architecture + construction alliance
research initiatives
fall 2010
A R C H I T E C T U R E + C O N S T R U C T I O N A L L I A N C E
_______________________________________________________________________________
i
A R C H I T E C T U R E + C O N S T R U C T I O N A L L I A N C E
_______________________________________________________________________________
ii
INTENT
That wall…was an act of technology. It was beautiful, but not because of any masterful intellectual planning or any
scientific supervision of the job, or any added expenditures to “stylize” it. It was beautiful because the people who
worked on it had a way of looking at things that made them do it right unselfconsciously. They didn’t separate
themselves from the work in such a way as to do it wrong. There is the center of the whole solution.”
Zen and the Art of motorcycle Maintenance, by Robert Pirsig
Walls are not the domain of any one discipline. They are however, metaphorically constructed to protect
domains.
The academy has allowed Architecture and Construction to have metaphorical walls, constricting collaboration
and ultimately the raising of critical questions; some call research. The Architecture + Construction Alliance is an
organization of 15 universities in the USA focused on the collaboration of asking and addressing questions between
the disciplines. These questions – at this point in time - range in 6 domains that are important to the advancement of
design processes and construction of the built environment.




The intent is for there to be 4 levels of collaboration;
Between faculty at the same institution
Between faculty at different institutions
Between faculty and industry and corporations
Between faculty and governmental agencies
This publication is intended to offer a range of research currently being engaged by some faculty from these 15
institutions. It is a monograph that will hopefully be updated annually and offered to academicians, industrial and
corporate sponsors and governmental funding agencies.
A wall is a beautiful object that requires the collaboration of many professionals involving its site, its materiality,
its means and methods of assembly and finally its construction. A wall should be something to celebrate, not
overcome.
Jack Davis, FAIA LEED AP
Reynolds Metals Professor and Dean
College of Architecture and Urban Studies
Virginia Tech
President A+CA
A R C H I T E C T U R E + C O N S T R U C T I O N A L L I A N C E
_______________________________________________________________________________
iii
This monograph was compiled in September and October of 2010 from the faculty whose names
are attached to each of the research outlines submitted. No content alterations were made to
their submittals. The Architecture + Construction Alliance assumes no responsibility for the
content submitted to this monograph by the research faculty.
The cover image is used with permission of, The Western European Architecture
Foundation. The artist is Professor Mario Cortes, School of Architecture + Design, Virginia Tech;
winner of the 2006 Gabriel Prize.
A R C H I T E C T U R E + C O N S T R U C T I O N A L L I A N C E
_______________________________________________________________________________
iv
Table of Contents
INTENT ...................................................................................................................................... iii
Architecture + Construction Alliance ....................................................................................... ix
Research Initiatives ................................................................................................................. xii
Area 1: (HOUSING AND HOMEBUILDING)
A Preconstruction Model for Residential Construction - Life Cycle Cost Analysis - Structurally
Insulated Panels .......................................................................................................................... 3
Jason B. Peschel and Rick W. Cherf
Characterizing Zero Energy Home Consumers ........................................................................... 4
Andrew P. McCoy and Chayanika Mitra
Area 2: CURICULUM (LEARNING AND PEDAGOGY)
A Portal for Collaborative Authoring of Topics and Case Studies Towards Integrated
Curriculum Development ........................................................................................................... 7
Georg Reichard, John Randolph, and Sean McGinnis
Service Learning Applied to Construction Education ................................................................. 8
Philip Barlow
Change/ Challenge/ Response: Design Education For Architects In 2060 ................................ 9
Tom Regan, Professor
Program To Increase Promotion and Tenure Success or Faculty Members ............................... 10
Tom Regan, Professor
Collaboration Opportunity – A Design and Construction Administration Course .................. 11
Richard C. Ryan AIC, CPC, LEED AP
Here Comes the Sun: Rediscovering the Sun in Architectural Pedagogy ................................ 12
Bronne Dytoc + Ed Akins II
Educational Delivery Methods Applied to Construction Education ........................................ 13
Philip Barlow
From Drawing Structures in Class to Designing Forms in Studio ............................................. 14
Bronne Dytoc
Developing the Studio as Pedagogical Practice in Building Construction Education .............. 15
Dr. Theo Haupt, Dr. Islam El-Adaway, & Christopher Monson
A R C H I T E C T U R E + C O N S T R U C T I O N A L L I A N C E
_______________________________________________________________________________
v
lumenHAUS: Uses and Benefits of ICT for Educational Achievement and Market Advantage
................................................................................................................................................... 16
Andrew P. McCoy, Robert Schubert, Robert Dunay and Joseph Wheeler
Emotional Effectiveness in the Classroom: Virginia Tech’s Integrated Leadership ................ 16
Andrew P. McCoy and Christine Fiori
Guiding Integration: Supply Chain Shortcomings in AEC Curriculum ...................................... 18
Patrick Doan and Andrew P. McCoy
Area 3: (INTEGRATED PROCESS AND DELIVERY)
Teaching Collaboration in a Studio Setting Utilizing Integrated Delivery Methodology ........ 21
David Boeck BArch, MArch, Hans-Peter (Hepi) Wachter MFA, March, Tammy McCuen MS
High Performance Project Outcomes: Traditional vs Relational Contract Agreements ......... 22
Islam H. El-adaway and Sharareh M. Kermanshachi
Team Processes and Dynamics Demonstrated in Interdisciplinary BIM Teams ..................... 23
Tamera McCuen and Lee Fithian
The Impact of Project Delivery Method on Achieving Project Sustainability Goals ............... 24
Tamera L. McCuen, Douglas D. Gransberg, Keith R. Molenaar and Nathaniel J. Sobin
Understanding the Relationships and Risks of Designers and Constructors in the Design and
Preconstruction Process ........................................................................................................... 25
Rick W. Cherf A. Don Poe Professor
Integrated Project Delivery Case Study: Guidelines for Drafting Partnering Contract ........... 26
Islam H. El-adaway
Guidelines for a Standard Project Partnering Contract............................................................ 27
Islam H. El-adaway
Multi-Party Partnering for Integrated Project Delivery: A Proposed World Bank
Infrastructure Management Contract ...................................................................................... 28
Islam H. El-adaway and Sharareh M. Kermanshachi
Changing the Culture of Design and Construction Education in the U.S. ................................ 29
Paul Holley & Josh Emig
From Integration to Outreach: Leveraging Integrated Design and Construction Education for
Community Betterment............................................................................................................ 30
Josh Emig & Paul Holley
A R C H I T E C T U R E + C O N S T R U C T I O N A L L I A N C E
_______________________________________________________________________________
vi
A Virtual Construction Environment (VCE) to Support Integrated Project Management
Processes ................................................................................................................................... 31
Jason Lucas (Graduate Student),and Walid Thabet (Department Head)
AREA 4: (BUILDING INFORMATION MODELING)
Analyzing Capacity of BIM Tools to Support Data Use across Project Lifecycle...................... 34
Jason Lucas (Graduate Student) and Walid Thabet (Department Head)
The Effect of Building Information Modeling on Conflict and Conflict Management in
Interdisciplinary Teams ............................................................................................................ 35
Tamera McCuen
Extending BIM from Information Modeling to Knowledge Modeling and Support ................. 36
Jim Jones
AREA 5: (HEALTHCARE FACILITY DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION)
Quality Control and Construction Project Success on Hospital Projects ................................. 38
Philip Barlow
Emerging Sustainable Community Design Studio Focused on Teaching Interdisciplinary
Collaboration in Senior Wellness Center Design Project........................................................ 39
David Boeck BArch, MArch , Hans-Peter (Hepi) Wachter MFA, MArch
Sustainable One-stop General Hospital Design ........................................................................ 40
Zhe Sun
Architecture for Health: An Inter-Institutional Approach Teaching Collaboratively
Community Health Design ........................................................................................................ 41
David Boeck BArch, MArch, Hans-Peter (Hepi) Wachter MFA, MArch
Practitioner Evaluation of Healthcare Facilities ....................................................................... 43
Mardelle McCuskey Shepley
Cleveland County Cardiac Care Center ..................................................................................... 44
PI: Christopher Coombs
Redefining the Role of Information Technology: Transforming Facility Management ......... 45
Jim Jones and Elizabeth Grant
A R C H I T E C T U R E + C O N S T R U C T I O N A L L I A N C E
_______________________________________________________________________________
vii
AREA 6:(SUSTAINABLE DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION)
Deconstruction and Reuse of Construction Materials ............................................................. 48
Abdol Chini
Potential Harmful Environmental Impacts as a Consequence of Material and System
Specifications, Installation, and Operations in Current U.S. Green Building Practices .......... 49
Tamera McCuen and Lee Fithian
Research Subject: Engineering Sustainable Building Systems ................................................. 50
Esther Obonyo and Robert Ries
Delivering Sustainable Buildings: A Content Analysis of Procurement Documents .............. 51
Nathaniel J. Sobin
The Impact of Project Delivery Method on Achieving Project Sustainability Goals ............... 52
Tamera L. McCuen
Development of a Cost Model for External Shading Systems ................................................. 53
Jim Jones
Buildings That Teach.................................................................................................................. 54
Jim Jones
Development of a Decision-Support Framework for Schematic Design for Building Materials
and Systems Reuse ................................................................................................................... 55
Jim Jones and Ahmed Ali
A Framework for Integrating Risk and Uncertainty in the Valuation Analysis of Green
Building Investment Options .................................................................................................... 56
Jim Jones and Alireza Bozorgi
A+CA Member Schools ........................................................................................................... 58
A R C H I T E C T U R E + C O N S T R U C T I O N A L L I A N C E
_______________________________________________________________________________
viii
Architecture + Construction Alliance
Mission
The Mission of the A+CA is to facilitate collaboration among schools that are committed to
fostering interdisciplinary educational and research efforts between the fields of architecture
and construction, and to engage leading professionals and educators in support of these efforts.
Purpose
The 21st century architecture and construction professions and industries of are undergoing
significant changes as they respond to multiple demands and opportunities to increase
collaborative project work. They are propelled by changed societal and client expectations to
more fully coordinate their formerly separate roles and responsibilities for the social,
environmental, and financial performance of projects. Emerging collaborative business models,
such as Integrated Project Delivery (IPD), and new design process technology, such as Building
Information Models (BIM) are providing new collaborative strategies for the design and
construction of exceedingly large and complex buildings.
These global changes in the technologies and processes used by our built environment
professions and industries need to be reflected in the education of future professionals, with a
major emphasis on fostering interdisciplinary knowledge and team based skills that support the
synergy and innovation of the 21st century professional context.
Given this imperative, a consortium of universities in the United States that have both
architecture and construction programs within the same college are working together to foster
the necessary interdisciplinary and collaborative education needed by the built environment
professions and industries. The alliance of these universities has the unique ability to assume a
leadership role in the development, pilot testing, assessment, and dissemination of courses and
projects through coordination of the faculty, staff, and financial support to create this new
environment for collaborative education and practice.
Partners
Of the over 120 accredited schools of architecture and the over 60 degree programs in
construction in the nation, less than twenty universities have degree programs in both
architecture and construction in the same college; however, collectively these programs
educate a significant percentage of the architecture construction undergraduate and graduate
students in the nation.
