Burford, N K and Smith, F W (1999) Developing a new military shelter system: A case study in innovation. Building Research & Information, 27(1), pp. 35-55. ISSN 0961-3218
Abstract
A lightweight, rapid-erect shelter system using a new combination of composite materials and fabric diaphragms in a truss support system has been developed in response to changes in military requirements. This paper outlines the background to the project and the reasons for its inception; it follows the development of the design from initial conceptual idea to eventual solution. Decisions influencing the overall design, structure, materials, prototyping and manufacturing techniques are discussed in relation to performance criteria and client capabilities. The authors focus on the problems encountered in the development programme and the innovation process, highlight how these problems were overcome and detail the benefits which were created. In particular, the resulting tent incorporates lightweight sprung glass reinforced composite beams, post-tensioned by a fabric diaphragm. The new shelter uses a minimum number of these lightweight, rigid components and consequently achieves a reduction in weight, erect and strike times and packed bulk through its innovations.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | advanced materials; design management; innovation; prototype; shelter; tents |
| Index terms: | prototyping, beam, design management, programme, prototype, shelter system, case study, composite, performance criteria |
| Subjects: | structural engineering, performance measurement, safety engineering, design process, project controls, data collection methods, materials science, modelling and simulation, innovation and technology management |
| Topics: | Research Practice, Engineering Principles, Construction Materials, Time Control, Design Practice, Quality Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCE |
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