Sacks, R; Whyte, J; Swissa, D; Raviv, G; Zhou, W and Shapira, A (2015) Safety by design: Dialogues between designers and builders using virtual reality. Construction Management and Economics, 33(1), pp. 55-72. ISSN 01446193
Abstract
Designers can contribute to enhancing the safety of construction work by considering how their decisions impact on both the physical environment in which construction workers operate and the means and methods they use. To do so, however, designers require knowledge about safety hazards on site and the opportunity to examine their designs early in projects. Through a set of studies virtual reality tools were used to examine the potential for collaborative dialogue between designers and builders to provide a forum for learning and proactive change of a design to make a project safer to build. In the tests, participants viewed proposed designs using virtual reality to examine various alternative design and construction scenarios. The study shows that consultation and dialogue with an experienced construction professional are highly beneficial for designers to appreciate the implications of designs on safety, and that designers are more willing to adapt design details than to change aesthetic aspects of their designs.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | building design; construction safety; engineering design; virtual reality |
| Index terms: | designer, builder, aesthetic, construction work, building design, construction professional, construction safety, construction worker, engineering design, design and construction, virtual reality |
| Subjects: | environmental health, design process, virtual reality, professional development, profession, operations management, architectural design, contractual arrangements, practitioner, factor and component analysis |
| Topics: | Information Management, Digital Applications, Project Management, Roles and Professions, Procurement, Sustainability, Design Practice |
| Descriptive scope: | 2 PC |
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