In 2005, deans and department heads of these colleges began meeting together to discuss ways
to collaborate, and they established working groups to share perspectives and showcase best
A R C H I T E C T U R E + C O N S T R U C T I O N A L L I A N C E
_______________________________________________________________________________
ix
practices for collaboration of architecture and construction programs. Two meetings of the
deans of these colleges have been held each year. In addition, two mini-conferences, held in
2006 and again in 2008, attended by deans and department heads from both architecture and
construction programs, were devoted to presentations by all schools and extensive discussions
about assessments of pilot projects, replicable endeavors, and the many points of possible
collaboration with one another. This type of informational exchange and “cross fertilization”
prompted the participants consider appropriate adaptations for their own programs, and obtain
valuable perspectives for their own university’s colleagues on pilot programs and concept
proposals currently under development.
In the summer of 2008, the deans determined that these gatherings and informal contacts are
not sufficient to create the closer connections and potential joint endeavors were need to
sustain serious collaborative efforts; therefore, these deans of the schools founded the
Architecture + Construction Alliance (A+CA), a formal, staffed consortium and agreed to enlist
participation from the built environment professions and industries.
The A+CA is now an active association focused on positively transforming the education of
architects and constructors in response to the transformations taking place in the built
environment professions and industries. Through this new vehicle, with a joint academic and
practitioner advisory board, the member schools undertake the following activities and actions:
Collaborative Culture – create a collaborative academic environment among faculty members
that fosters mutual respect and stimulates creative innovation among faculty in architecture,
construction, and affiliated disciplines in our colleges and universities.
Interdisciplinary Courses – develop, pilot test, assess, and replicate a range of classes and
projects that foster productive and mutually respectful teamwork among architecture,
construction, and allied professional students
Training and Workshops - produce materials and conduct training sessions to broaden
interdisciplinary teaching capacity within all professional colleges
Applied Research – support cross disciplinary and cross institutional faculty professional
development and research in the teaching and practice of interdisciplinary education, including
joint work with practitioners and professional organization working committees
Technology Pilots – engage practitioners and technology providers in beta testing and
demonstration projects across the spectrum of our member universities
Financial Models – identify and create funding support for expanding and enhancing
interdisciplinary education among our sister professions within each academic institution and
jointly among consortium members.
A R C H I T E C T U R E + C O N S T R U C T I O N A L L I A N C E
_______________________________________________________________________________
x




Public Good
The Architecture + Construction Alliance universities represent a diversity of cultures, locations,
and university profiles, making the organization a good cross section for fostering a number of
different models and approaches in interdisciplinary education. At the same time, taken
together member colleges share some important characteristics that makes their endeavors to
work collaboratively in partnership with our professions even more critically important for our
larger society and future generations:
Alliance member schools are in both public and private universities, offering undergraduate and
graduate educational opportunities for diverse populations, and sharing public missions to
produce graduates who will in some manner serve the states and regions that helped provide
them with their education. Alumni of the programs compose a large percentage of architecture
and construction graduates who enter the professional workforce throughout the United States.
The member schools are located in thirteen states from coast to coast. Taken together, it is
estimated that these states will absorb approximately 65% of all population growth in the US,
and it is projected that these states constitute up to 75% of all future construction and
renovation activity in the nation.
Each of the schools has, on its own initiative, begun pilot programs in interdisciplinary
education, and is committed to broadening its efforts and sharing best practices and lessons
learned through academic and professional networks.
As our built environment professions and industries together face the need to meet society's
future growth needs and simultaneously address global environmental challenges, the
populations, professions, and industries served by the member schools have a heightened need
for architects and constructors who are innovative professionals who can creatively collaborate
to meet the emerging challenges to rebuild and expand our nation.
A R C H I T E C T U R E + C O N S T R U C T I O N A L L I A N C E
_______________________________________________________________________________
xi
Research Initiatives
The A + CA brings together the combined teaching and research talents of over 400 faculty with
direct contact to thousands of students in architecture and construction. Many of these faculty
members are already highly involved in research on a number of topics that our professional
and industry partners and advisors have deemed of great value. Some of this research is being
undertaken among faculty across the design and construction disciplines primarily at one of our
member schools, and other ventures are being undertaken among faculty at several of our
schools.
In order to facilitate greater collaboration among our disciplines and our schools, the A + CA is
providing a Faculty Network List on this website of our combined faculty who have indicated a
strong interest in inter-university collaboration. The list has been organized by the six current
research initiatives in which the member schools have the greatest concentrations of faculty
involvement. Additional topics will be listed as they surface over time. For more information,
contact the Research Initiative Coordinator listed below.
Housing & Homebuilding
Coordinator: Professor Michael Berk – Mississippi State University
Curriculum: Design and Construction Learning
Coordinator: Professor Phil Barlow – Cal Poly San Luis Obispo
Integrated Process and Project Delivery
Coordinator: Professor Paul Holley – Auburn University
Building Information Modeling and Technology
Coordinator: Dr. Mark Clayton – Texas A&M University
Healthcare Facility Design and Construction
Coordinator: Professor James Patterson – University of Oklahoma
Sustainable Design and Construction
Coordinator: Dr. Esther Obonyo – University of Florida
A R C H I T E C T U R E + C O N S T R U C T I O N A L L I A N C E
_______________________________________________________________________________
xii
AREA 1
HOUSING AND HOMEBUILDING
A R C H I T E C T U R E + C O N S T R U C T I O N A L L I A N C E
_______________________________________________________________________________
1
A R C H I T E C T U R E + C O N S T R U C T I O N A L L I A N C E
_______________________________________________________________________________
2
HOUSING AND HOME BUILDING
GreenMobile® :
Ecological |
Pre-Fab | Low-cost | HOUSING
Michael A. Berk F.L. Cane Professor
Justin Taylor Assistant Professor
School of Architecture
Mississippi State University
The CONCEPT: The GreenMobile®
proposal accepts the fact that the
basic concept and strategy (of
mobile home production and
delivery) is exceptional; the only
intention here is to modify the end
product. The ecologically-minded
GreenMobile® is a new type of
deployable
factory-built,
ultraaffordable, energy-efficient, mobile
home unit (capable of operating ‘offthe-utility-grid’). It is intended to
replace current single-wide trailer
housing
(of
the
economically
disenfranchised) dotting and rotting
in the rural landscape; and in limited
cases, replace suburban and urban
housing.
It
is
designed
and
engineered to meet all applicable
‘stick-built’ housing codes such as the
IRC (as well resilience to meet wind
zone requirements on the coast). It is
also designed to meet (and mostly
exceed) the new LEED Green
Building Rating System™.
The
GreenMobile® unit is a hybridized mix
of traditional single-wide delivery
along w/ site installed ‘add-on’
modules such as: pods, porches,
photovoltaic systems, rain harvesting
systems, and decks.
INNOVATIVE CONCEPTS INCLUDE
AWARDS: This project has been
acknowledged
by
the
FEMA
Alternative Housing Pilot Program
(AHPP) - - - where the GreenMobile®
was selected number one in ranking
and awarded funding ($5.8 million)
for the construction of 100 units on
the
Mississippi
Gulf
Coast
in
December 2006. No progress has
been made in working w/ the
governor’s office and MEMA to
execute the grant. This project also
won
the
Un-built
Professional
category of the LifeCycle Building
Challenge 2007 Award sponsored by
the
U.S.
EPA
(Environmental
Protection Agency) and the AIA.
Current FUNDING: This project has
current seed-money funding with the
U.S. DOE to prototype a unit w/ an
industrial partner.
the following:
1) Helical pier foundation system (demountable)
2) Wood SIP envelope construction
3) Open building systems (Dfd)
4) Passive/orientations to sun and wind
5) Site landscape kit (trees + layout)
6) Life-cycle materials analysis
7) On-demand equipment w/ ductless A/C systems
A R C H I T E C T U R E + C O N S T R U C T I O N A L L I A N C E
_______________________________________________________________________________
1
HOUSING AND HOMEBUILDING
A Preconstruction Model for
Residential Construction - Life Cycle
Cost Analysis - Structurally Insulated
Panels
Jason B. Peschel
Rick W. Cherf
College of Engineering & Architecture
Washington State University
The idea of life cycle cost analysis in
meeting the direct project objectives of
time, money and performance are critical in
any analysis of building systems. In
residential construction this is a process
that is often times overlooked by the
designer and the builder.
Thorough
preconstruction services completed by a
consultant or the builder inform the
designer and the client as to the impact of
their decisions.
This process will explore true costs of
specifying and installing these systems. In
addition to the life cycle cost analysis, an
analysis of the less tangible issues
surrounding the systems such as
sustainability and the risks to all project
participants in the project delivery process
are explored.
Expanding the Systems Analysis
Approach in Residential Construction
Often the residential building process is
evaluated as a complete system and not
broken down into the systems that
comprise the whole of the structure. In part
this is due to the relative disconnect
between architects and residential builders.
In order to improve the quality of housing
and the quality of decisions made during
the design process a model is being
developed in an academic setting that can
be easily implemented in the industry.
Utilizing this model, students are
evaluating the cost, installation and
performance criteria of two common
residential building systems - traditional
stick framing vs. structural insulated panels.
A R C H I T E C T U R E + C O N S T R U C T I O N A L L I A N C E
_______________________________________________________________________________
3
HOUSING AND HOMEBUILDING
Characterizing Zero Energy Home
Consumers
Andrew P. McCoy and Chayanika
Mitra
Department of Building Construction;
Myers-Lawson School of Construction
Virginia Tech
A net zero-energy home (ZEH) is a
residential building with greatly reduced
energy needs through efficiency gains such
that the balance of energy needs can be
supplied with renewable technologies.
Despite the benefits and implications
associated, the field of ZEH research lacks a
measurement of innovativeness, the
propensity for consumers to adopt certain
innovation sooner than others. One key to
defining ZEH innovativeness is a definition
of attributes of ZEH consumers, an
important set of criteria that could drive
future concerns. The overall goal of the
study is to collect ZEH innovativeness
attributes and validate them based on
consumer concerns. A preliminary set of
attributes is collected and distilled through
extant literature.
The attributes are
operationalized through a survey of ZEH
consumers on-site, in the context of the
Solar Decathlon, a display of ZEH homes
and technologies. ZEH consumers are
questioned regarding current preferences in
the display and future concerns, as well as
categorized based on Rogers’ (2003)
innovativeness attributes, a control set of
propensity towards adoption. The work
compares across current, future and
control-set attributes to establish new
categories of ZEH consumer propensity
towards innovation.
The research aims to advance the
understanding of complex ZEH consumer
behavior.
Literature:
1)Energy-efficient
products; 2) Zero
Energy Homes; 3)
Zero Energy
Buildings and 4)
ecological
consumers
ZEH
Consumer
ON-SITE SURVEY
Attributes
Rogers’
Innovativeness
Attributes
A R C H I T E C T U R E + C O N S T R U C T I O N A L L I A N C E
_______________________________________________________________________________
4
AREA 2
CURRICULUM
(L E A R N I N G AND P E D A G O G Y)
A R C H I T E C T U R E + C O N S T R U C T I O N A L L I A N C E
_______________________________________________________________________________
5
A R C H I T E C T U R E + C O N S T R U C T I O N A L L I A N C E
_______________________________________________________________________________
6
C U R R I C U L U M (L E A R N I N G & P E D A G O G Y)
A Portal for Collaborative Authoring of
Topics and Case Studies Towards
Integrated Curriculum Development
Virginia Tech and participating community
colleges are currently developing a
prototype environment that focuses on
content related to sustainability and energy
efficiency in buildings.
Georg Reichard, John Randolph, and
Sean McGinnis
Our categorization model will allow for
tagging content for a specific educational
level ranging from high school to
community college, to different university
levels.
Building Construction, Urban Affairs &
Planning, and Green Engineering
VIRGINIA TECH
Wiki authoring portals, including Wikipedia
as
one
of
its
most
successful
implementations, have revolutionized how
we collaboratively author and share
information with a broader/open public.
