Chapter 28

Smart Construction Sites and Construction Digitalization: From People Watching People to Systems Watching People

Compiled by Guangdong Fortune Stone New Material Co., Ltd.

Key Points

• Traditional facade retrofit construction management is “open-loop control,” where problems are corrected only after they occur, resulting in high costs. Construction digitalization is “closed-loop control,” eliminating problems in the process through “construction—record—feedback—adjustment.” The system consists of the perception layer, network layer, platform layer, and application layer. Its value depends on whether data is authentic, whether transmission is smooth, and whether processing is timely.
• The essence of construction digitalization is replacing human self-discipline with institutional constraints: process check-in prevents skipped work, material traceability prevents mixed use, and acceptance traceability prevents disputes. Whether tools can be promoted depends on whether users perceive them as useful and easy to use. Make project managers feel it is simple, construction teams gain practical benefits, and supervisors recognize traceable records.
• The biggest challenge in facade retrofit construction is that “people watching people” cannot watch everything. Smart construction sites are not a patent of large projects. A mobile phone, a QR code, and an electronic form can turn construction quality from “relying on self-discipline” to “relying on systems.” The core is not “installing cameras” but “leaving traces”—every step is recorded, every location is traceable, and every batch of materials is traceable.

28.1 The “Three Persistent Challenges” of Facade Retrofit Construction Management

28.1.1 Skipped Processes

Facade retrofit projects have many processes and a fast pace, making “skipped processes” the most common problem: substrate treatment without primer before applying flexible stone; insulation layer without anchoring before rendering; bonding agent without curing before entering the next process.

Consequence: hollowing, detachment, and water seepage. Post-event rework costs are 1.5–2 times normal construction.

Case: To rush the schedule, a construction team applied flexible stone directly without primer on the substrate. Less than half a year after delivery, local flexible stone began to detach. Investigation found severe substrate dusting, no interface treatment, and the bonding agent adhered to floating dust rather than the substrate. Ultimately, the area was removed and redone, costing an extra half month of schedule. This case shows that the cost of skipping one process is far higher than the cost of executing it normally. Process check-in is an effective means of preventing skipped work.

28.1.2 Material Mixing

Different batches of materials mixed, causing obvious color differences; wrong bonding agent model, resulting in insufficient bonding strength; auxiliary materials substituted with inferior ones, affecting overall system performance.

Consequence: appearance defects, performance degradation, acceptance failure.

Case: To save effort, a construction team mixed two batches of flexible stone together. After construction, obvious color differences appeared on the facade, and the client required rework. The construction party explained that the materials were the same, only the batches differed, but the client refused acceptance on the grounds of unqualified visual effects. Ultimately, the area was removed and redone, doubling the cost. This case shows that the cost of material mixing is rework and reputational loss. Material traceability is an effective means of preventing mixing.

28.1.3 Acceptance Disputes

No records during construction, making it impossible to explain at acceptance; when problems occur, no responsible party can be found; the client, supervisor, and construction party pass the buck to each other.

Consequence: delayed acceptance, settlement disputes, broken cooperative relationships.

Case: During acceptance of a project, local hollowing was found. The client believed it was a construction party problem, the construction party believed it was a material problem, and the material supplier believed it was a design problem. The three parties failed to reach consensus for a month and ultimately commissioned third-party testing. The test conclusion was non-standard construction technology and insufficient compaction, and the construction party bore the responsibility for free rework. If the project had retained complete construction records, the responsible party could have been identified at a glance. This case shows that the essence of acceptance disputes is the absence of process traces. Acceptance traceability is an effective means of preventing disputes.

28.2 The “Three Core Actions” of Construction Digitalization

In response to the three persistent challenges, the core countermeasures of construction digitalization are three actions: process check-in, material traceability, and acceptance traceability. The three actions respectively correspond to “preventing skipping,” “preventing mixing,” and “preventing disputes,” forming a full-chain digital closed loop from construction process to material management to quality acceptance.

