# An Expert Knowledge-Based System to Evaluate the Efficiency of Dry Construction Methods
## 3 Results
### The Analysis of the Dry Construction Potential in Finishing Construction Works
From the above results, it can be concluded that by choosing only dry techniques, the time for the completion of finishing works can be reduced by 40% to 66% compared to the use of wet construction systems and techniques. In terms of average values, there is a reduction of days by almost 60%. By choosing at least one construction work implemented with dry techniques, the implementation time is reduced by 12%; by choosing three dry techniques, it can be reduced by 50%. In a similar way, the analysis of the construction time was carried out for apartments with different numbers of living rooms, for a family house with an area of 100 m\({}^{2}\), and for a one-storied family house. Based on the results of the analyses presented above, the potential of DCTs was clearly confirmed in terms of construction time, both for residential buildings and for family houses. Several sources mention the increased construction cost as one of the disadvantages of dry construction techniques compared to traditional wet techniques. Although these increased costs were confirmed by our simulations, the ensuing analyses point to several cases where the costs of dry construction are comparable to the costs of traditional construction or combinations of dry and wet technologies (technological model M3) and even lower. Figure 9 shows the total construction cost of the finishing works in the reference family house FH 70, for all simulated combinations separately. For a faster and clearer evaluation, the lowest construction cost within the examined combinations of individual technological models is highlighted in dark green, and the highest construction cost is in deep red. The average values of the cost parameter in technological models M1P, M2P, and M3P are also highlighted in the colors corresponding to each model: models M1--blue, M2--yellow, and M3--green. The construction cost of finishing works in the case of technological model M1, which includes combinations of only wet technologies, is from a minimum of EUR 8091 (M1/7) to a maximum of EUR 10,949 (M1/4). The average cost is EUR 9438. If the combinations of finishing works include only dry construction systems and techniques (technological model M2), the construction cost is a minimum of EUR 9698 (M2/6) and a maximum of EUR 11,588 (M2/8). The average construction cost in the technological model M2 is EUR 10,658. To compare dry techniques with traditional wet techniques, we can confirm an increase in costs by 12% to 43%, but there are also combinations when the costs of dry technologies are  
Figure 8: Construction time of different technological models of finishing works in the family house FH 70.  
lower. The construction cost in the case of combining dry construction techniques together with traditional wet construction techniques in individual combinations of the technological model M3 is a minimum of EUR 6698 (M3/4) and a maximum of EUR 11,970 (M3/11). The average cost in the technology model M3 is EUR 9288. The value of the average cost of the combination of dry and wet techniques, M3P, is lower compared to the value of wet techniques, M1P, by 1.6% and compared to the average cost of dry techniques, M2P, by 13%. In the same way, the analysis of construction cost was carried out for apartments with different numbers of living rooms, for a family house with an area of 100 m\({}^{2}\), and for a one-storied family house. From the results of the analysis, it follows that by choosing only dry construction systems and techniques, the construction cost will increase in the range of 12% to 43% of the cost of wet construction systems and techniques. Considering the average values of dry M2P to wet M1P, the cost increase is 12%. By choosing at least one of the finishing works for a dry technique, the cost is reduced by a maximum of 39% compared to wet techniques in the model M1; by choosing three finishing works with dry systems or techniques, the cost could increase by 48%.