Learning management systems (LMS), such
as moodle, have emerged over the past
decade and mostly act as file repositories
for instructors, with tools for managing
access to content and communication with
enrolled students. However, there is
currently no tool or platform readily
available that combines both and would
allow a community of instructors to
collaboratively develop and share content
for categorized topics. We define
collaborative authoring beyond reviewing
or editing text and presentation files that
are shared on a file server. Collaborative
authoring should happen in a real time,
web-based environment, with a lively wikibased discussion on content, how it is
presented, and how it is linked to other
topics. The opportunities of such a system
are numerous and can include lab
examples, question pools, or specific case
studies. Researchers and instructors at
Instructors can then assemble content
according to topic, level, and content-type
to meet the objectives of a particular
curriculum, syllabus, or delivery style. We
believe that this effort will improve our
overall teaching quality; cut down on time
spent replicating existing content, and
ultimately provide an opportunity for
established educators to share their wealth
of experience with junior faculty across
department and university boundaries.
à
Level
P
Q
CS
WIKI
Authoring
Database
Student
Instructor
Course
A R C H I T E C T U R E + C O N S T R U C T I O N A L L I A N C E
_______________________________________________________________________________
7
Traditonal LMS
ß
T
Collaborative Curriculum Development Portal
Topics
à
ß
C U R R I C U L U M (L E A R N I N G & P E D A G O G Y)
Service Learning Applied to
Construction Education
Philip Barlow
Construction Management Department
California Polytechnic State University
Great learning can occur when students are
put in situations outside the curriculum
norm, situations which make them a bit
uncomfortable and challenge them in new
ways. Service learning is one model which
can achieve this type of learning
environment.
Service learning is a method of teaching and
learning that enriches students’ educational
experience by engaging them in meaningful
hands on service to the community.
Concurrently students are given the
opportunity to gain valuable knowledge and
skills that more fully connect them with
their classroom studies. Service learning is a
pedagogical approach which gives students
an ability to develop professional and social
skills in concert with learning and reflecting
on curricular material. There are many ways
to achieve these goals, but service learning
provides a combination of active student
participation in a meaningful community
service project.
It offers open and
interactive reflection which is mentored
with formal discussions and goals. Inserting
service learning within a construction
management curriculum is an attempt to
add both breadth and depth to the
student’s construction education.
The projects selected should have
substance and be meaningful for both the
student and the community. The students
need to be genuinely empowered to take
chances and make mistakes in a safe,
controlled, and supervised environment.
A R C H I T E C T U R E + C O N S T R U C T I O N A L L I A N C E
_______________________________________________________________________________
8
C U R R I C U L U M (L E A R N I N G & P E D A G O G Y)
Change/ Challenge/ Response: Design
Education For Architects In 2060
Tom Regan, Professor
Department of Architecture
Texas A&M University
The focus is on the emerging ways
buildings are designed and constructed in
the 21st century, and it identifies new ways
that buildings will be designed in the future,
incorporating
Building
Information
Modeling (BIM) and “ecological / genomic
based” design and construction processes.
These emerging processes will allow
architects to integrate the building site and
the building itself through entirely
processes.
Objective: To identify the technological and
societal changes and drivers of change of
the processes used by architects to design
buildings,
and
the
consequential
adjustments in architectural education that
followed these changes. Dates considered
in the research are from 1910 - 2010,
projecting the emerging design processes
that will be used in 2060.
Summary: The design and construction of
buildings for the past 1000 years in western
civilization has largely changed-over-time
by reacting to advances in technology and
art that were pioneered in fields other than
architecture.
Although the designs of
buildings themselves have changed during
the millennia, the processes that architects
use to design buildings has remained
essentially the same. The strategies of
educating the architect on how to design
buildings, which began in Europe and
America in the 20th century, have also
largely remained the same, adjusting to
changes in practice rather than initiating
them.
This paper traces critical changes in
architectural design and design education in
fifty-year increments; 1910, 1960, and
2010, then projects likely future changes
forward to 2060.
A R C H I T E C T U R E + C O N S T R U C T I O N A L L I A N C E
_______________________________________________________________________________
9
C U R R I C U L U M (L E A R N I N G & P E D A G O G Y)
Program To Increase Promotion and
Tenure Success or Faculty Members
Tom Regan, Professor
Department of Architecture
Texas A&M University
Initiating a proven program that enhances a
faculty member’s chance of promotion and
tenure success, within the academic unit’s
budget, is particularly important during
these times of economic stress at all
institutions of higher learning.
Objective: To increase the probability of
success in promotion and tenure of
assistant professors in research universities.
Summary: Faculty members at all major
universities are under increasing pressure
to contribute to the body of knowledge in
their area of specialization by publishing the
results of their research. This pressure is
most intense during the “probationary
years” when a faculty member is preparing
for her/his tenure review, usually in the
sixth year of employment at the university.
This paper outlines a specific program to
assist a tenure-track faculty member
prepare her/his research contributions for
promotion and tenure review that I
initiated at Texas A&M in 2004. The
program, which has benefitted over twenty
faculty members to date, continues to be
very successful. The paper outlines the
components of “The Faculty Research
Semester Award Program”, the process by
which it operates, and the steps that can be
taken to economically initiate the program
at the departmental, college, or university
level.
The presentation will empower
administrators as well as individual faculty
members to establish this program at their
own institution.
A R C H I T E C T U R E + C O N S T R U C T I O N A L L I A N C E
_______________________________________________________________________________
10
C U R R I C U L U M (L E A R N I N G & P E D A G O G Y)
Collaboration Opportunity – A Design
and Construction Administration
Course
Richard C. Ryan AIC, CPC, LEED AP
Construction Science
University of Oklahoma
A dedicated design and construction
administration course composed of both
Architecture and Construction students is
ideal for not only exploring the different
roles, responsibilities and perspectives of
designers and contractors - but to reinforce
the importance of effective and efficient
communication and documentation as part
of the collaborative Architect and
Contractor relationship.
Building modeling and evolving integrated
project delivery have thrust Contractors
into project design and subsequently an
expanded relationship with the Architect.
This evolving relationship has forced
Architects to broaden the design input
process and share greater accountability for
incorporating the construction budget and
schedule into the project design.
Architecture curriculums include ProPractice course content focusing on
primarily the relationship with the Client or
Owner during the design and bidding
phases of a building project. Construction
curriculums
include
construction
administration content focusing on
communication and documentation with
the Architect.
Though from different disciplines, this
shared process administration focus
provides potential content overlap and a
unique opportunity for collaborative
exploration and greater understanding of
the evolving design and construction
environment.
A R C H I T E C T U R E + C O N S T R U C T I O N A L L I A N C E
_______________________________________________________________________________
11
C U R R I C U L U M (L E A R N I N G & P E D A G O G Y)
Here Comes the Sun: Rediscovering
the Sun in Architectural Pedagogy
Bronne Dytoc + Ed Akins II
Department of Architecture, Southern
Polytechnic State University
Through pedagogical integration and course
development, particular steps to reintroduce solar studies into environmental
technology courses and design studios have
resulted in a rediscovery of design
principles that are reshaping Architectural
education. This solar nurtured design
approach will be examined to discuss the
plausible future of such methods within
University curriculum.
detrimental contributors to building
performance.
Therefore, it is the
relationship with the sun that anchors
instruction within the department.
Utilizing heliodons and refined pedagogical
approaches, students learn the qualitative
and quantitative results of basing early
design decisions on solar access. From site
selection, orientation, and early design
concepts to the final detail development of
tectonic components, students are actively
engaged in the application of these ideas
into the art of building design.
The Architecture program at Southern
Polytechnic State University (SPSU) has
taken particular steps to re-integrate solar
studies into the pedagogy of its
environmental technology courses and
design studios.
With specific focus on the earth’s
relationship to the sun, the classes develop
a more knowledgeable appreciation of
design strategies as shaped by daylight,
heat
gain/rejection,
and
climate
appropriateness. This solar nurtured design
approach has resulted in a multitude of
Heliophilic architectural design projects
within our curriculum.
The key issues for day-lighting, related to
the earth’s axial tilt, are investigated with
an emphasis on annual variations of solar
patterns for tropical, temperate, and polar
regions of the earth. It is equally important
to note that we instill an understanding of
light and heat energy as both beneficial and
Keywords:
Sun, solar studies, daylighting, climate,
shading, heliophilia, architecture, design,
pedagogy
A R C H I T E C T U R E + C O N S T R U C T I O N A L L I A N C E
_______________________________________________________________________________
12
C U R R I C U L U M (L E A R N I N G & P E D A G O G Y)
Educational Delivery Methods Applied
to Construction Education
Philip Barlow
Construction Management Department
California Polytechnic State University
While traditional delivery methods
implemented and compared individually
with alternative methods may not compare
well, a combination (or variety) of teaching
methods may raise student retention rates
under all circumstances. The assortment of
alternative delivery methods (or nontraditional approaches) which could be
utilized by an instructor is endless. How the
class is formulated (or set-up) by the
instructor, can also lead to unimagined
student learning opportunities. Projectbased learning is one such example where
students can explore the class material in a
way which offers higher retention rates,
exposing them to “practice by doing” and
“teaching others” delivery methods.
Research has shown that traditional
methods of teaching (instructor lectures,
textbook reading assignments, and audio
visual material) have proven to be relatively
poor educational delivery methods.
This is particularly true at academic
institutions which offer professional
degrees
including
architecture
and
construction management.
Students in
these programs are expected not only to
know and understand the basics of their
discipline, but also to perform efficiently
and effectively in a multidisciplinary and
fully integrated design and construction
environment. It is critically important to
emphasize the “soft skills” of business
which can more readily be taught in an
alternative learning environment.
A R C H I T E C T U R E + C O N S T R U C T I O N A L L I A N C E
_______________________________________________________________________________
13
C U R R I C U L U M (L E A R N I N G & P E D A G O G Y)
From Drawing Structures in Class to
Designing Forms in Studio
Bronne Dytoc
School of Architecture
Southern Polytechnic State University
To this day, a large portion of architecture
programs in many institutions experience a
distinct disconnect between design studio
and the structures class. While it is not
surprising to see how a typical studio
culture may consider the issue of structures
as a utilitarian necessity, it is curious why
such a paradigm gap continues to exist;
especially since “form” is the root meaning
of structures.
In this way, the very activity of precise
drawing can serve as the indispensable
physical skill set which would overlap into
both the class and the studio, thus
encouraging a more fluid symbiotic state
between the two.
Constructing an effective pedagogical
bridge between structures and studio has
often been seen as a challenge. The interest
in developing this structures + studio
platform is not just academic in nature but
pragmatically dynamic in its potential for
design training.
The research is rooted in the hypothesis
that an effective pedagogical linkage
between the structures class and the design
studio relies in a symbiotic exchange of
attitudes. The design studio can adopt
structural form-behavior as a major
generator and refiner of design ideas and
their iterations, while structural class can
take on the intentional direction of learning
structures as an architectural course, and
not just a computational one.
The
methodology for adoption would be the
deliberate integration of more graphic
techniques to inform and link with
subsequent computational procedures.
A R C H I T E C T U R E + C O N S T R U C T I O N A L L I A N C E
_______________________________________________________________________________
14
C U R R I C U L U M (L E A R N I N G & P E D A G O G Y)
construction
education
adequate
representations of true inquiry-based
learning? The new Building Construction
Science program at Mississippi State
University is engaging these questions by
developing the studio as pedagogical
practice in building construction education.
The curriculum is designed around six
inquiry-based learning studios and shared
technology support courses with the School
of Architecture.