28.2.1 Process Check-In

Approach: After each process is completed, construction personnel check in on their mobile phones. Check-in requires photo + location + timestamp. Before the next process begins, the system automatically checks whether the previous process is completed; if not, an early warning is issued.

Effect: The probability of skipped processes is greatly reduced; every process is traceable; when problems occur, the specific process and responsible person can be accurately identified.

Table 28-5 Process Check-In Implementation Points

28.2.2 Material Traceability

Approach: Each batch of materials is scanned and registered upon entry, recording batch number, quantity, and test report; material use locations are associated with batch numbers; the system automatically records “which building, which wall, which batch of materials used.”

Effect: Material mixing and substitution are exposed; color difference problems can be traced to specific batches; if quality problems occur during the warranty period, the responsible party can be quickly identified.

In terms of material traceability, the enterprise’s independently developed series of flexible stone emulsion technologies provide quality parameter support. The interface stability data of the independently developed non-migratory flexible stone emulsion technology, the -30°C flexibility and 3500h weather resistance data of the high-flexibility flexible stone emulsion technology, and the stain resistance data (whiteness recovery rate ≥80%) of the inorganic silicone resin modified acrylic emulsion topcoat technology for flexible stone can all be incorporated into the material traceability database, achieving “batch—performance—location” associated traceability.

Table 28-6 Material Traceability Implementation Points

28.2.3 Acceptance Traceability

Approach: For each process acceptance, the supervisor signs on the system; acceptance records are automatically archived, including photos, data, and signatures; at final acceptance, the system automatically generates a complete set of acceptance documents.

Effect: Acceptance disputes are greatly reduced; complete documents make settlement smooth; maintenance during the warranty period also has a basis.

Table 28-7 Acceptance Traceability Implementation Points

Case: The editorial team implemented three digital measures during technical services for a project: process check-in—after each process was completed, construction personnel checked in on their mobile phones with photo + location + timestamp; material traceability—each batch of materials was scanned and registered upon entry, and material use locations were associated with batch numbers; acceptance traceability—for each process acceptance, the supervisor signed on the system, and acceptance records were automatically archived. During the entire project construction period, there were no skipped processes, material mixing, or acceptance disputes. This case shows that systems watching people is more reliable than people watching people, and data traces are more accurate than oral reports.

28.3 The “Three Tools” of Construction Digitalization

28.3.1 Mobile Construction Management APP

Functions: process check-in, material scanning, acceptance signature, problem reporting, progress viewing.

Applicable objects: construction personnel (check-in, reporting), project managers (progress, problems), supervisors (acceptance, signature), clients (viewing, supervision).

Table 28-8 Mobile Construction Management APP Functions

28.3.2 QR Code On-Site Identification

Approach: Hang QR code identification signs in each construction area; scanning the code allows viewing of the construction plan, material information, process progress, and acceptance records for that area.

Effect: Clients and supervisors can scan and view at any time without flipping through paper documents; residents can scan to understand construction progress, reducing complaints caused by information opacity; when reporting problems, scanning the code enables precise positioning and efficiency.

Table 28-9 QR Code On-Site Identification Functions

28.3.3 Electronic Acceptance Forms

Approach: Convert traditional paper acceptance forms into electronic forms; fill in, photograph, and sign on mobile phones during acceptance; the system automatically archives and summarizes.

Effect: Acceptance efficiency improves by more than 50%; documents are no longer lost or retroactively signed; summary reports are automatically generated, and settlement is faster.

In terms of construction equipment digitalization, the enterprise’s independently developed flexible stone cutting device integrates cutting, fixing, pushing, and dust removal, making the cutting process more precise, efficient, and environmentally friendly. The device can serve as a data collection terminal for the construction digitalization system, recording cutting quantity, dust concentration, noise decibels, and other construction data, connecting to the mobile construction management APP, and realizing linkage between construction equipment and the digital management platform.

