wu, S; Lee, A; Koh, W W I; Aouad, G and fu, C (2004) An IFC-based space analysis for building accessibility layout for all users. Construction Innovation, 4(3), pp. 129-141. ISSN 1471-4175
Abstract
An accessible or inclusive building design does not disable any user; it should enable the independent and equal use of a facility by all. With the introduction of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 (DDA), the consideration of issues such as access and inclusive design become even more important. Space analysis is an important aspect of the current accessibility assessment. Existing space analysis techniques, such as space syntax, have tackled the local and global accessibility of a building layout using graph theory. However, there are difficulties in the automatic transfer of design information from architectural drawings into a space analysis tool. With the recent development of the building information model and Industry Foundation Classes (IFCs), it is now possible to automate the transfer process. This paper demonstrates the automation process and how it can be used in accessibility analysis.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | accessibility; building information model; graph theory; ifc; space planning; space syntax |
| Index terms: | inclusive design, discrimination, drawing, graph theory, accessibility, space syntax, industry foundation classes, disability, building design, automation, space planning |
| Subjects: | professional ethics, urban design, computational design, inclusive design, design methods, architectural design, technical documentation, health conditions and diseases, design process, theoretical framing, automation and robotics |
| Topics: | Digital Applications, Research Practice, Health and Safety, Design Practice, Legal Issues |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCA |
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