Developing the Studio as Pedagogical
Practice in Building Construction
Education
Dr. Theo Haupt, Dr. Islam El-Adaway,
& Christopher Monson
Building Construction Science
Mississippi State University
The implementation of inquiry-based
learning pedagogies has driven many new
applications in construction management
programs. Most construction programs
have instituted various forms of problembased
projects,
integrated
content
coursework, and capstone projects, and
anecdotally have seen improvements in
student outcomes. However, these changes
have almost uniformly been implemented
within the existing classroom paradigm; the
instructor still acts as the source of
knowledge for students, assignments tend
toward a proscriptive adherence to outlined
course content, the focus remains on
individual student accountability, and
students have little real responsibility for
the learning of their peers. Even so, many
programs have come to believe that their
curriculums are “problem-based,” and that
they have satisfactorily progressed toward
the benefits of integrated, inquiry-based
learning pedagogies. But are these
curriculums truly “constructivist”? Can it be
actually demonstrated that students are
remaking their own knowledge through acts
of reflection and learning transfer? Are the
classroom environments really structured
to foster socialized discourse and
professionalization?
Is the
learning
authentically
collaborative
between
students? Are the new instructional
practices that have become so prevalent in
As
an
immersive
constructivist
instructional environment, the studio class
provides the appropriate coursework credit
and length of class time—six credits and
twelve hours a week—to engage in
synthetic problem solving. The studio is the
place where all other coursework content is
integrated, and it is the instructional
environment where professional thinking is
learned through practice. Characteristic to
studio instruction, teachers engage
students over their work at their desks
through critique. By this simple activity, the
structure of power in the studio is shifted
from the instructor to the student’s work—
a key dimension to constructivist learning.
Lines of research are being developed to
qualify student learning outcomes from this
new studio curriculum as well as
instructional development strategies for
further dissemination.
A R C H I T E C T U R E + C O N S T R U C T I O N A L L I A N C E
_______________________________________________________________________________
15
C U R R I C U L U M (L E A R N I N G & P E D A G O G Y)
lumenHAUS: Uses and Benefits of ICT
for Educational Achievement and
Market Advantage
Andrew P. McCoy, Robert Schubert,
Robert Dunay and Joseph Wheeler
Department of Building Construction;
School of Architecture + Design
Virginia Tech
By many accounts, American classrooms are
not using the most effective means to
properly educate and train young graduates
and professionals. Common goals involve
educational achievement and therefore
market advantage for students, with a wide
variety of proposed solutions. Technology in
the classroom environment has been
touted as one route for translating
academic goals to the market. Education in
the
Architecture,
Engineering
and
Construction (AEC) industry is no different:
a rise in industry and classroom technology,
paired with enrollment, justifies the need to
re-focus solutions from technology to
provide for the academic and market needs
in the built environment.
The recent
Virginia Tech 2009 Solar Decathlon
Competition (VTSD) offered an ideal setting
for better understanding the effective uses
of technology in the translation of these
AEC goals.
VTSD was a student-led,
integrated
classroom
environment
incorporating students of all disciplines in
the design and construction of an energyefficient home.
Information and
communication technologies (ICT) played a
major role in the educational and
competitive efforts.
This paper aims to explore academic uses
and benefits of ICT for the classroom
through: 1) presenting common goals of the
2009 Solar Decathlon competition, Virginia
Tech’s
design-build
educational
environment and the AEC classroom, 2)
presenting various forms of ICT used to
accomplish these goals and 3) discussing
broad outcomes of applications for
incorporated technologies across the design
build process.
A R C H I T E C T U R E + C O N S T R U C T I O N A L L I A N C E
_______________________________________________________________________________
16
C U R R I C U L U M (L E A R N I N G & P E D A G O G Y)
Emotional Effectiveness in the
Classroom: Virginia Tech’s Integrated
Leadership
Andrew P. McCoy and Christine Fiori
Department of Building Construction;
Myers-Lawson School of Construction
Virginia Tech
Future work aims to expand such studies
beyond Virginia Tech academically and into
industrial settings.
The goal of the following research is to
establish and test leadership objectives
within a construction curriculum. Informal
industry feedback, at Virginia Tech’s MyersLawson School of Construction and
Department of Building Construction, has
stressed the importance of leadership
training (“soft skills”) within the classroom
setting. Such skills are often difficult to
quantify and, as a result, effectively report.
One course, the Integrated Leadership
Studio (ILS) combines technical and
leadership measurable objectives within the
process of pre-construction techniques for a
locally observed commercial facility.
Technical aptitudes are measured through
typical
construction
management
curriculum objectives. Leadership aptitudes
are measured through objectives of
emotional
intelligence
(EI).
The
effectiveness of EI objectives within the
construction
education
setting
are
established through: 1) an integrated
curriculum for technical and leadership
deliverables; 2) personalized student
training in leadership skills based on EI
parameters; and 3) the administration of
two surveys that measure EI, one prior to
course deliverables and one at the end.
Results suggest that EI is currently lacking in
construction student psyche and can be
improved through training and classroom
development.
A R C H I T E C T U R E + C O N S T R U C T I O N A L L I A N C E
_______________________________________________________________________________
17
C U R R I C U L U M (L E A R N I N G & P E D A G O G Y)
Guiding Integration: Supply Chain
Shortcomings in AEC Curriculum
Patrick Doan and Andrew P. McCoy
School of Architecture + Design;
Department of Building Construction
Virginia Tech
AEC industry is highly fragmented. The
world is moving towards Integrated Project
delivery and one of the biggest challenges
to achieve this integration is the
fragmented nature of our industry. The
proposers hypothesize that one of the main
reasons for the fragmented nature of the
AEC industry is the way education is
focused and imparted to Architects,
Engineers and Construction students. The
educational curriculum for different
stakeholders of the AEC industry is focused
towards specific needs of the particular
profession with little or no concern to
educate about the perspective of other
members of the supply chain. The present
research will focus on overcoming this
barrier through a set of guidelines
proposing to incorporate integration-based
knowledge in the core curriculum of AEC
education through the following steps:
 Identify the barriers to achieve
integration
in
the
highly
fragmented AEC industry.
 Identify the shortcomings in the
present AEC educational system in
correlation with these barriers.
 Propose guidelines to overcome
such shortcomings.
The research will be conducted through
industry
interviews,
surveys
and
student/faculty workshops and culminate in
a manual of findings as well as industry
based publications.
A R C H I T E C T U R E + C O N S T R U C T I O N A L L I A N C E
_______________________________________________________________________________
18
AREA 3
INTEGRATED PROCESS
AND DELIVERY
A R C H I T E C T U R E + C O N S T R U C T I O N A L L I A N C E
_______________________________________________________________________________
19
A R C H I T E C T U R E + C O N S T R U C T I O N A L L I A N C E
_______________________________________________________________________________
20
INTEGRATED PROCESS AND DELIVERY
Teaching Collaboration in a Studio
Setting Utilizing Integrated Delivery
Methodology
David Boeck BArch, MArch
Hans-Peter (Hepi) Wachter
March, Tammy McCuen MS
MFA,
College of Architecture
University of Oklahoma
Multi-disciplinary team structures for
project development, both academically
and professionally, are becoming the norm
in meeting the federal government’s
requirements for both research project
funding and building project development.
The discussion about, and use of, Integrated
Project Delivery and specifically the use of
Building Information Modeling in building
project development has, or is, becoming
more and more common as the mode for
project development on the Federal level.
Multi-disciplinary teams are not new to the
academic area of teaching and present in
professional settings of design. Finding an
effective pedagogy in a multi-disciplinary
setting is challenging for administration,
faculty and students.
This course involved an approach of a multidisciplinary design studio setting and the
learning experience of architecture, interior
design and construction science students.
A R C H I T E C T U R E + C O N S T R U C T I O N A L L I A N C E
_______________________________________________________________________________
21
INTEGRATED PROCESS AND DELIVERY
High Performance Project Outcomes:
Traditional vs Relational Contract
Agreements
Islam H. El-adaway and
Sharareh M. Kermanshachi
Civil and Environmental
Engineering/Building Construction
Science
Mississippi State University
Today’s construction industry requires close
interaction
between
dissimilar,
yet
contractually integrated parties including
owners, designers, contractors, subcontractors, suppliers, manufacturers, and
others. Meanwhile, all of these parties
should work for the successful completion
of the project; each of which still come with
different
interests,
functions,
and
objectives. This paper presents a
comparative analysis between traditional
and relational contract agreements. The AIA
A201 is analyzed being the most widely
used
traditional
delivery
contract
agreement in the construction industry.
This contract reflects a tools-based
approach that currently dominates the
industry and only aims to guide project
completion through segregated and
unconnected mechanisms.
The research also studied the available IPD
contract agreements comprising Concensus
DOCS 300, AIA C195, AIA C191, as well as
the authors’ developed multi-party
partnering contract for integrated project
delivery. In contrast, these contracts adopt
a holistic approach focused on raising the
expectations of each project member,
combining collective knowledge, building
trust, and emphasizing proactive knowledge
sharing. This research crystallizes the added
benefits of relational contracting and
triggers the required culture change to
attain high performance project outcomes.
A R C H I T E C T U R E + C O N S T R U C T I O N A L L I A N C E
_______________________________________________________________________________
22
INTEGRATED PROCESS AND DELIVERY
Team Processes and Dynamics
Demonstrated in Interdisciplinary
BIM Teams
Tamera McCuen
Haskell & Irene Lemon Construction
Science Division
University of Oklahoma
Lee Fithian
Division of Architecture
University of Oklahoma
optimize
performance
outcomes.
Building Information Modeling (BIM)
combines technology and methodology to
integrate design and construction team
members in order to optimize productivity
and project outcomes. Inherent in crossfunctional teams are members from
multiple domains with divergent objectives
and processes for a project. Educators in
the
architecture
and
construction
disciplines face the challenge of preparing
students to participate in this crossfunctional team environment. This paper
reports the results from a three year study
of interdisciplinary teams working on
multiple projects in an immersive classroom
environment, focusing on team processes
and team dynamics.
Team processes
included are goal setting, communication
approaches, alternative analyses, decision
making, and conflict management. Team
dynamics included in this research are
interpersonal relationships, trust, conflict,
commitment, and cohesiveness. Teams
demonstrated integrative strategies to
and
project
In addition to the discussion about results
from this research, recommendations are
included about fostering an interdisciplinary
learning environment focused on team
processes and dynamics.
A R C H I T E C T U R E + C O N S T R U C T I O N A L L I A N C E
_______________________________________________________________________________
23
INTEGRATED PROCESS AND DELIVERY
The Impact of Project Delivery Method
on Achieving Project Sustainability
Goals
Tamera L. McCuen
Haskell & Irene Lemon Construction
Science Division
University of Oklahoma
Douglas D. Gransberg
Civil, Construction, and Environmental
Engineering
Iowa State University
Keith R. Molenaar
Civil, Environmental, and Architectural
Engineering
University of Colorado
delivery method used and the owner’s
success in achieving project sustainability
goals. The study synthesizes the results of a
survey of 230 sustainable building projects
from 47 states. Sustainability was measured
by the United States Green Building
Council’s Leadership in Energy and
Environmental Design (LEED) Green Building
Rating System. The survey findings were
validated by structured interviews with
owners, designers, and constructors. The
major finding is that respondents used
integrated project delivery methods,
(Design-Build and Construction Manager-atRisk), for 75 percent of the projects in the
population. The study concludes that the
success of a project in terms meeting or
exceeding its original LEED sustainability
goals is influenced by the project delivery
method.