Table 28-10 Electronic Acceptance Form Functions

Case: The editorial team configured three types of digital tools during technical services for a project: mobile construction management APP—construction personnel used the APP for check-in and reporting, and project managers used the APP to view progress; QR code on-site identification—each construction area hung a QR code, and clients and supervisors could scan and view at any time; electronic acceptance forms—supervisors filled in acceptance forms on mobile phones, photographed, signed, and automatically archived. During the entire project construction period, management efficiency significantly improved. This case shows that the value of digitalization lies not in the amount of equipment investment, but in whether data is truly collected, analyzed, and used for decision-making.

28.4 The “Five Digital Key Nodes” of Flexible Stone Facade Retrofit Construction

28.4.1 Substrate Acceptance

Digital actions: Input substrate strength pull-off test data into the system; input substrate flatness test data into the system; input substrate moisture content test data into the system.

Purpose: Ensure substrate conditions meet standards, avoiding later hollowing and detachment; data traces ensure clear responsibility. Substrate bonding strength test results should meet ≥0.4 MPa.

Table 28-11 Substrate Acceptance Digitalization List

28.4.2 Material Entry Acceptance

Digital actions: Scan and register material batches; upload test reports to the system; photograph and trace material appearance sampling.

Purpose: Ensure materials are qualified and batches traceable; prevent material mixing and substitution.

Table 28-12 Material Entry Acceptance Digitalization List

28.4.3 Sample Wall Construction

Digital actions: Photograph and video the entire sample wall construction process; input sample wall acceptance data into the system; trace sample wall effect confirmation signatures.

Purpose: Sample first, confirm the effect before large-scale construction; sample data serves as the benchmark for large-scale construction.

Table 28-13 Sample Wall Construction Digitalization List

28.4.4 Large-Scale Construction

Digital actions: Check in for each process; construction records for each wall (time, personnel, material batch); inspection records (hollowing inspection, flatness inspection).

Purpose: Ensure controllable construction quality; early detection and early handling of problems.

Table 28-14 Large-Scale Construction Digitalization List

28.4.5 Completion Acceptance

Digital actions: System automatically generates a complete set of acceptance documents; acceptance data automatically summarized; acceptance signatures electronic.

Purpose: Efficient acceptance, complete documents; smooth settlement, clear warranty. Completion acceptance standards are consistent with the unified standards in Chapter 19: bonding strength ≥0.4 MPa, hollowing rate ≤5%, flatness ≤3 mm.

Table 28-15 Completion Acceptance Digitalization List

28.5 The “Three Pitfalls to Avoid” in Construction Digitalization

28.5.1 Do Not “Emphasize Hardware Over Use”

Do not buy expensive smart hardware right away. Start with mobile APP + QR code + electronic forms. No matter how simple the tool, it works if used; no matter how advanced the tool, it is useless if not used.

Table 28-16 Avoiding Emphasizing Hardware Over Use

28.5.2 Do Not “Emphasize Records Over Rectification”

Records are for discovering problems, not for making records look good. After problems are discovered, closed-loop rectification must be carried out: “discover → rectify → review → close.” Recording without rectification is equivalent to no recording.

Table 28-17 Avoiding Emphasizing Records Over Rectification

28.5.3 Do Not “Emphasize Systems Over Training”

Training must be in place before system launch. If workers cannot use it, the system becomes a burden. Training should be simple and direct, with the core being the “three-step operation method”: photograph, check in, report.

Table 28-18 Avoiding Emphasizing Systems Over Training

Case: The editorial team implemented three digitalization pitfall-avoidance measures during technical services for a project: do not emphasize hardware over use—start with mobile APP + QR code, and do not purchase expensive hardware; do not emphasize records over rectification—carry out closed-loop rectification after discovering problems, and avoid formalism; do not emphasize systems over training—training in place before system launch, with workers proficient in operation. During the entire project construction period, digital tools were truly implemented, and management efficiency significantly improved. This case shows that digitalization is not one-step到位 but step by step; only by walking each step steadily can you reach the destination.

Decision Reference for Facade Retrofit Offices

I. Applicable Object Determination: This chapter applies to the digital construction management construction of various facade retrofit projects. Before decision-making, first determine the project scale and digitalization needs: for single buildings or small-scale facade retrofit, a lightweight solution of mobile APP + QR code + electronic forms can be adopted; for district comprehensive renovation or multi-building complexes, a system platform solution can be adopted. Then determine the management foundation: whether the project has clear division of responsibilities, acceptance processes, and material management systems. The role of digital tools is to solidify management processes, not to replace missing management systems.

