Format Curriculum (leerplan) P2

2009-02-17T13:42:00.000-08:00

Title

The title of the final project

Interacting Building Parameters

(Constraints and trade-offs in the Architectural Engineering Design process

Architectural Engineering Design Management)

Subject / problem area

An overall description of the field of study; the context of and backgrounds to the ultimate study question

In Architecture, the Design Process (DP) is part of a larger and much more complex process; the Project Life Cycle (PLC). However, the Design Process itself controls and directs most of the outcome of the rest of the process. If the Architectural Engineering Design Process (AEDP) is supposed to improve this Architectonic Design Process; which are the changes that this particular perspective cause in the project? Are there many opportunity costs when using this approach?

First, it is necessary to define Architectural Engineering:

What is Architectural Engineering?

“Architectural Engineering is the discipline concerned with the planning, design, construction, and operation of engineered systems for commercial, industrial, and institutional facilities. Engineered systems include electric power, communications and control; lighting; heating, ventilation, and air conditioning; and structural systems.

An Architectural Engineer works closely with those in all areas of the building process to design and possibly to construct the engineered systems that make buildings come to life for their inhabitants.”[1]

Therefore, one can conclude that Architectural Engineering aims to improve the results though the application of technologies in building design and construction.[2] Where do these improvements take part in the process? How and when can the AEDP create decision support tools to improve the product of the process?

Figure 1. Design Process Analysis.[3]

The Architectural Design Process described in figure 1 is taken from a Computer Decision Support Tools paper by Cristina Hopfe. This diagram is used in order to describe the process, since there is not established “standard” and unique process. However, the phases described within it can be commonly identified in any project.

Figure 2. Description of the deliverables in each phase of the ADP.

Traditionally in the Project Design Phase, the engineering party produces process and criteria to create support tools for design. The aim of this thesis is to explore the drivers in the generation of these tools, as well as the consequences that AE produce in the rest of the process; since there is not a formal process yet defined that points out the difference in the process.[4]

Figure 3. Design Process Proposed Analysis

This graduation project will describe, explore and apply the process embedded within the AE design process and compare with the traditional design process through the development of a mixed use project. In Architectural Engineering, the main shift in the process relies in the creation of tools that supports the form finding and design process. These tools are generated due to a certain aspect in the design that can be designed in order to have an optimization or a improvement from the traditional way to build.

Figure 4. Architectural Engineering Desing Process

In order to develop the connections between the design and the research, it is needed to clarify some of the working definitions used along the process:

Design Parameter

Qualitative and quantitative aspects of physical and functional characteristics of a component, device, product, or system that are input to its design process. Design parameters determine cost, design, and risk tradeoffs in the item's development. The quantitative parameters that can be identified in the project depend on the amount of information or the assumptions made.

BRIEF		ARCHITECTONIC PROJECT DESCRIPTION
typology		FLOOR SPACE			BUILDING FORM
image	A, B, C	gross floor area	m²	GFA	facade length	m	FL
rooms	unit	built area	m²	BA	external wall	m²	EW
users	unit	structural area	m²	SA	external wall non glazed	m²	EWC
cars	unit	net floor area	m²	NFA	external wall glazed	m²	EWO
		circulation space	m²	CS	external wall glass	m²	EWG
		circulation usable space	m²	CSU	external wall panel	m²	EWP
		circulation space circulation	m²	CSC	internal wall	m²	IW
		building services area	m²	BSA	internal wall non glazed	m²	IWC
		useful floor area	m²	UFA	internal wall glazed	m²	IWO
		functional useful area	m²	FUA	roof	m²	R
		total UFA+CSU	m²	UAC	roof not open	m²	RC
					roof open	m²	RO
					overhang	m²	OH
					geoss ground floor area	m²	GGA
					gross volume content	m³	VOL
					gross storey height	m	GSH
					average storey height	m	ASH

Table 1. Parameters in the design project.

However, the qualitative parameters that could reflect architectural quality in spaces are far more complicated. Sometimes this can be established by relating the quantitative parameters in ratios that must reflect a condition.

ARCHITECTONIC PROJECT ANALYSIS
INDICES
m² useful floor area per person	P/UFA
gross floor area per useful floor area	GFA/UFA
m² facade area per m² gross floor area	F/GFA
m² roof area per m² gross floor area	R/GFA
m² internal wall area per m² gross floor area	W/GFA

Table 2. Example of indices in design project.

The indices can be generated by relating one or more parameters; depends on which aspect of the building is being analyzed. It is important to mention also that previous examples or similar models are important to analyze and compare this numbers and to interpret them. By comparing examples it is possible to extrapolate certain values and create assumptions.

Opportunity cost

Opportunity cost is the value of the next best alternative foregone as the result of making a decision; being in this kind of process time and cost that impact both, project and construction time.

