Parrish, K D (2009) Applying a set-based design approach to reinforcing steel design. PhD thesis, University of California, Berkeley, USA.
Abstract
Researchers and practitioners have been implementing 'lean' in the architecture engineering construction (AEC) industry since the 1990s. They seek to bring lean practices from the manufacturing and new product development communities, most notably those developed by Toyota, to the AEC industry in support of improved project delivery. Toyota engineers use a set-based design methodology to promote innovation in product design, reduce rework, and facilitate collaboration between project stakeholders. AEC practitioners use a set-based design methodology to some degree; however, it has not been formalized nor has implementation been widespread. The set-based design methodology involves postponing commitment to a specific design, instead generating and evaluating sets of design alternatives. A design team reviews the sets of design alternatives available to each project stakeholder and integrates them to find compatible combinations. They weigh input from several project stakeholders at the same time, early on, and throughout project delivery, while studying tradeoffs between what individual stakeholders value and what is of value to the project as a whole. Set-based communication helps stakeholders avoid rework and, through teamwork, develop a more globally satisfactory design than would otherwise be the case. This dissertation argues for the use of a set-based design methodology in the AEC industry and presents tools and processes that could aid in its implementation. It specifically explores the use of a set-based design methodology to select reinforcing steel (rebar) configurations for reinforced concrete projects through case studies and workshops. Moreover, it examines the role of the design structure matrix (DSM) in revealing opportunities for implementing a set-based design methodology and explains the role of the Choosing By Advantages Decisionmaking System (CBA) in a set-based design methodology. Research findings illustrate the effectiveness of set-based design in reducing rework and facilitating innovation on AEC projects. No single set-based design methodology will apply to all projects: opportunities for implementation vary from project to project. This dissertation delivers a proof of concept for a set-based design methodology and validates it through case studies and workshops. Future research can deepen the theoretical understanding of set-based design methodologies and further advance tools to support it in the AEC industry.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Thesis advisor: | Tommelein, I D |
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | effectiveness; reinforced concrete; collaboration; communication; innovation; manufacturing; project delivery; teamwork; project stakeholder; stakeholders; case studies |
| Index terms: | product design, reinforcing steel, tradeoff, design structure matrix, design team, rework, commitment, reinforced concrete, configuration, practitioner, project stakeholder, collaboration, methodology, workshop, teamwork, case study, engineer, new product development, effectiveness, rebar, project delivery, dissertation, implementation |
| Subjects: | systems engineering, sociology, decision analysis, performance management, research methods, management, project delivery, contractual arrangements, innovation and technology management, professional practice, operations management, building materials, psychology, design methods, practitioner, innovation studies, construction type, profession, data collection methods, research dissemination and communication |
| Topics: | Construction Technology, Stakeholder Management, Roles and Professions, Construction Materials, Research Practice, Business Strategy, Organizational Design, Design Practice, Procurement, Risk Management, Engineering Principles, Project Management, Quality Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTE |
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