Concurrent Design for Production (CDP): Materializing interface knowledge on a US residential construction project using computer aided design objects

Understanding and Managing the Construction Process: Theory and Practice - 14th Annual Conference of the International Group for Lean Construction, IGLC-14

Volumn , Issue , 2006, Pages 319-330

  Folkestad, James E ^a  

^a Veterinary Dentistry and Oral Surgery   (United States)

Author keywords

Computer Aided Design (CAD); Concurrent design for production; Production; Residential construction

Indexed keywords

CAD MODELS; CONCURRENT DESIGN; DESIGN PROCESS; ETHNOGRAPHIC METHODS; FIELD LEVEL; ON-SITE CONSTRUCTION; RESEARCH STUDIES; RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION; RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS; SOCIAL PROCESS; STUDY DESIGN; VISUAL REPRESENTATIONS;

CONSTRUCTION; CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY; GROUP THEORY; INTERFACES (MATERIALS); PRODUCT DESIGN; PRODUCTION; THREE DIMENSIONAL;

COMPUTER AIDED DESIGN;

EID: 84866127527     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (14)

1. Bashford, H. H. S., Anil; Walsh, Kenneth D.; and Kot, Kunal. (2003). "Implications of Even Flow Production Methodology for U.S. Housing Industry." Journal of Construction Engineering & Management 129 (3): 330.
2. Boujut, J.-F. and P. Laureillard (2002). "A co-operation framework for product-process integration in engineering design." Design Studies 23: 497-513.
3. Bucciarelli, L. L. (1994). Designing Engineers. Cambridge, MA, MIT Press.
4. Finger, S., Konda, S., and Subrahmanian, E. (1995). "Concurrent design happens at the interfaces." Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing, 9: 89-99.
5. Folkestad, J. and D. Sandlin (2005). "Digital construction: Utilizing three dimensional (3D) computer models to improve constructability. " Proceedings of the 11th Annual International Conference on Industry, Engineering, and Management Systems (IEMS), Cocoa Beach, Florida, College of Business Administration, California State University, Stanislaus.
6. Gann, D., M. (2000). Building Innovation: complex constructs in a changing world. Reston, VA, Thomas Telford.
7. Love, T. (2003). "Design as a social process: bodies, brains and social aspects of designing." Journal of Design Research 3 (1): 1-7.
8. Picchi, F. (2000). "Lean principles and the construction main flows". Proceedings of the 8th International Group for Lean Construction, Brighton, UK.
9. Schrage, M. (2000). Serious Play: How the World's Best Companies Simulate to Innovate. Boston, MA, Harvard Business School Press.
10. Slaughter, S. (1993). "Builders as Sources of Construction Innovation." Journal of Construction Engineering & Management 119 (3): 532-549.
11. Spear, S. and Bowen, K. H. (1999). "Decoding the DNA of the Toyota Production System." Harvard Business Review: 95-106.
12. Thomke, S., H. (2003). Experimentation Matters. Boston, MA, Harvard Business School Press.
13. Tommelein, I. D. R., D. and Howell, G. A. J. (1999). "Parade game: Impact of work flow variability on trade performance." Journal of Construction Engineering & Management 125 (5): 304-310.
14. Tsao, C., C. Y. and I. Tommelein, D. (2002). "Comparing and Implementing alternative work structures: installation of door frames". 10th Annual Conference of the International Group for Lean Construction (IGLC), Gramado, Brazil.