Nathaniel J. Sobin
Civil, Environmental, and Architectural
Engineering
University of Colorado
Anecdotal evidence leads one to
hypothesize that some project delivery
methods may be better suited to delivering
green building projects than others.
However, to date, there is no
comprehensive study that explores the
impacts of project delivery methods on
sustainable design and construction. This
paper reports the results of a nationwide
study in the US that sought to find if there is
indeed a connection between the project
A R C H I T E C T U R E + C O N S T R U C T I O N A L L I A N C E
_______________________________________________________________________________
24
INTEGRATED PROCESS AND DELIVERY
Understanding the Relationships and
Risks of Designers and Constructors in
the Design and Preconstruction
Process
Rick W. Cherf A. Don Poe Professor
College of Engineering & Architecture
Washington State University
Integrated Project Delivery has introduced a
new set of roles and responsibilities in the
preconstruction phases of the project
delivery process.
The idea of
preconstruction and constructability is a
philosophy of meeting the direct project
objectives
of
time,
money
and
performance. The Construction Industry
Institute (CII) defines constructability as
“the optimum use of construction
knowledge and experience in the planning,
design, procurement and field operations to
achieve overall project objectives.” This
philosophy of producing the lowest cost
project which meets the owner objectives
through the use of collaboration amongst
all parties responsible for the project is
becoming the norm in many large
construction organizations. This paper
presents a case study by reviewing this new
role of preconstruction services by
contractors. These new concepts of design
assist and preconstruction services are
changing
the
perceptions,
roles,
responsibilities and risks of all project
participants in the project delivery process.
Preconstruction
Responsibilities & Risk
Roles,
Preconstruction Services
DESIGNER
A R C H I T E C T U R E + C O N S T R U C T I O N A L L I A N C E
_______________________________________________________________________________
25
CONSTRUCTOR
INTEGRATED PROCESS AND DELIVERY
Integrated Project Delivery Case
Study: Guidelines for Drafting
Partnering Contract
Islam H. El-adaway
Civil and Environmental
Engineering/Building Construction
Science
Mississippi State University
A partnering contract would never, on its
own, change the culture and environment
of the construction process and thus,
strategic partnering should be promoted
not only at project specific activities but at
all organizational activities. Based on this
project, the paper presents a list of ten
managerial and contractual issues to
promote strategic partnering. The author
hopes that the results of this case study
would foster legal professionals toward
drafting a modern partnering contract,
which should help in developing a more
effective
and
efficient
contracting
environment.
This paper presents a case study through
which a multinational contracting firm
aimed to introduce integrated project
delivery through strategic partnering into its
industry operations. The study reports on a
research carried out by the author on
behalf of the firm to set out series of
principles and guidelines to consider when
drafting a standard partnering contract
whereby the owner, contractor, suppliers,
and manufacturers collaboratively work
together under the same terms and
conditions.
Published in:
Journal of Legal Affairs and Dispute Resolution in
Engineering and Construction, Vol. 2, No. 4,
November 1, 2010
A R C H I T E C T U R E + C O N S T R U C T I O N A L L I A N C E
_______________________________________________________________________________
26
INTEGRATED PROCESS AND DELIVERY
Guidelines for a Standard Project
Partnering Contract
Islam H. El-adaway
Civil and Environmental
Engineering/Building Construction
Science
Mississippi State University
This paper calls for a project partnering
contract that integrates the entire project
team under a single multi-party document.
A three-phase methodology study based on
literature review, interviews with 21 senior
industry practitioners, and subsequent
associated analysis was utilized in order to
meet the goal and objectives of this study.
Under this research, a series of principles
and guidelines were highlighted whereby
the owner, contractor, suppliers, and
manufacturers
collaboratively
work
together under the same terms and
conditions. Thus, the owner has to deal
with only one integrated contract which
substantially reduces the risk of gaps or
overlaps between the different roles and
creates duties of care between all team
members.
A partnering contract would never, on its
own, change the culture and environment of
the construction process and thus, strategic
partnering should be promoted not only at
project specific activities but at all
organizational activities. It is perceived that
that this research would hopefully lay basis
and foster legal professionals towards
drafting of the first standard U.S partnering
contract, which should help in developing a
more effective and efficient contracting
environment.
Published in:Construction Research Congress
2010: Innovation for Reshaping Construction
Practice, Alberta, Canada
A R C H I T E C T U R E + C O N S T R U C T I O N A L L I A N C E
_______________________________________________________________________________
27
INTEGRATED PROCESS AND DELIVERY
Multi-Party Partnering for Integrated
Project Delivery: A Proposed World
Bank Infrastructure Management
Contract
Islam H. El-adaway and
Sharareh M. Kermanshachi
Civil and Environmental
Engineering/Building Construction
Science
Mississippi State University
incentives, changes, and conflicts and
disputes.
The
contract
conditions
recover
communication, encourage cooperation,
share risk, improve quality, decrease cost,
minimize waste, maximize efficiency, and
mitigate conflicts.
World Bank funded projects involve and
require close collaboration between various
multinational
and
multicultural
stakeholders. Partnering has attempted to
solve the limitations of the traditional
delivery systems governing infrastructure
projects. Integrated project delivery (IPD) is
likewise another approach to reduce cost,
time, and waste through organizing project
teams and converging interests. This
[research]
develops
a
multi-party
partnering contract for integrated project
delivery whereby the owner, contractor,
suppliers,
and
manufacturers
collaboratively work together under the
same terms and conditions. This research
builds on and improves already available
IPD and partnering contract agreements
through adopting a more comprehensive
and holistic contract addressing ten critical
interrelated aspects including: project
environment,
project
management,
partnering advisor, design process,
partnering and project schedules, suppliers
and manufacturers, prices and profits,
A R C H I T E C T U R E + C O N S T R U C T I O N A L L I A N C E
_______________________________________________________________________________
28
INTEGRATED PROCESS AND DELIVERY
Changing the Culture of Design and
Construction Education in the U.S.
Paul Holley & Josh Emig
Master of Design Build Program
School of Architecture and McWhorter
School of Building Science
Auburn University
As such, it becomes a compelling option for
those who wish to pursue a value-added
graduate education; one that arms them
with a new perspective of their career
counterparts as they enter the industry of
the built environment.
Education models for the design and
construction disciplines have long been
segregated in many parts of the world,
particularly in the U.S. Industry trends in
project delivery of the past few decades,
however, have demonstrated a need to
fundamentally
reconsider
a
more
collaborative, interdisciplinary approach.
While many singular efforts towards this
goal have shown success, academia
struggles with more perpetual models,
largely because of innate departmental and
faculty tendencies to be soloists.
Unfortunately, this perspective is ingrained
in students, and follows them into their
professional career. This paper presents a
case study of a new post-professional
graduate degree program in the U.S. that
breaks down these cultural barriers,
bringing students with design and
construction backgrounds together to
proactively respond to actual client
solicitations. The model’s goal is not to
make designers out of builders, or vice
versa, but rather to equip students to
leverage the collaborative dynamics of
interdisciplinary teams, integrated design
and construction, and BIM to produce high
performance building solutions.
A R C H I T E C T U R E + C O N S T R U C T I O N A L L I A N C E
_______________________________________________________________________________
29
INTEGRATED PROCESS AND DELIVERY
From Integration to Outreach:
Leveraging Integrated Design and
Construction Education for
Community Betterment
Josh Emig & Paul Holley
Master of Design Build Program
School of Architecture and McWhorter
School of Building Science
Auburn University
Among U.S. schools of Architecture and
Construction
Management,
Auburn
University’s Master of Design Build Program
has demonstrated significant success in
employing one of the only jointly-operated
collaboration-driven, technology-enabled,
and sustainability-focused approaches to
education in the production of the built
environment. In keeping with the strong
tradition of community outreach that has
given rise to programs at Auburn such as
the Rural Studio, the Master of Design Build
program is now shaping its own unique
approach to outreach that leverages the
collective knowledge of faculty, postprofessional graduate students and the
integrated approach of the program in
service of communities in need. The 20092010 academic year saw the program
working with diverse clients on a variety of
projects of scale such as East Alabama
Medical Center, City of Auburn High School,
and the River City Company - a non-profit
urban development agency in Chattanooga,
TN. Currently, the 2010-2011 cohort is
engaged
in
a
combined
design,
construction, and development effort in
partnership with two non-profit community
development agencies in New Orleans.
While the program’s integrated design and
construction endeavor differs not only in
degree but in kind from traditional “siloed”
approaches, faculty are also now
discovering that this integrated approach
offers unique advantages to working with
communities on holistic proposals for
development, design, and construction. As
a research direction, Auburn hopes to
continue this trajectory and explore and
document the benefits of connecting
“student-practitioners”
with
various
communities, agencies, municipalities who
can benefit from the effort.
A R C H I T E C T U R E + C O N S T R U C T I O N A L L I A N C E
_______________________________________________________________________________
30
INTEGRATED PROCESS AND DELIVERY
A Virtual Construction Environment
(VCE) to Support Integrated Project
Management Processes
Jason Lucas (Graduate Student),and
Walid Thabet (Department Head)
Department of Building Construction
and Myers-Lawson School of
Construction
Virginia Tech University
This ongoing research work at Virginia Tech
focuses on the development of a 2nd
generation
Virtual
Construction
Environment (VCE) framework for micro
project management. The work addresses
the issue of transforming monolithic CAD
objects into more granular form to
correspond with work tasks. The proposed
VCE framework is comprised of graphical
and analytical functions for visualizing and
manipulating graphical and non-graphical
project information necessary to perform
different
work
execution
planning
scenarios. A prototype implementation is
pursued to demonstrate concepts proposed
The current-state-of-the-art of Virtual
Prototyping (VP) for communicating project
data and information across project phases
is currently limited to the development of
interference checking and schedule
simulation (4D) tools that rely heavily on
BIM models with monolithic CAD objects.
While helpful, these interference checking
and macro schedule simulation tools only
scratch the surface and do not approach the
possibilities of generating much needed
estimates and schedules expressed in the
currency of the individual work tasks that
contractors and subcontractors use to bid,
construct, measure and track. Virtual
Prototyping technologies provide features
and capabilities that can be utilized to
develop richer and more sophisticated tools
to assist project participants to think, plan
and conceive construction strategies at the
micro level. At the same time, monolithic
CAD objects from BIM models, produced
during design phase, must be somehow
transformed into a more granular and
robust form amendable to representing the
individual work tasks that comprise
estimates and detailed schedules.
A R C H I T E C T U R E + C O N S T R U C T I O N A L L I A N C E
_______________________________________________________________________________
31
A R C H I T E C T U R E + C O N S T R U C T I O N A L L I A N C E
_______________________________________________________________________________
32
AREA 4
BUILDING INFORMATION
MODELING
A R C H I T E C T U R E + C O N S T R U C T I O N A L L I A N C E
_______________________________________________________________________________
33
BUILDING INFORMATION MODELING
Analyzing Capacity of BIM Tools to
Support Data Use across Project
Lifecycle
Jason Lucas (Graduate Student) and
Walid Thabet (Department Head)
Department of Building Construction
and Myers-Lawson School of
Construction
Virginia Tech University
The lifecycle of a building project, from
design through inception and facility
management, comprises multiple project
management processes where data and
information are defined and generated. This
information is often only developed and
stored in a format and at a level of detail
sufficient for the process that it was
created, leading to the reworking of
information to support later project
processes. In order to support processes
throughout the project lifecycle, there
needs to be a method of structuring and
storing information that takes into account
information needs at later project
processes. This research work examines the
use of BIM tools and the methods used to
record, recall, manipulate, and generate
information to support processes through
the project lifecycle (Figure 1). The benefit
of a structured information system based
upon process information (Figure 2) needs
is explored as to how it can enhance the use
of information within a BIM to support
lifecycle processes.
