Modular building has become a revolutionary method in the construction sector, where it has provided both time and money comparatives by off-site pre-fabrication and onsite erection of building material. This paper is a critical assessment of modular construction compared to conventional practices on the basis of schedules, cost, technological limitations, and the adaptability within the industry. With the help of the Microsoft project (MS Project) as a project simulation tool, two models were formulated as a case model (modular and conventional), and the results were examined and measured to compare in terms of the differences experienced in time and cost. Project results indicate that the modular way helped in time savings of 66 days (13 percent), which took 425 days compared to the traditional method, which took 491 days. But it was more expensive at 13,840,920.00 against 12,975,900.78 because of prefabrication, logistics, and special labour; a premium of 6.67 percent. This notwithstanding, modular construction has strategic benefits for time-pressing projects. Surveys of stakeholders also revealed high initial cost of capital, shortage of skilled workforce, and regulation among the major obstacles to adoption. The relative importance index (RII) was used to express the gravity of the given barriers and to point out areas of intervention priorities. The research summaries that modular construction is a high-potential and scalable solution to the traditional model, especially with fast-track infrastructure. Nevertheless, it should be implemented successfully with the help of an augmenting ecosystem consisting of policy liberation, economic rewards, labor conveyance, and attention. Modular construction has a chance to become a seemingly universal solution in contemporary project delivery, given that the modular construction process requires suitable strategic assistance.
Manjarekar et al. (Thu,) studied this question.