Economic and Technical Analysis of Traditional Contact Façade Compared to Dry-Mounted Façade

At the beginning of the diploma thesis preparation, they familiarised themselves in detail with the project documentation. With the help of professional literature, they decided to examine in detail the technical report for a simple residential building, which describes data about the building, parcel number, cadastral municipality of building planning, building size, description of the foundation slab, composition and required materials. After examining the technical report, they briefly described the types of project documentation and the most important part of the diploma thesis, the comparison of both façades. They found that the dry-mounted façade is more expensive than the traditional contact façade, thereby confirming the second hypothesis. The traditional contact façade is more cost-effective, but the dry-mounted façade justifies its high implementation costs with quality.

Problem

At the beginning of the diploma thesis preparation, they familiarised themselves in detail with the project documentation. With the help of professional literature, they decided to examine in detail the technical report for a simple residential building, which describes data about the building, parcel number, cadastral municipality of building planning, building size, description of the foundation slab, composition and required materials.

Solution and Method

After examining the technical report, they briefly described the types of project documentation and the most important part of the diploma thesis, the comparison of both façades. With the help of literature, they presented the concept of façade, listed types, described materials used for a particular type of façade and described the process of their production. Thus, they were able to examine the traditional contact and dry-mounted façade in more detail.

Since dry-mounted façades are very rarely used in construction today, especially in Slovenia, and are less commonly used on residential buildings than traditional façades, they had considerable difficulties in obtaining literature and studying their properties. The purpose of the diploma thesis was to use their knowledge acquired during their studies at the Academia Institute of Technology in the costing module to carry out a cost comparison analysis between the traditional contact and dry-mounted façade. The decision to compare these two façades was prompted by interest in new materials used in such façades and determining the price range.

When examining the properties of both façades, they found that the dry-mounted façade is more suitable than the traditional contact façade in all aspects mentioned in the diploma thesis, thus confirming their first hypothesis set out in the introduction. When researching materials and obtaining prices for materials for each façade, they found that both façades have different substructures and materials in their production. When breaking down the material for the traditional contact façade and the selected supplier, they calculated the price for 1 m² of façade implementation according to Giposs standards.

The costs amount to 28 EUR. Since the method of implementing the dry-mounted façade is mostly used in the German market, they contacted the German company TLB d. o. o., where they presented the implementation materials and prices in detail so that they could also calculate the cost of implementing 1 m² of dry-mounted façade, which amounts to 189.14 EUR.

Results

They found that the dry-mounted façade is more expensive than the traditional contact façade, thereby confirming the second hypothesis. The traditional contact façade is more cost-effective, but the dry-mounted façade justifies its high implementation costs with quality. Thus, they would suggest to the investor the production of a traditional façade, as it is cost-effective for the implementation of a single-family house and the price is acceptable given today's living standards.

Through a survey, they tried to determine whether randomly surveyed respondents distinguish the difference between traditional contact and dry-mounted façade, what impact good façade implementation has on them and what implementation cost is still acceptable to them. Of 30 randomly surveyed respondents, half know the traditional contact façade and half the dry-mounted façade, which was encouraging, given that the dry-mounted façade is less commonly used in the Slovenian environment. They analysed the survey results in more detail in the survey section.

Based on all the information obtained about façade properties, materials and all analyses carried out, they fulfilled the objectives of the diploma thesis set out in the introduction. If they were to decide on ordering or implementing a façade themselves, they would choose the dry-mounted façade, which is indeed in an extremely high price range, but brings a lot in the long term, as it is energy-efficient and more rational and made from ecological, human-friendly materials. Most investors at this time opt for the production of a lower price range façade.

It can be predicted that in the coming years there will be increased demand for the production of dry-mounted façades. Since competition in this industry is high, one must not forget the client who is deciding on the choice of façade, as contractors who produce these types of façades must be aware that satisfied clients mean a competitive advantage.