Felix, R (1988) The use of domestic building products by the owner-builder. PhD thesis, University of Leeds, UK.
Abstract
Background investigations into owner-built houses indicated that such an approach to house construction enables the owner-builder to participate in the building process. While exercising individual choice in selecting from the structural methods available, the owner-builder house in the United Kingdom often uses non-structural products and materials from a limited range available. A literature survey concluded that domestic building products appeared to have common characteristics of use, state of manufacture and similar skills required for their assembly. The aim of the research was to establish and analyse the characteristics of domestic building products and to be able to predict the relative suitability for use by an owner-builder. A survey was made of those domestic building products which were available through retail outlets. Information on individual products was classified and analysed by product types which use the same or similar materials. The conclusion of the research is to establish methods of analysis which assist in determining a domestic building product's relative suitability for use by the owner-builder and propose a method of classification to assist in their selection by the user.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | United Kingdom; builder; building process; owner; skills |
| Index terms: | suitability, investigation, house construction, owner, United Kingdom, domestic building, builder, survey, building process |
| Subjects: | sociology, practitioner, construction type, data collection methods, Geography, design criteria, building construction |
| Topics: | Design Practice, Construction Technology, Geographical Context, Roles and Professions, Site Management, Research Practice, Stakeholder Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCEA |
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