Figure 1: Improving Information exchange
through project lifecycle
Figure 2: Work Task Information Framework
A R C H I T E C T U R E + C O N S T R U C T I O N A L L I A N C E
_______________________________________________________________________________
34
BUILDING INFORMATION MODELING
The Effect of Building Information
Modeling on Conflict and Conflict
Management in Interdisciplinary
Teams
Tamera McCuen
Haskell & Irene Lemon Construction
Science Division
University of Oklahoma
Building Information Modeling (BIM) is an
emerging phenomenon in the building
design and construction industry requiring
change from traditional functional silos to
collaboration across multiple disciplines and
stakeholders in a facility’s life cycle.
Construction educators face the challenge
of preparing students for this evolving
environment in which the focus is on
interdisciplinary teams working together
much earlier in the life cycle of a project.
Industry professionals face a similar
challenge and are looking to understand
more
about
interdisciplinary
team
interactions and management. Conflict is
typical in these types of diverse teams due
to
the
various
backgrounds
and
perspectives between team members.
Collaboration and productivity from conflict
requires teams utilize an integrative
strategy for conflict resolution. This paper
tests several hypotheses related to different
types of conflict, conflict management
strategies, and the productivity of conflict
related to problem solving.
The results reported are from an immersive
classroom
environment
in
which
interdisciplinary teams first used traditional
methods and processes for a creative task,
then used BIM to complete two subsequent
tasks. In addition to a discussion about the
results from this research, there are
recommendations about fostering an
environment in which the inevitable conflict
leads to productive solutions and improves
team dynamics.
A R C H I T E C T U R E + C O N S T R U C T I O N A L L I A N C E
_______________________________________________________________________________
35
BUILDING INFORMATION MODELING
Extending BIM from Information
Modeling to Knowledge Modeling and
Support
Jim Jones
Architecture Virginia Tech
In cooperation with Autodesk, current
Building Information Modeling tools are
being enhanced as knowledge-based
systems. Through a process of knowledge
capturing decision-making procedures
related to topics such as: design of green
roofs, natural ventilation, radiant chilled
ceilings, facility management, etc. are being
mapped and translated to BIM domains. By
linking
these
knowledge-bases
and
decision-support structures through BIM a
designer’s knowledge-base can be quickly
and effectively extended allowing for
consideration of unfamiliar systems and
strategies during the early phases of design
A R C H I T E C T U R E + C O N S T R U C T I O N A L L I A N C E
_______________________________________________________________________________
36
AREA 5
HEALTHCARE FACILITY
DESIGN &
CONSTRUCTION
A R C H I T E C T U R E + C O N S T R U C T I O N A L L I A N C E
_______________________________________________________________________________
37
HEALTHCARE FACILITY DESIGN & CONSTRUCTION
Quality Control and Construction
Project Success on Hospital Projects
Philip Barlow
Construction Management Department
California Polytechnic State University
Quality control is the consensus term for a
construction inspection process which
verifies the final quality of construction
projects. Nowhere is this process more
rigorous or formalized than hospital
construction, particularly in California. The
amount of anticipated health care
construction to occur in California over the
next ten years is predicted to be over $100
billion dollars.
Failed third-party
inspections result in both direct and indirect
cost of rework.
This research will focus on the collection of
construction quality data from third-party
inspections of hospital projects in California.
This data will be utilized in several ways
including trend analysis, benchmarking, and
developing key performance indicators.
From this information a predictive model
could be developed. This research may
assist subcontractors, general contractors,
and hospital construction projects in
general to be more success and reduce
unnecessary quality costs.
These are unnecessary and avoidable costs
of construction which are termed (as a
group) non-conformance costs. These costs
are one of three types of costs which are
associated with quality. The other two are
conformance costs (or quality assurance
costs) and lost opportunity costs.
A R C H I T E C T U R E + C O N S T R U C T I O N A L L I A N C E
_______________________________________________________________________________
38
HEALTHCARE FACILITY DESIGN & CONSTRUCTION
Emerging Sustainable Community
Design Studio Focused on Teaching
Interdisciplinary Collaboration in
Senior Wellness Center Design
Project
David Boeck BArch, MArch
Hans-Peter
MArch
(Hepi)
Wachter
MFA,
College of Architecture
University of Oklahoma
The University of Oklahoma - College of
Architecture has joined forces with the
Donald W. Reynolds Department of
Geriatric Medicine and the OU Health
Science Center to design a Senior Wellness
Senior project for five sites in OKC involving
a collaboration of third year Architecture
and Interior Design students.
Architecture
and
Interior
Design
professionals were involved in the review
process, as well as individuals from senior
citizen focus groups, construction science
faculty, faculty from the OU Health Science
Center,
Oklahoma
City
University,
Oklahoma City Community College,
MetroTech, and interested members of the
public.
The student involvement in this project was
made possible through a generous donation
from the Benham Group of Oklahoma City
to the OU College of Architecture. The
students utilize the new Urban Design
Studio in Oklahoma City, provided through
the Benham Group’s donation, to complete
their work for the nearby site.
This collaboration is a part of an emerging
sustainable community design program that
is focused on interdisciplinary collaboration
to provide opportunities for sustainable
community designs. The Senior Wellness
Center is the first project for the new Urban
Design Studio site in Oklahoma City.
A R C H I T E C T U R E + C O N S T R U C T I O N A L L I A N C E
_______________________________________________________________________________
39
HEALTHCARE FACILITY DESIGN & CONSTRUCTION
Sustainable One-stop General Hospital
Design
Zhe Sun
Master of Architecture
University of Oklahoma
Since the hospital is a special building type,
and the building shape is restricted because
of the complicated function, circulation and
workflow, it can be difficult to design a
hospital in an expressive form (unlike other
public spaces such as museums).
A dynamic facade, complete with sun
shading, will provide increased visual
interest.
The project is located in Las Vegas, NV.
Although Las Vegas is known for its
extremely hot climate, it is in the same
energy zone as Norman, OK.
This hospital is a one-stop general hospital.
Traditionally, the physician’s offices and
pharmacy are separated from hospital.
People have to run from place to place in
order to see a doctor. This translates to the
hospital being more costly, less-effective,
more time-consuming, and less fuel
conscious. Alternately, a one-stop hospital
can help people complete in one-trip
services such as lab work, injections, filling
prescriptions at the pharmacy, and even
small surgery in one day and in one
building. The one-stop hospital workflow is
designed to be much more convenient,
cost-effective, timesaving and patient
friendly.
Another outstanding function of the onestop general hospital is flexibility.
Flexibility is the highest level of
sustainability. The plan of the hospital will
offer flexible office units that are suitable
for different medical departments, such as
Pediatrics, Obstetrics and Gynecology,
Cancer, Dental, General Surgery. The
flexibility of the office unit will attract
physicians to the one-stop hospital. Also,
the inpatient room design will make it easy
to switch between the inpatient rooms and
apartments. The available inpatient room
can be rented or used as apartment to
alleviate the problem between the hospital
and the nearby residences synthetically.
The one-stop general hospital is also more
sustainable. The goal of the project is use all
the necessary sustainable strategies, such
as triple-zero (zero energy, zero waste and
zero emission), at both the architecture and
landscape levels. For this project,
sustainability will include a focus on sun
shading. A well-designed sunshade can not
only achieve energy efficiency and adjust
the distribution of sunlight, but also enrich
the expression of the building’s elevation(s).
Sun shading is especially relevant in Las
Vegas given the climatic conditions.
A R C H I T E C T U R E + C O N S T R U C T I O N A L L I A N C E
_______________________________________________________________________________
40
HEALTHCARE FACILITY DESIGN & CONSTRUCTION
Architecture for Health: An InterInstitutional Approach Teaching
Collaboratively Community Health
Design
David Boeck BArch, MArch
Hans-Peter
MArch
(Hepi)
Wachter
MFA,
College of Architecture
University of Oklahoma
A principal concern of this program is
environmental design and aesthetics in the
form of the health facilities, service support
systems for community health facilities,
(e.g. pharmacy, health food, wholesome
restaurants, specialty stores etc.), and
infrastructure, (e.g. transportation, streets,
walkability of the neighborhood, housing).
community. Community participation and
involvement in academic projects are often
challenging. The pilot project will develop a
communication concept and will build a
bridge through the web as public interface
(Wiki and Blog), a project steering
committee comprised of public service
organizations and focus groups lead by
neighborhood organizations.
This program is an interdisciplinary design
collaboration
between
architecture
students and interior design students at the
College of Architecture in Norman, the
Urban Design Studio in Tulsa, the
Architecture for Health Design Studio at
Texas A&M with 40 years of experience in
healthcare design teaching, the clinical
program development at the OU Wayman
Tisdale Specialty Center, School of
Community Medicine and the Tulsa
Economic Development Corporation. It is
aimed to develop a community health
design studio and sustained studio
collaboration with community partners,
collaborators in the field of the build
environment and partnering healthcare
provider and professionals in the medical
field with a focus on community healthcare
facilities and public health in the
The studio collaboration, the interaction
with the clinical development program and
the exchange with the Tulsa Economic
Development Corporation encourages the
interaction and understanding of diverse
disciplines, methods, perspectives, and
approaches in the development of such a
pilot project.
We are using the term “healthy
environments” to indicate the operational
principal is holistic and inclusive of public
health, care, environmental design and
community. The project seeks to build
relationships between those components to
provide
a
better
and
inclusive
understanding of community health to the
students participating in this program.
A R C H I T E C T U R E + C O N S T R U C T I O N A L L I A N C E
_______________________________________________________________________________
41
HEALTHCARE FACILITY DESIGN & CONSTRUCTION
First, health care involves an inclusive
planning process through educational and
community outreach events (to assess
health needs, reduce health inequalities,
listen to users’ views, and work in
partnership with local agencies) and the
translation of the findings into a health
environment design.
Second,
community
development
recognizes the social, economic, and
environmental causes of ill health and links
user involvement and commissioning to
improve health and reduce inequalities. We
seek to improve community health by
ensuring that, for example, farmers'
markets and neighborhood grocery stores
are supported, or by promoting sidewalks,
parks and other environmental components
that encourage physical activity besides the
considerations that will go into the design
of a health facility itself.
Third, a community health center can
identify and support community networks
as a catalyst for economic stimulus, thus
improve health and provide important
services that will support the health center
and the community. For example, health
food grocery stores are valuable assets to a
community, not only do they make healthy
food more accessible, but they also can
provide living-wage jobs.
A R C H I T E C T U R E + C O N S T R U C T I O N A L L I A N C E
_______________________________________________________________________________
42
HEALTHCARE FACILITY DESIGN & CONSTRUCTION
Practitioner Evaluation of Healthcare
Facilities
Mardelle McCuskey Shepley
Center for Health Systems & Design
Texas A&M University
modified to reflect the differing design
objectives of projects. The process will
culminate in a knowledge dissemination
plan. Conducting facility evaluations is a
social responsibility of all design firms, as
the resulting information is critical to
improving the quality of healthcare
environments.
Researchers and designers have argued that
practitioners are not able to conduct
credible evaluations of their own projects.
Concerns have been raised regarding their
ability to be objective, and the lack of
skilled researchers among professional
staff. Lack of funds to support in-depth
studies has also been identified as a barrier
to the evaluation process.
