Fox, S J (2001) Application of design for manufacture principles to building design and construction. PhD thesis, Sheffield Hallam University, UK.
Abstract
The aim of this thesis is to answer the two research questions: how can design for manufacture be applied during building component design and building design?; and how can the application of design for manufacture be successful in improving the productivity and quality of building component production and building construction? These two questions emerged during exploratory research focused on the use of design to improve construction industry productivity and quality. Subsequent review of manufacturing literature revealed that the two key principles of design for manufacture are standard production design improvement rules and standard production design evaluation metrics. Review of construction literature, and a survey involving over one hundred and fifty industry practitioners, revealed that, whilst rules and metrics for building components and buildings do not currently exist, there are no fundamental reasons why they could not be developed and applied successfully. These findings led to the generation of the research hypothesis: design for manufacture principles can be applied successfully to building components and buildings. The research hypothesis was tested by two interventions, action research within a private business which manufactures and installs building components, and a case study with a multi-national company which designs and constructs buildings. These interventions resulted in significant business benefits. Further, they confirmed that it is both technically feasible and economically viable to apply rules and metrics to building component design and building design, and that doing so can improve the productivity and quality of building component production and building construction. Following analysis of research findings, strategic plans were developed for the successful application of rules and metrics. These were validated through interviews with senior construction industry practitioners. Contributions to knowledge include the strategic plans for successful application of rules and metrics. These cover the full range of organisations working in the construction industry and, together with the detailed descriptions of the interventions, offer practical guidance for industry practitioners seeking to improve productivity and quality. The research also makes a contribution in the area of research methodology. It has shown that threats to research validity in the construction industry can be counteracted by applying a quasi-experimental perspective to action research interventions and case studies.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Thesis advisor: | Cockerham, G; Grove, J and Marsh, L |
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | action research; building design; case study; design and build; design for manufacture; interview; productivity |
| Index terms: | building construction, design and building, survey, interview, action research, design and build, building component, practitioner, productivity, validity, building design, case study, construction industry, design for manufacture, design evaluation, research methodology, exploratory research |
| Subjects: | research methods, architectural elements, manufacturing engineering, management, design process, building construction, industry analysis, design assessment, research design and methodology, evaluation and assessment methods, data collection methods, practitioner, architectural design, contractual arrangements |
| Topics: | Engineering Principles, Procurement, Research Practice, Business Strategy, Construction Technology, Roles and Professions, Design Practice |
| Descriptive scope: | 5 PCTEA |
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