specified for external wall systems
them into one comprehensive degree that expresses the of school building design; that will be found by using a
order of the alternative between a set of decision program (AHP), which will make pair comparisons
alternatives. between criteria depending on the values of arithmetic
mean for criteria.

Fig. 7. Hierarchy model for criteria and alternatives

Fig. 8. Pairwise comparisons for criteria with respect to the goal

7
MATEC Web of Conferences 162, 02033 (2018) https://doi.org/10.1051/matecconf/201816202033
BCEE3-2017

Fig. 8. (Continued) Pairwise comparisons for criteria with respect to the goal

Fig. 8. (Continued) Pairwise comparisons for criteria with respect to the goal

Fig. 8. (Continued) Pairwise comparisons for criteria with respect to the goal

8
MATEC Web of Conferences 162, 02033 (2018) https://doi.org/10.1051/matecconf/201816202033
BCEE3-2017

Completing the required data in the software program has the AHP software program. As shown in Fig 9. Then the
been guided by civil engineers who were specialists in evaluation matrix is worked out.
external wall system for buildings.
After the comparison was completed, the whole
inconsistency index is less than 0.10, so the results are
fine.
The function index is determined by comparing the
alternatives with the main criteria of wall design using

Fig .9. Pairwise comparisons for alternatives with respect to the Durability criteria.

Fig .9. (Continued) Pairwise comparisons for alternatives with respect to the Safety criteria.

*
Corresponding author: bce.41593@uotechnology.edu.iq

9
MATEC Web of Conferences 162, 02033 (2018) https://doi.org/10.1051/matecconf/201816202033
BCEE3-2017

Fig .9. (Continued) Pairwise comparisons for alternatives with respect to the Maintainability criteria.

Fig. 9. (Continued) Pairwise comparisons for alternatives with respect to the Flexibility criteria.

Fig. 9. (Continued) Pairwise comparisons for alternatives with respect to Labor skill availability criteria.

10
MATEC Web of Conferences 162, 02033 (2018) https://doi.org/10.1051/matecconf/201816202033
BCEE3-2017

Fig. 9. (Continued) Pairwise comparisons for alternatives with respect to the regionally materials criteria.

Fig. 9. (Continued) Pairwise comparisons for alternatives with respect to The Waste Management criteria.

Fig. 9. (Continued) Pairwise comparisons for alternatives with respect to The Thermal properties criteria.

11
MATEC Web of Conferences 162, 02033 (2018) https://doi.org/10.1051/matecconf/201816202033
BCEE3-2017

Table 4 Analysis Matrix

ALTERNATIVES

Assigned Brick Light Weight Precast Metal-framed

Evaluation criteria
weight Cavity Block Concrete sandwich panel Wall
Wall System Wall System Wall Panel System
Ranking Score Ranking Ranking Ranking Score
Score Score

Durability 0.194 0.270 0.052 0.130 0.025 0.490 0.095 0.110 0.021

Safety 0.164 0.310 0.051 0.310 0.051 0.280 0.046 0.110 0.018

Maintainability 0.115 0.180 0.021 0.280 0.032 0.100 0.012 0.440 0.051

Flexibility 0.066 0.290 0.019 0.420 0.028 0.180 0.012 0.110 0.007

Labor skill 0.131 0.480 0.063 0.180 0.024 0.250 0.033 0.090 0.012
availability

The regionally
0.131 0.470 0.061 0.170 0.022 0.280 0.037 0.070 0.009
materials

Waste Management 0.058 0.210 0.012 0.230 0.013 0.090 0.005 0.470 0.027

Thermal properties 0.099 0.240 0.024 0.620 0.061 0.050 0.005 0.090 0.009

Acoustical 0.044 0.330 0.014 0.040 0.002 0.480 0.021 0.060 0.003
properties

Total weight Score=Weight*

0.317 0.258 0.264 0.157
Ranking

In addition, this method can be used for evaluation and

3 Conclusions choose any construction system by following the value
engineering methodology as shown in this paper
The evaluation matrix resulted in prioritization of four
alternatives among a wide range of alternatives to
exterior wall systems in school buildings. They are, in the
References
order of preference: Brick Cavity Wall System, Precast 1. Dell ‘ Isola , R.S. Means , USA ,1997.
Concrete Wall, Light Weight Block Wall System and 2. Saaty , T. L. , Int. J Service Science, Vol.1 ,No.1 ,
Metal-framed sandwich panel Wall System. 2008.
This proposed method should help designers and decision 3. Abudlmohsen Al-Hammad, M.A., Journal of
maker to select the best external wall system for any Architectural Engineering , volume: 2, No.3 ,
particular situation. September, 1996.
4. Department of Public Works LEED Certification
fact sheet_alt layout.doc , USA , 2007.

12