However, by using the correct protocols,
practitioners can produce cost-effective
evaluations that can inform the design of
new buildings. The correct protocols include
identifying and documenting hypotheses at
the onset of a project, and generating an
evaluation boilerplate than can be readily
adapted to each project. In order to
generate this boilerplate, the practitioner
firm must investigate the firm culture
relative to the evaluation process. There
are three dimensions in which firms differ:
1) the level of objectivity sought (are
outsiders permitted to participate in the
study?), 2) attitudes toward the degree to
which the study is inclusive (will end users
as well as administrators, be incorporated
in the subject pool?), and 3) the degree to
which firm management wishes to
communicate the results (will the outcomes
be shared externally via publications and
presentations, or will they be limited to the
original design team?). Once the firm
culture has been explored, a concise set of
research tools can be generated that can be
A R C H I T E C T U R E + C O N S T R U C T I O N A L L I A N C E
_______________________________________________________________________________
43
HEALTHCARE FACILITY DESIGN & CONSTRUCTION
Cleveland County Cardiac Care Center
PI: Christopher Coombs
Committee Chair: Jim Patterson
Committee Member: Hepi Wachter
Committee Member: Joel Dietrich
Master of Architecture University of
Oklahoma
Heart disease is the number one killer
within Oklahoma and the United States.
Statistically, every American will know
someone who develops heart disease. The
family will experience repeated trips to the
hospital. However, hospitals are designed
to "treat the disease." So research and
improvement on evidence-based healthcare
design is important for providing a holistic
healing environment for heart disease
patients. This importance is due to
sustainable building environment's ability to
assist healing, influence healthy lifestyles,
and provide a stress free atmosphere.
While at the hospital, patients and families
can experience anxiety, fear, and
apprehension that design can augment.
By creating an ideal healing environment,
the built environment can help treat,
rehabilitate, and prevent heart disease from
claiming more lives. This project and
research will conceive beneficial ways to
empower the patient, their family, and
assist the doctors. The design will help the
process for treatment, but also provide
design innovation for rehabilitation and
prevention of heart disease.
A R C H I T E C T U R E + C O N S T R U C T I O N A L L I A N C E
_______________________________________________________________________________
44
HEALTHCARE FACILITY DESIGN & CONSTRUCTION
Redefining the Role of Information
Technology: Transforming Facility
Management
technology (IT) tools and map their
capabilities to FM needs.
Jim Jones and Elizabeth Grant
School of Architecture + Design
This will provide a foundation for planning
an agenda for research to develop or
modify these IT tools to best serve FM. The
outcome will be a shift from a reactive to a
proactive approach to FM.
Virginia Tech
Through this project, the process of
managing complex facilities such as
laboratories and healthcare buildings will be
transformed to better address emerging
performance mandates including resource
conservation, health and safety, homeland
security, and maintenance and operations.
This transformation will, in part, be
accomplished through development and
adaptation of new information technology
tools such as Building Information Modeling
that can provide mechanisms for efficient
information and knowledge sharing both
within the facility management profession
and externally with other related
professionals such as architects and
building system designers.
An outcome from the first phase of work
will be a comprehensive research plan
including
the
identification
and
prioritization of research needs related to
FM. The research agenda will be executed
through the collaborative efforts of the
Center for High Performance Learning
Environments at Virginia Tech, the
International
Facility
Management
Association, and the International Institute
for Sustainable Laboratories, and affiliated
organizations such as the American Institute
of Architects. In subsequent phases of the
work the research outcomes will be
implemented and their impact on FM
documented, with new educational
strategies and curricula developed for FM.
The initial phase of the research will employ
a unique knowledge sharing approach. A
social networking system will be set up for
facility management (FM) stakeholders to
facilitate an exchange of comments and
suggestions related to the roles and tasks
involved with FM. This will lead to the
identification
of
emerging
needs,
establishment
of
priorities,
and
development of a strategic plan for
improving facility management for complex
buildings. This phase will also include a firstof-its-kind approach to document the
features and capabilities of information
As a result of this work, FM professionals
will be better equipped to address the
expanding
performance
mandates
associated with the operation of
laboratories or healthcare facilities.
Consequently these facilities will be more
responsive to environmental issues such as
resource conservation and sustainability,
provide a higher level of health and safety
to the building occupants and be more
efficient in terms of operations and
maintenance.
A R C H I T E C T U R E + C O N S T R U C T I O N A L L I A N C E
_______________________________________________________________________________
45
AREA 6
S U S TA I N A B L E D E S I G N
AND CONSTRUCTION
A R C H I T E C T U R E + C O N S T R U C T I O N A L L I A N C E
_______________________________________________________________________________
46
A R C H I T E C T U R E + C O N S T R U C T I O N A L L I A N C E
_______________________________________________________________________________
47
S U S TA I N A B L E D E S I G N A N D C O N S T R U C T I O N
Deconstruction and Reuse of
Construction Materials
Abdol Chini
Rinker School of Building Construction
Though these barriers often can be
overcome
by
design
and
policy
modifications,
the
economic
and
environmental benefits of deconstruction
are not yet well established in the United
States.
UNIVERSITY of Florida
In the United States every year construction
industry contributes to a large amount of
waste to municipal solid waste stream. The
US Environmental Protection Agency has
estimated that total building related
construction and demolition (C&D) waste
was 170 million metric tons (MMT) in 2003.
Adaptive reuse is another way to reduce
C&D waste; deconstruction should be
considered only if a building is not fit for
adaptive reuse. Designing buildings to be
built in ease of future deconstruction is
beginning to receive attention and
architects and other designers are starting
to consider this factor for new buildings.
Tools are been developed to facilitate the
speed of deconstruction and improve
worker safety during the process. Many
states have set solid waste diversion and/or
recycling goals. A number of associations
have been formed to promote networking
and information exchange, lobby for
government support, and improve the
efficiency of the construction and
demolition industry.
Deconstruction is emerging as an
alternative to demolition around the world.
Deconstruction may be defined as the
disassembly of structures for the purpose of
reusing components and building materials.
The primary intent is to divert the
maximum amount of building materials
from the waste stream. Top priority is
placed on the direct reuse of materials in
new or existing structures.
Deconstruction has several advantages over
conventional demolition, including the
facilitation of building material recycling
and reuse, but it has its challenges. Most
existing buildings have not been designed
for dismantling, and the majority of building
components have not been designed for
disassembly. Dismantling of buildings
requires additional time. Building codes and
materials standards often do not address
the reuse of building components. Buildings
constructed before the mid-1970s often
contain lead-based paint and asbestos
materials.
US Building-Related C&D Debris
(2003, MMT)
Residential Non-residential Totals
Construction
10
5
15 (9%)
Renovation
38
33
71 (42%)
Demolition
19
65
84 (49%)
TOTALS
67
103
A R C H I T E C T U R E + C O N S T R U C T I O N A L L I A N C E
______________________________________________________________________________
48
170 (100%)
S U S TA I N A B L E D E S I G N A N D C O N S T R U C T I O N
Potential Harmful Environmental
Impacts as a Consequence of Material
and System Specifications,
Installation, and Operations in Current
U.S. Green Building Practices
Tamera McCuen
Haskell & Irene Lemon Construction
Science Division
University of Oklahoma
Lee Fithian
Division of Architecture
University of Oklahoma
This chapter discusses emissions and
green buildings from three perspectives
that include the design, construction, and
occupied phases of a building's life-cycle.
The three perspectives are:
1) Emissions/environmental harm from
material manufacturing for the construction
phase.
2) Emissions/environmental harm from
equipment/processes
during
the
construction phase.
3) Emission/environmental harm from
the completed building (post construction).
Issues addressed in this chapter include the
characteristics of select raw materials used
frequently to produce construction
materials; concerns about the harmful
properties of certain manufactured
materials/ systems; and concerns about
emissions of installed materials over their
life-cycle. Governance in these areas is
often incomplete and/or inconsistent with
the intent of green building.
A R C H I T E C T U R E + C O N S T R U C T I O N A L L I A N C E
______________________________________________________________________________
49
S U S TA I N A B L E D E S I G N A N D C O N S T R U C T I O N
Research Subject: Engineering
Sustainable Building Systems
Esther Obonyo and Robert Ries
Building Construction
University of Florida
The NSF funded “Engineering sustainable
building systems’ was established to give
American students the opportunity to
enhance their global competence through
addressing these challenges within the East
African context using selected case studies.
and sanitation systems that are both
sustainable and affordable;
4.
To
demonstrate
sustainable
building systems that exploit crossfertilization of ideas across the different
regions in the research.
Through working closely with University of
Florida and University of Nairobi professors,
the targeted students acquire a global
perspective on developing innovations that
can make construction processes, products
and services more sustainable within the
global context. Sustainability is used here in
a wide context to include the so-called
‘triple bottom line’ of environmental, social
and economic perspectives. The specific
research objectives are:
The IRES program is directed at improving
the students’ ability to construct
sustainable built environments through
investigating construction practices in
international settings. In addition, through
matching funding provided by the
University of Florida (UF), the students are
supported to continue their research and
analysis after the time spent in the field,
extending the lessons learned to
construction students in the United States
(US). This allows the students to more
concretely synthesize their experiences in
the US and East Africa. All students are
required to disseminate their findings
through
lectures
and
workshop
presentations. The primary metrics for
evaluating the success of the program is the
quality of research undertaken by the
students.
1. To characterize the differences in
approaches to sustainable construction
engineering
between
developed
countries such as the USA and
developing countries such as Kenya and
define a framework for cross-country
learning;
2. To investigate the appropriateness of
construction engineering approaches
used by the different types of “builders”
in developing economies using suitable
assessment models;
3. To contextualize innovative and low
cost use of building materials, water
A R C H I T E C T U R E + C O N S T R U C T I O N A L L I A N C E
______________________________________________________________________________
50
S U S TA I N A B L E D E S I G N A N D C O N S T R U C T I O N
Delivering Sustainable Buildings: A
Content Analysis of Procurement
Documents
Nathaniel J. Sobin
Civil, Environmental, and Architectural
Engineering
University of Colorado
Environmental Design (LEED®) rating system
as prescribed by the United States Green
Building Council (USGBC®). The growing
number of LEED certified projects and the
inclusion of the system in building codes
since inception is evidence of its
exponential growth.
The LEED rating
system does not capture information on
project delivery methods and procurement
procedures. As a result, there is little
information available concerning how
project delivery methods and procurement
procedures relate to projects in which
sustainability is an objective. This study
examines 92 projects between the years of
2004 and 2009 to explore the relationship
between project delivery methods and
procurement procedures.
The study
employs a content analysis methodology to
examine and codify specific language and
techniques used in procurement documents
for the various delivery and procurement
methods. The results reveal that most
owners, regardless of delivery method,
communicate
sustainable
objectives
through a set certification level as evaluated
by the USGBC. Integrated delivery methods
such as design-build and construction
manager at risk were found to allow greater
flexibility in contractor input and the risk
allocation of non-certification.
Such
delivery methods were also found to allow
the reward of higher LEED levels.
Keith R. Molenaar
Civil, Environmental, and Architectural
Engineering
University of Colorado
Douglas D. Gransberg
Civil, Construction, and Environmental
Engineering
Iowa State University
Tamera L. McCuen
Haskell & Irene Lemon Construction
Science Division
University of Oklahoma
Owners, architects, engineers, constructors,
and public policy advocates are demanding
that projects incorporate sustainable design
and
construction
practices.
