Moore, D (1996) Buildability assessment and the development of an automated design aid for managing the transfer of construction process knowledge. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 3(1-2), pp. 29-46. ISSN 0969-9988
Abstract
The cause of construction problems is suggested as being the lack of industry cohesion. This can only be addressed successfully by design professionals and construction professionals working more closely together, i.e. considering buildability. Buildability is a problem of managing the transfer of appropriate knowledge about the construction process to the design process worker. It is not solely about the technicalities of the construction process. It is suggested that no buildability strategy which seeks to impose predetermined construction solutions will be readily accepted by design professionals. The development of a design buildability strategy which transfers construction process knowledge in such a manner as to be seen as an adviser on simplification, would not be seen by design professionals as a convergent approach to buildability. Such a strategy would represent just one of a range of strategies to achieving overall project buildability.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | automated design aid; buildability; knowledge transfer |
| Index terms: | strategy, design aid, simplification, knowledge transfer, design process, cohesion, buildability, construction professional, construction process |
| Subjects: | management, structural engineering, professional development, design methods, research dissemination and communication, building construction, design efficiency |
| Topics: | Engineering Principles, Design Practice, Information Management, Site Management, Digital Applications, Business Strategy |
| 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