Skip to Content (custom)

A Framework and Practices for Cost-Effective Engineering in Capital Projects in the A/E/C Industry

Publication No
RR112-11
Type
Guidelines/Suggestions
Publication Date
May 01, 1998
Pages
202
Research Team
RT-112
DOCUMENT DETAILS
Abstract
Key Findings
Filters & Tags
Abstract
A perception within the construction industry, which is reinforced by limited data, holds that current engineering practices are not cost effective. In contrast, some companies such as NUCOR have reported using innovative or non-traditional practices
Key Findings

This research concludes:

  • Yes, 2% engineering costs can be achieved for standard equipment-intensive projects; and
  • No, 2% engineering costs cannot be achieved for custom design process-intensive capital projects, but some reduction of costs may be possible.

The research also highlights that typical engineering cost as a percentage of Total Installed Costs (TIC) has been 5-10% for standard equipment intensive projects and 15-20% for custom design process intensive projects. (RR112-11, p. 121)

The research includes an integrated framework for cost effective engineering developed by the National Science Foundation and others. This framework contains detailed schematic representations of the different dimensions, components, and elements, and special processes and tool to achieve effective engineering. (RR112-11, Appendix E)
RR112-11, An Overview of Practices for Cost Effective Engineering in the A/E/C Industry  

The strategies and practices described are embedded within approaches to the context of capital projects, contracting and team building, engineering design and technologies, productivity improvement and lessons learned. (RR112-11, p. 75)
Filters & Tags
Research Topic
Cost Effective Engineering
Keywords
2% Engineering, Nucor Way, Design Philosophy, Integrated Framework for Cost Effective Engineering, Use of Minimum Specs, Improve Engineering Practices, Lump Sum Engineering Procurement, Bare Essential Requirements, rt112