The
predominant evaluation system in the
United States for sustainable construction
practices is the Leadership in Energy and
A R C H I T E C T U R E + C O N S T R U C T I O N A L L I A N C E
______________________________________________________________________________
51
S U S TA I N A B L E D E S I G N A N D C O N S T R U C T I O N
The Impact of Project Delivery Method
on Achieving Project Sustainability
Goals
Tamera L. McCuen
Haskell & Irene Lemon Construction
Science Division
University of Oklahoma
Douglas D. Gransberg
Civil, Construction, and Environmental
Engineering
Iowa State University
sustainable design and construction. This
paper reports the results of a nationwide
study in the US that sought to find if there is
indeed a connection between the project
delivery method used and the owner’s
success in achieving project sustainability
goals. The study synthesizes the results of a
survey of 230 sustainable building projects
from 47 states. Sustainability was measured
by the United States Green Building
Council’s Leadership in Energy and
Environmental Design (LEED) Green Building
Rating System. The survey findings were
validated by structured interviews with
owners, designers, and constructors. The
major finding is that respondents used
integrated project delivery methods,
(Design-Build and Construction Manager-atRisk), for 75 percent of the projects in the
population. The study concludes that the
success of a project in terms meeting or
exceeding its original LEED sustainability
goals is influenced by the project delivery
method.
Keith R. Molenaar
Civil, Environmental, and Architectural
Engineering
University of Colorado
Nathaniel J. Sobin
Civil, Environmental, and Architectural
Engineering
University of Colorado
Anecdotal evidence leads one to
hypothesize that some project delivery
methods may be better suited to delivering
green building projects than others.
However, to date, there is no
comprehensive study that explores the
impacts of project delivery methods on
A R C H I T E C T U R E + C O N S T R U C T I O N A L L I A N C E
______________________________________________________________________________
52
S U S TA I N A B L E D E S I G N A N D C O N S T R U C T I O N
Development of a Cost Model for
External Shading Systems
Jim Jones
Architecture
Virginia Tech
In cooperation with the NYSAN Company a
cost model, both performance and
installation, is being developed for
application to schematic design phase
decisions. Through a combined approach
using energy simulations, parametric cost
analysis, multi-variant regression and case
studies the goal is the development of a
cost estimation model that can be included
in Life-cycle Cost analyses through software
such as eQuest.
A R C H I T E C T U R E + C O N S T R U C T I O N A L L I A N C E
______________________________________________________________________________
53
S U S TA I N A B L E D E S I G N A N D C O N S T R U C T I O N
Buildings That Teach
Jim Jones
Architecture
Virginia Tech
engages the building and 3) have
knowledge
of
system
monitoring
equipment for integration into the building.
Furthermore the designer should recognize
that buildings can participate in learning at
more than one level including the explicit
integration of building performance data
into curricula to implicit learning through an
expression of architectural form.
The typical school houses learning but does
not actively participate in the learning
process. This is a missed opportunity for
architecture. Researchers at Virginia Tech
are seeking to transform the way learning
environments are designed by promoting
the concept of “buildings that teach”. Like
biological organisms, buildings respond to
dynamic
functional,
as
well
as
environmental
conditions.
Indeed
philosophers such as Johann Geothe
suggest that this response is a critical
informant for deriving biological form.
When architectural form is derived with
these same inputs then opportunities are
created for buildings to actively teach
through themselves. This is particularly
applicable with the current interest in
resource conservation. While there are
many recently designed schools that
attempt to support learning through
themselves these efforts typically fall short
of their potential with only a sundial near
the entry or a dashboard displaying building
performance parameters. By fully applying
the concept of buildings that teach
architecture becomes an active participant
in learning and the building serves as an
exhibit of environmental responsiveness.
However to fully apply the concept of
buildings that teach requires 1) the designer
understand
the
philosophical
and
pedagogical underpinnings of sustainability
and environmental responsiveness, 2) work
with educators to derive curricula that
Through
an
immersive-participatory
method using a series of case studies
including a Regional Environmental
Learning Center, the proposed Shenandoah
Valley Discovery Museum, and the Science
Museum of Southwest Virginia, this
transformative process has begun by
documenting
lessons-learned
toward
development of continuing education
material to promote “buildings that teach”.
Work is being supported by the American
Institute of Architects through an Upjohn
Initiative
A R C H I T E C T U R E + C O N S T R U C T I O N A L L I A N C E
______________________________________________________________________________
54
S U S TA I N A B L E D E S I G N A N D C O N S T R U C T I O N
Development of a Decision-Support
Framework for Schematic Design for
Building Materials and Systems Reuse
Jim Jones and Ahmed Ali
This work extends current research agendas
that are narrowly focused on building
construction for assembly and disassembly
and do not explicitly address component
reuse and the architectural design process.
Through the development of a “Virtual
Material Repository” and the supporting
decision support infrastructure, two
significant changes to the architectural
design process are envisioned. First,
through adaptation of a decision-support
framework for building material reuse,
including the development of a “Virtual
Material Repository”, architects will be able
to effectively evaluate and compare both
new and salvaged building components into
their current designs. The “Virtual Material
Repository” will be a centrally accessible
database of available reclaimed and
disassembled building materials and
components for reuse that, through the
decision-support software infrastructure,
can be “matched” to component needs in
the proposed new building’s design. While a
few on-line databases exist to promote
component reuse they do not include
sufficient description of attributes nor are
they structured to directly interface with
software supported building design, as will
be the case with this new approach. The
virtual repository and decision support
infrastructure will be accessible directly
through Building Information Modeling
(BIM) tools and will contain descriptive
“attributes” of the salvaged components
that become inputs into the decisionsupport framework.
Architecture
Virginia Tech
This proposal merges green and civil
engineering, architecture, and information
technology to transform the architectural
design process to one that explicitly
supports the reuse of building materials and
components in new construction. Through a
knowledge-capturing process from several
disciplines involved in building design,
construction, demolition and salvaging a
new decision-support framework will be
developed to assist architects when
designing for reuse. Through the application
of information technology and decisionmaking theory this decision-support
framework will be integrated with Building
Information Modeling tools and the World
Wide Web. As a result architects will, for
the first time, have broad access to a new
mechanism for identifying and evaluating
the use of de-constructed building
components in their designs. The result will
be a shift in the paradigm for the
architectural design process to one which
more explicitly considers the building life
cycle as well as an increase in building
recycling and reduction in construction
related waste, energy use, and carbon
dioxide emissions. This paradigm shift will
be shown through beta testing and
qualitative assessment of this new design
process as observed and documented in
selected architectural firms.
A R C H I T E C T U R E + C O N S T R U C T I O N A L L I A N C E
______________________________________________________________________________
55
S U S TA I N A B L E D E S I G N A N D C O N S T R U C T I O N
A Framework for Integrating Risk and
Uncertainty in the Valuation Analysis
of Green Building Investment Options
Jim Jones and Alireza Bozorgi
Architecture
Virginia Tech
Investment in sustainability and green
options in buildings is gaining popularity in
the real estate sector. Unfortunately there
is typically much uncertainty associated
with the valuation of these investments as
projected returns related to energy savings
and market penetration for greening
buildings may not be realized. This is, in
part, because the performance evaluation
techniques used by building designers and
systems engineers are different from
valuation analysis approaches used by real
estate decision-makers. As a result
investment in sustainable strategies and
systems may be less frequent than it
otherwise could be. Therefore there is a
need for an decision-making approach that
explicitly includes uncertainty and links the
building systems performance evaluation to
property
valuation
and
investment
decision-making. Through this work a
framework will be developed for assessing
the true value, both revenue and risk, of
sustainable options investment in incomeproducing properties, while explicitly
considering uncertainty. The proposed
process sets forth the fundamentals for the
development of a new assessment tool to
assist both property assessment and design
professionals in making informed decisions
about “green” value and investment. The
framework will be based on current
Building
Simulation
Programs,
the
Discounted Cash Flow approach and Monte
Carlo simulation for deriving reliable and
understandable estimates of final financial
performance indicators. As part of this new
framework “uncertainty factors” associated
with the appraisal and investment decisionmaking process will be derived and
integrated into the framework. The
derivation of the uncertainty factors and
the framework will be the result of a
qualitative method using case study and
stakeholder interview tactics. The outcome
will be a first-of-a-kind approach to link
building performance evaluation to
valuation and investment decision-making
while explicitly including uncertainty to the
benefit of building performance evaluators
and real estate investment decision-makers.
The broader impact of this work will be
more investment in “green” building
strategies.
A R C H I T E C T U R E + C O N S T R U C T I O N A L L I A N C E
______________________________________________________________________________
56
A R C H I T E C T U R E + C O N S T R U C T I O N A L L I A N C E
______________________________________________________________________________
57
A+CA Member Schools
Auburn University
College of Architecture, Design and Construction Daniel Bennett, Dean 202 Dudley Commons Auburn University, AL 36849
Email: bennedd@auburn.edu
Phone: 334-844-4524
California Polytechnic State University
College of Architecture & Environmental Design
R. Thomas Jones, Dean
Building 05, Room 214 San Luis Obispo, CA 93407-0280
Email:rtjones@calpoly.edu
Phone: 805-756-5916
Clemson University
College of Architecture, Arts & Humanities
James B. London, Associate Dean
Email: london1@clemson.edu
Georgia Tech
College of Architecture
Douglas Allen, Senior Associate Dean
247 Fourth Street SW
Atlanta, GA 30332-015
Email:doug.allen@coa.gatech.edu
Phone: 404-894-3880
Mississippi State University
College of Architecture, Art and Design
Jim West, Dean;
Barr Avenue, Giles 240
Mississippi State, MS 3976
Email:jwest@caad.msstate.edu
Phone: 662-325-2202
Prairie View A&M University
School of Architecture
Dr. Ikhlas Sabouni, Dean
PO Box 519 Prairie View, TX 77446-2100
Email: ISabouni@pvamu.edu
Phone: 936-261-9810
Southern Polytechnic State University
School of Architecture, Civil Engineering Technology, and Construction
Dr. Wilson C. Barnes, Dean
11 South Marietta Parkway Marietta, GA 30060-2896
Email: wbarnes@spsu.edu
Phone: 678-915-5519
Texas A&M University
College of Architecture
Jorge Vanegas, Interim Dean
202 Langford Architecture
College Station, TX 778433137
Email:JVanegas@archmail.tamu.edu
Phone: 979-845-1222
University of Florida
College of Design, Construction & Planning
Christopher Silver, Dean
PO Box 115701
Gainesville, FL 32611-5701
Email: silver2@dcp.ufl.edu
Phone: 352-392-4836
University of Oklahoma
College of Architecture
Charles Graham, Dean
830 Van Vleet Oval
Norman, OK 73019
Email: cwgraham@ou.edu
University of Texas – San Antonio
College of Architecture
Dr. John Murphy, Dean;
501 West Durango Blvd, San Antonio, TX 78207
Email:
john.murphy@utsa.edu
University of Washington
College of Architecture & Urban Planning
Dr. Daniel S. Friedman, Dean
224 Gould Hall Box 355726
Seattle, WA 98195-5726
Email: dsfx@u.washington.edu
Phone: 206-616-2440
Washington State University
College of Engineering and Architecture
School of Architecture and Construction
Management
Greg Kessler, Director
Box 642220
Pullman, WA 99164-2220
Email:gkessler@mail.arch.wsu.edu
Phone: 509-335-5593
Virginia Tech
College of Architecture & Urban Planning
Jack Davis, Dean
202 Cowgill Hall Blacksburg, VA 24061
Email: davisa@vt.edu
Phone: 540-231-6416
Wentworth Institute of Technology
Dr. Russ Pinizotto, Vice Presidnt for Academic Affairs and Provost
550 Huntington Avenue, Boston, MA 20115
Email: pinizzottor@wit.edu
Phone:617-989-4590