Modular Multi-family Construction: A Field Study of Energy Code Compliance and Performance through Offsite Prefabrication
Kevin Grosskopf is a professor at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln
Prefabrication in a factory setting may improve the performance of modular buildings compared to traditional site-built buildings. To validate this premise, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) funded a 3-year study from 2020-2023 comparing the energy performance of more than 50 modular and site-built multifamily buildings under construction in Los Angeles, San Francisco, Philadelphia and Seattle. In addition to energy performance, DOE was also interested in the potential cost savings of modular construction as well as other market opportunities and challenges.
Crane set at a modular jobsite (VBC), Philadelphia PA, 2022. 260,000 sq. ft. mixed-use project consisting of 5-stories and 410 residential modular units over 2-stories of site-built commercial podium.
Part I - Energy Performance
Multifamily buildings selected for this study averaged 6 stories, 140,390 sq. ft. square-feet and 144 units. Data was collected on several energy-related material and equipment systems. Data collection for each project began with a plan review followed by two field inspections. For modular projects, the first inspection was conducted at the factory and a second inspection was conducted at the construction site. Findings indicate that the performance of key energy-related materials and equipment in modular multifamily construction was somewhat better than those found in site-built, particularly in climate zones 3 (Los Angeles and San Francisco).
The DOE study also looked at the post-occupancy energy performance of another 20 modular multifamily buildings completed between 2013-2022 in these same areas. While there appeared to be little difference between the annual energy use in modular multifamily buildings (36.0 kBtu/sq. ft./yr) compared to more than 120 site-built buildings (35.8 kBtu/sq. ft./yr), ENERGY STAR™ scores for modular (86) were higher on average compared to site-built (81).
Given that most of the modular buildings in this study were affordable housing, apartment units were smaller on average (560 sq. ft.) compared to site-built units (830 sq. ft.). As a result, occupant density in modular multifamily buildings was 30-50% higher. When normalized for this, the energy performance of modular multifamily construction is likely (much) better than site-built. Although few differences were observed between the types of materials and equipment used in either modular or site-built multifamily construction, installation quality appeared to be significantly better in modular.
Part II - Market Opportunities & Challenges
During factory and construction site inspections, interviews were conducted with project stakeholders to identify key market implementation opportunities and challenges. Findings suggest that the most significant advantage of modular construction is schedule savings. Offsite prefabrication can proceed simultaneously with onsite construction, reducing time, project overhead and the impact of weather. Overall, modular buildings in this study were completed 25-30% faster on average when compared to site-built buildings. Despite added transportation costs, modular construction ($243/sq. ft.) was also found to be cost-competitive with site-built construction ($251/sq. ft.), particularly when considering shortened construction schedules and speed to market.
Yet, persistent barriers to modular market growth remain, including a building industry that is unwilling to change from traditional site-built methods, consideration of modular too late in the design process, lack of modular industry standards, and the risks associated with modular builders as a very large suppliers or subcontractors in the design-bid-build delivery process.
To address these issues, some manufacturers have undertaken a greater role in the design-manufacture-construct process. Specifically, manufacturers have begun to offer ‘turn-key’ building solutions by providing design, manufacturing and construction services in-house. By doing so, a commitment to modular is made at the beginning of the project, saving time and money. The inefficient, even adversarial relationship between designers, manufacturers, and site contractors is replaced with a single, fixed-price contract between developer and manufacturer before production begins. Profits are tied to overall project performance, not to the performance of individual players in the traditional design-bid-build process.
Production line at a modular factory (Nashua Builders), Nampa ID, 2023.
Conclusion
With greater control over the project design, as well as the number and timing of projects undertaken, modular manufacturers in the design-manufacture-construct process can better achieve product standardization within their factories and sustain production between project cycles. In doing so, factories can be operated more efficiently with less worker turnover.
Download the Complete Report
Download a complete copy of Kevin Grosskopf's 2023 report "Modular Multi-family Construction: A Field Study of Energy Code Compliance and Performance through Offsite Prefabrication"
More from Modular Advantage
Mind the Gap: The Interface Between Onsite and Offsite Construction
Every design for manufacture and assembly (DfMA) project — modular, mass timber, or panelized — is really two projects joined at a seam. One is built in a controlled factory to millimeter tolerances; the other in the field, in weather, to the looser tolerances of poured concrete and human hands. Between them sits an interface: where the factory’s precision meets the site’s reality.
Rules, Rails & Repeatability: Applying DfMA to Modular Healthcare
DfMA offers several advantages for healthcare projects, with faster delivery among the most valuable. Schedule matters when building new facilities, expanding campuses, renovating existing space or bringing care closer to communities that need it.
Precision and Possibility: Demands of DfMA and What Modular Mass Timber Makes Possible
Mass timber does not automatically create an efficient modular building. Its precision makes early coordination more important: fabricated components will accurately reproduce both the team’s solutions and its mistakes. The material’s advantages are realized only when supported by an equally precise design and delivery process.
Catch It in the Factory, Not in the Field: Smarter Testing for Modular Builds
Integrating watertightness and airtightness testing into factory workflows transforms quality assurance from a reactive process into a proactive commissioning strategy. It ensures that every module shipped is field ready and resilient for transportation while also supporting the ability of the modular construction industry to make buildings better.
Modular Construction Contracts: Key Considerations for Successful Canadian Projects
Starting a modular project with a well-developed contract protects both the owner and the contractor. It will help keep the project on track and on budget, and it will improve quality from the factory floor to final installation on-site.
Modular by Design: Turning Architecture into a Manufacturing System
Modular construction is often presented as a faster way to build. Speed, however, is only one part of its value. The larger opportunity is to create a coordinated design and production system that improves quality, reduces uncertainty, and allows a building to move efficiently from concept design through manufacturing, transportation, installation, and completion.
Repeatability Begins with Trust: What Alora at Dry Creek Reveals About Scaling Modular Housing
Alora at Dry Creek, a 329-unit, multifamily community comprising five four-story buildings in Centennial, Colorado, demonstrates how repeatable design, standardized manufacturing and early collaboration can work together to create a model that is not only faster to deliver, but easier to replicate across future projects.
T.R. Arnold: The Art of Third-Party Inspections
T.R. Arnold (TRA), a third-party inspection company in Elkhart, Indiana, contracts with modular manufacturers across the US. Manufacturers register with each state to which they intend to send their modules and may be required to hire a third-party inspection company.
Creating an ‘Ecosystem for Innovation:’ 50+ Years of Modular Construction Oversight in Virginia
Virginia’s modular building program began in 1973, with the implementation of the Virginia Industrialized Building Unit and Mobile Home Safety Regulations. Now it’s leading the country in modular code adoption.
Understanding Thermal Barriers Compliance Methods & Emerging NFPA-275 Foam Plastic Technologies
New fire barrier technologies are improving total costs and margins in major areas of construction, such as commercial, government, union and prevailing wage projects. These benefits translate into other large fringe areas, such as agriculture, commercial cold storage facilities, grow houses, outbuildings, military and aviation hangars.