Bellamy, L (2019) Optimisation tools to assist efficient and sustainable tall building design. PhD thesis, Imperial College London, UK.
Abstract
Sustainability is an increasingly important factor in global decision-making, and provision of infrastructure is responsible for a substantial volume of global greenhouse gas emissions. Whilst efforts are ongoing to reduce operational carbon in the construction industry, work is still necessary to lower embodied carbon. Currently, the optimisation and design process of structures is largely based on engineers' experience. Whilst this experience is extremely valuable and will often reach good results, making use of computational technologies that are now available could achieve improved results whilst also saving time in the design process. This could lead to more efficient designs and savings on material quantities, lowering the embodied carbon of structures. This thesis aims to develop optimisation tools for tall buildings, which are an increasingly common structural form constructed, to assist their efficient and sustainable design. The PhD project has been conducted in collaboration with industry to ensure its applicability to projects encountered in structural consultancy offices, with relevant outputs. A qualitative study has been conducted to assess the current and future place of computational engineering in the construction industry. The computational tools developed include concrete core, slab and column optimisation including sizing of core and columns, and grid layout and bracing arrangement optimisation for steel buildings including sizing optimisation. They aim to be versatile, robust and user-friendly, having been developed in an accessible, widely used software environment. They have been tested on theoretical and retrospective case studies and are now accessible to practising engineers. The engineering research presented is intended to be used in various design stages with a focus on early design stages, an area where valuable benefits both on environmental sustainability and design process efficiency can be reached. It enables engineers, in conjunction with their technical experience, to search the design space available more efficiently, to conduct analysis and optimisation and to make informed decisions earlier in the design process than would be possible with standard design methods.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Thesis advisor: | Phillips, A T M |
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | collaboration; columns; design method; design process; efficiency; optimisation; sustainability; case studies |
| Index terms: | design stage, collaboration, greenhouse gas emission, decision-making, environmental sustainability, operational carbon, consultancy, sustainable design, design process, embodied carbon, tall building, column, early design stage, design method, construction industry, case study, efficiency, savings, qualitative study, engineer |
| Subjects: | design methods, research design and methodology, profession, data collection methods, performance management, management, environmental health, industry analysis, decision analysis, climate science, environmental impact, organization, construction type, economic analysis, professional practice, design process, health safety and environment, structural engineering |
| Topics: | Quality Management, Risk Management, Sustainability, Health and Safety, Engineering Principles, Organizational Design, Design Practice, Roles and Professions, Construction Technology, Business Strategy, Research Practice |
| 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