Nakajima, T (1972) Modeling and optimization of the building process for systems building. PhD thesis, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, USA.
Abstract
[Extract from introduction] In the process of describing their requirements, clients usually ask for more items of better quality while they try to have the consequent cost and time reduced as much as possible. These two desires are conflicting. Therefore, "optimum building" often means the compromise of these contradictory desires. However, cost and time in the construction process are not simply determined by user requirements but are also affected by the choice of construction method and the nature of the environment in which the project is to be built. In general, the environment is beyond the control of construction engineers. Therefore, the main interests are construction method and user requirements specified in WHAT to build (user requirements) and HOW to build (construction method). Therefore, they focus on these areas where they can exercise some control and simply respond to the environment. For this reason, effort here is devoted to planning and modeling concepts. In the traditional building process, it is difficult for construction engineers to exercise control over WHAT to build because of the owner-architect contracting format. In this environment, the builder contracts to build a given project (the WHAT) in competition with others and he operates with some objective concept (his HOW); i.e., lower cost, more profit conditioned by competition. Therefore, the construction engineers can only make an effort to have the best construction method meet the specified time of completion of the project, as well as not exceed the estimated cost; al-though construction engineers can have very little control over the cost and completion time, even with completely free choice of available construction methods. The cost and time attributes are almost completely determined when WHAT to build is prescribed and the construction engineer's influence is restricted to efforts to complete it without waste of time-and available funds. One of the great advantages of systems building is that it gives the construction engineer the chance to participate in the design process and discuss WHAT to build from the construction point of view. This has actually been done for the designs of temporary buildings, such as pavilions of exposition sites, because for those buildings, construction and destruction are of most interest. Despite of the intended drastic changes of the building process in systems building, good tools have not yet been found which allow users, architects and engineers to cooperate with each other closely…
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | competition; optimization; building process; construction method; architect; builder; client; systems building; system building; modelling |
| Index terms: | user requirement, traditional building, exercise, competition, construction process, owner, system building, engineer, architect, building process, profit, completion time, builder, construction method, modelling, design process |
| Subjects: | profession, practitioner, market analysis, project controls, construction type, user-centered design, health behaviours and lifestyles, design methods, analytical methods, economic analysis, sociology, building construction |
| Topics: | Time Control, Research Practice, Stakeholder Management, Site Management, Business Strategy, Health and Safety, Construction Technology, Design Practice, Roles and Professions, Engineering Principles |
| Descriptive scope: | 2 PC |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here