## 4 Discussion and Analysis  
### Differences between Assembled M&E Systems and Conventional M&E Systems  
In the planning and design stage, by comparing the construction methods of traditional M&E, it is not difficult to conclude the advantages and shortcomings of the assembly M&E system because of the one-piece design, so it is necessary to make an excellent and detailed decision at this stage to satisfy each other to meet the matching and avoid problems such as inconsistency in the diameter of the pipe orifices. Conventional MEP system design offers a higher degree of flexibility, and design changes can be made more efficiently during the construction process, but this is because it is this flexibility that can cause instability in the MEP components. Compared to traditional MEP systems, assembly MEP systems can solve problems in advance, such as space conflict and installation sequence, better control the design and construction costs, and improve project information interoperability. The addition of BIM allows the stages to have better coordination and coherence. In the prefabrication stage, the differences between assembly MEP systems and traditional MEP systems are mainly reflected in the component manufacturing environment, the level of customization, and component transportation. The assembly M&E system can be uniformly pressed in the factory. In contrast, the traditional M&E system mainly relies on on-site manufacturing, and the assembly M&E system can be customized according to the drawings with high-precision management. In contrast, the traditional M&E system relies more on on-site installation. However, the transportation of assembled M&E systems is relatively more complex, and it must be ensured that the finished prefabricated components arrive safely at the site. The main advantages of assembled M&E systems over traditional M&E systems are improved efficiency, higher quality control, a reduction of on-site processing safety risks, and the elimination of various on-site instability factors. In the installation and construction stage, by comparing the installation of traditional M&E systems, it is easy to realize that in traditional M&E system installation, almost all the work is carried out on site. This involves cutting and assembling pipes, wires, ducts, and other system components on-site, which is often inefficient, and the working environment on-site is challenging to control. The safety and quality of construction may, therefore, be compromised. On the other hand, assembly MEP systems take a more convenient approach, featuring prefabricated and pre-assembled components of critical systems at a prefabricated manufacturing facility. This increases construction efficiency while improving the level of quality control. Since a significant amount of the work is conducted off-site, there is less disruption on-site, and the construction cycle is consequently shorter. Usingassembly systems also reduces material waste on site and improves overall environmental sustainability. With a more standardized work process and lower risk, assembly MEP systems allow for better construction cost and time forecasting. In the operations and maintenance stage, the main points of difference between the operations stage of an assembled MEP system and a traditional MEP system are modularity and replaceability. Assembled MEPs can remove a single faulty module, but traditional MEPs are usually fixed-mounted and often require the removal of the entire piece. The overall maintenance costs are higher, and because assembled MEP systems are designed with prefabricated, standardized modules, the costs of operations and repairs are lower. Maintenance is more time-sensitive, and prefabricated modules allow for quick installation, thus reducing the downtime of the M&E system. Next, compare the difference between the assembled M&E system and the traditional M&E system in dismantling and reuse.