Quality analysis and evaluation tools [5]

In the quality planning field for projects there are several tools and techniques that can be used to evaluate certain aspects. In order to evaluate the cost and time benefits of a proposal it is necessary to simulate the project planning scenarios. Cost and time benefits can be reflected in simulations. Time improvements are related to the optimization of effort driven activities, an improvement in the relations that establish a critical path in the project planning, so process can be performed within the best time; or even the reduction of the risk of expanding the time due to uncertainties.

Cost-Benefit Analysis

Quality planning must consider cost-benefits tradeoffs. The primary benefit of meeting quality requirements is less rework, which means higher productivity, lower costs, and increased stakeholder satisfaction. The primary cost of meeting quality requirements is the expense associated with Project Quality Management activities.

Benchmarking

Benchmarking involves comparing actual or planned project practices to those of other projects to generate ideas for improvement and to provide a basis by which to measure performance. These other projects can be within the performing organization or outside of it, and can be within the same or in another application area.

Design of Experiments

Design of experiments (DOE) is a statistical method that helps identify which factors may influence specific variables of a product or process under development or in production. It also plays a role in the optimization of products or processes.

An example is where an organization can use DOE to reduce the sensitivity of product performance to sources of variations caused by environmental or manufacturing differences. The most important aspect of this technique is that it provides a statistical framework for systematically changing all of the important factors, instead of changing the factors one at a time. The analysis of the experimental data should provide the optimal conditions for the product or process, highlighting the factors that influence the results, and revealing the presence of interactions and synergisms among the factors. For example, automotive designers use this technique to determine which combination of suspension and tires will produce the most desirable ride characteristics at a reasonable cost.

Cost of Quality (COQ)

Quality costs are the total costs incurred by investment in preventing nonconformance to requirements, appraising the product or service for conformance to requirements, and failing to meet requirements (rework). Failure costs are often categorized into internal and external. Failure costs are also called cost of poor quality.

Additional Quality Planning Tools

Other quality planning tools are also often used to help better define the situation and help plan effective quality management activities. These include brainstorming, affinity diagrams, force field analysis, nominal group techniques, matrix diagrams, flowcharts, and prioritization matrices.

The proposed method to explore both processes is by dividing the project in two parts, and each part will be developed in one of the processes. The constraints in the project will be given by the context and the building form. In order to monitor the differences the core parameter will be defined during the process, so it will be possible to explore the interaction of the different parameters or “value drivers” throughout the design process.

These parameters will be analyzed in crucial points for decision making in the project design, and the outcome will be compared; qualifying this outcome with ratios relating cost or benefit analysis, and several indices relating measurements and quantities according to the variants that will be specified in the brief. The assumptions for the cost modeling will be worked out from sources as the books by Gerritse and de Jonge. [6, 7]

Relevance

The significance of the final project in a broader social and/or academic framework

Within the Architectural Engineering Design Management:

The definition of an integral design process within the Architectural Engineering scope.
Study the impact of the decision making in design based in engineering constraints.
Explore the trade-offs in processes and the consequences of the AE design process and tools (like the Building Performance Simulation) in a project.
The aim of this investigation is to point out the stages in which the technical aspects influence the results in the complete project, and to analyze if these decision support tools can foresee the opportunity cost-benefit in the project, as the result of the innovation in design by technical drivers. Therefore, this holistic approach can propose a “standard” process in order to have optimal results.
In studying the relations of the variables used in each stage of the design process, the objective is to explore the interaction of these value drivers in order to improve the results in the architectural value of the project.

In the urban strategy:

· As the Randstad perspective intends to develop 60% of the projected housing in new areas to urbanize, this proposal focuses on the peripheral urban zones to provide this demand within a “green belt”. By promoting this development in a restricted area and establishing this zone as a buffer and protection for the “green heart” of the Randstad; it is expected to avoid unnecessary satellite concentrations that might create side problems, like the landscape cluttering or the expansion of the functional region.

· The aim of creating an “intelligent region” [8] that gives the advantages of an agglomeration[9] is to avoid the expansion of the urban sprawl in concentration zones. These objectives must be translated in the architectonic program; and later in the formal configuration of the building design.

· The proposal should also allow the integration of housing dwellings in order to be aligned with the goals of the Randstad 2040 vision.

· The reduction of the commuting distance within the center and subcenters will encourage users to seek alternatives to commuting by car.[10]

Study question

The study question must be formulated in such a way that the graduation project answers this question

Which constraints from the AE-design process impact the project in a holistic way? Which are the trade-offs that they cause?

How can the parameters or value drivers in design be related to the parameters in the rest of the process?

Structure

Structure of the graduation project

Figure 5. Structure acording to the stage, scope and scale.

Design

70% name scientific domain (or chair): name main mentor

Architectural Engineering, Axel Kilian

Design brief

Program of design requirements with respect to functionality, form and structure

In the situational research a plot was selected to develop office buildings; indicating a density of 500%. The plot selected has is 100,000 square meters.

Assuming that the maximum amount of built surface to develop is 500,000 meters, the area is divided up according to the proposed program using percentages parameters. The main proposed use for the project is office space, but it will be combined with other program in order to provide services as restaurant, cafes and services.