II. Key Decision Indicators: The three core actions correspond to three key indicators—process check-in execution rate (the ratio of check-in records to actual process completion quantity should reach 100%), material traceability completeness rate (the coverage rate of scanning registration for incoming materials should reach 100%), and acceptance traceability completeness rate (the completeness rate of acceptance records with photos + data + signatures should reach 100%). All five digital key nodes should form electronic records, and construction quality acceptance indicators are consistent with the unified standards in Chapter 19: bonding strength ≥0.4 MPa, hollowing rate ≤5%, flatness ≤3 mm.

III. Solution Comparison Recommendations: Digitalization solutions should be selected according to the principle of “lightweight first, then heavy; pilot first, then promotion.” In the initial stage, adopt a lightweight combination of mobile APP + QR code + electronic forms, and do not rush to purchase expensive hardware; important projects can be piloted first, and promotion can be gradual after verifying effectiveness. Tool selection should meet three conditions: simple operation, workers can complete check-in in three steps; traceable data, records cannot be tampered with; controllable cost, flexible configuration according to project scale. Performance data involving enterprise independent R&D technologies, such as the -30°C flexibility and 3500h weather resistance of high-flexibility emulsion, and the stain resistance data of inorganic silicone resin modified topcoat technology, can be incorporated into the material traceability database as quality parameters.

IV. Cost and Schedule Reference: The lightweight digitalization solution has relatively low cost, mainly including APP usage fees or platform rental fees, QR code sign production fees, and personnel training fees; the system platform solution has relatively high cost, including platform development or procurement fees, hardware equipment fees, and operations and maintenance fees. Digitalization implementation does not occupy additional critical schedule; training can be completed before construction, taking about 0.5–1 day; the reduction in rework and improvement in management efficiency brought by digitalization can indirectly shorten the overall schedule. Subsequent data updates and system maintenance should be included in the project management budget.

V. Implementation Risk Warnings: The three major risks are worker resistance risk, data distortion risk, and missing rectification closed loop risk. Worker resistance—through simple operation training, make workers feel it is easy to use, emphasize practical benefits such as linking check-in with settlement, and reduce perceived use cost; data distortion—prohibit proxy check-in and retroactive check-in, set timestamps and location verification in the system, and ensure data authenticity; missing rectification closed loop—after problems are discovered, the closed loop of “discover → rectify → review → close” must be followed, ensuring records are not just “good-looking.” Training should be completed before digital tools are launched, and dedicated personnel should be arranged for on-site guidance in the initial stage.

Reflections on Stone, Insights on Fortune

The digitalization of facade retrofit construction is essentially changing management from “people watching people” to “systems watching people.” People watching people relies on responsibility, which varies, and management effects fluctuate accordingly. Systems watching people rely on institutions and data—every step leaves a trace, every location is traceable, and every batch of materials is traceable, making management effects stable and predictable. Digitalization is not a patent of large projects. A mobile phone, a QR code, and an electronic form are affordable, usable, and effective for facade retrofit projects. Solidly implement the three actions of process check-in, material traceability, and acceptance traceability, and manage the five nodes of substrate acceptance, material entry, sample wall, large-scale construction, and completion acceptance in place; then facade retrofit construction quality will have institutional guarantees. Let systems watch every detail and let data clarify every process—this is the true value that smart construction sites bring to facade retrofit.

References

[1] GB 50210—2018, Standard for Construction Quality Acceptance of Building Decoration[S].

[2] GB 50300—2013, Unified Standard for Constructional Quality Acceptance of Building Engineering[S].

[3] JGJ/T 29—2015, Specification for Construction and Acceptance of Building Painting[S].

[4] T/CECS 728—2020, Technical Standard for Comprehensive Renovation of Old Urban Residential Areas[S].

[5] Related general clauses in Chapters 17, 18, and 19 of this book.