De Lapp, J A; Ford, D N; Bryant, J A and Horlen, J (2004) Impacts of CAD on design realization. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 11(4), pp. 284-291. ISSN 0969-9988
Abstract
Complete and accurate design is critical for construction project success. Manifesting design intent in the constructed facility depends on coordinated design documents that are developed through design realization. This process evolves design intent from architects and engineers to contractors, through the production and review of shop drawings and other submittals. Information technology has been promoted as a tool to improve this process, but is not being fully utilized for this purpose. A case study investigates the impacts of computed aided design (CAD) on design realization. Comparative analysis between shop drawings prepared by hand and those done with CAD quantify notes, corrections and information transfer errors. Results support the hypothesis that utilizing CAD can improve design accuracy and lower project costs. Barriers to wider adoption, implications for practice and further research are discussed.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | computer aided design; construction operations; design and development |
| Index terms: | design and development, case study, engineer, construction operation, architect, drawing, project cost, comparative analysis, accuracy, construction project, computer aided design, documents, submittal, information technology |
| Subjects: | data analysis and analytics, construction operations, technical documentation, computing systems, profession, data collection methods, computational design, production management, design process, professional development, economics |
| Topics: | Site Management, Digital Applications, Design Practice, Roles and Professions, Information Management, Research Practice, Project Management, Cost 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