Program:

Total Leasable	280,000.00	67%
HORECA	63,000.00	15%
Circulation	42,000.00	10%
Front desk	21,000.00	5%
Services	75,600.00	18%
Offices	218,400.00	52%
Net Total	420,000.00	100%

Also, during the situational research, several options to distribute the surface were explored. From those options, the one appointed to develop for the project was the creation of four towers with different highs in the PCP itself, using the space that is left over from highway intersection.

By having this distribution, and according to the proposal to build four towers, it is possible to have a break down with additional data. In order to make those calculations, the considerations will be as follows:[7]

· Floor height 5m

· One user for each 20 m² of leasable surface.

· One car for each 75 m² of leasable surface.

· Foot print is 3,500 m² in the triangle 85 m² side

· Parking space floor area is 25 m² per car.

model four towers
	H	N	NET	LEASABLE	USERS	CARS	FOOTPRINT	PARKING
T1	60	12	42,000.00	28,000.00	1,400.00	373.33	3,500.00	9,333.33
T2	120	24	84,000.00	56,000.00	2,800.00	746.67	3,500.00	18,666.67
T3	180	36	126,000.00	84,000.00	4,200.00	1,120.00	3,500.00	28,000.00
T4	240	48	168,000.00	112,000.00	5,600.00	1,493.33	3,500.00	37,333.33
			420,000.00	280,000.00	14,000.00	3,733.33	14,000.00	93,333.33

Structure

A description of the methodology to be used in the design process

In order to explore the process, it will be analyzed while designing the proposed building. During the conceptual design phase the process will be divided in two parts, one to be explored from the Architectural Design approach, and the other from the Architectural Engineering approach.

Figure 6. Scheme of the division of the design process.

However, it is proposed that in some decisions, the decision making process will be specially observed. The proposed observation scheme is described as seen in figure 6.

Figure 7. Precedure for the observation and analysis in the decision making process when designing.

Design goals

· Making Prince Claus Plein a power junction in the community life; as well as for the population in transit to the center of Den Haag.

· In order to apply the AE design process, one office building will be designed with structural concept as the form finding method. This will be oriented to optimize the performance of the structure.

Design constraints

Analysis and organization of the prerequisite constraints contained in the design brief

· Integrate the building within the infrastructure landscape given by the highway.

· Designing a building which will be attractive to investors in terms of feasibility in regards to a cost/benefit analysis with the IRR.

· Use a mixed program being the office use the majority in the leasable surface.

· Distribute the 500,000 m2 in the office buildings created in the junction.

· Solve the complications created by the existence of the railway and the highway.

· Integrate and create public space in the PCP.

Design problems

Formulating the design problems that are locked into the design brief

Treatment of the “boundary” condition given by the highway.
Creation of a landmark.
Solve the integration and entrance for the building in the PCP.
Organization and integration of the new plan within the existing urban tissue.
Apply, as possible, environment friendly norms to design.
Allow the train to be integrated in the design.

Precedents

Collecting and analyzing design precedents to be used in the design

In Urban Design

In the situational research some examples were analyzed, so strategies could be foreseen. These analogous cases helped to explore the way to achieve the objectives within the urban frame.

Tokyo Planning green-belt strategy [11]

This example will be explored in the planning strategy. The green belt strategy in the urban planning allowed the creation of a Megacity, by improving the communication networks and controlling the urban sprawl. By planning a “decentralized concentration” it is possible to maintain a balance in the territory; however this new distribution must be supported by a creation of a stable infrastructure that encourages the idea of a functional entity; instead of being a morphologic network.

Figure 8. Diagrams by Andre Sorensen.

Sociopolis, Valencia, Spain by Manuel Gausa and Vicente Guallard[12]

This is an example of a new development oriented to promote high density buildings in transitional spaces between rural an urban communities. The strategy that was used to develop this project was focused in keeping a balance between the ratio of usable of area, and the ratio of usable surface and green spaces. Also, the objectives in this new kind of communities are supposed to be aligned with the transformation in the social dynamics caused by the implementation of ICT technologies in the daily life.

Figure 9. Sociopolis renders and distribution.

In Architectural Engineering Projects

Along the research and the project, it is also necessary to illustrate the differences between the ADP and the AEDP with some contemporary examples.

CCTV Headquarters Competition, Projects by Dominique Perrault and OMA with Arup

The CCTV Headquarters design competition asked for a new building in the Central Business District in Beijing. Although there was a large number of entries, the Office for Metropolitan Architecture (OMA) was awarded the contract on December 20, 2002. On the 10-hectare site in the new Central Business District in Beijing, the OMA proposal consolidates the program in an iconic configuration of two high-rise buildings.

The new CCTV headquarters, at a height of 230 meter and a floor area of about 400,000 square meters, combines administration with news, broadcasting, studios and program production - the entire process of TV making - in a sequence of interconnected activities. Although the building is 230 meter tall it is not a traditional tower, but a continuous loop of horizontal and vertical sections that establish an urban site rather than point to the sky. The irregular grid on the building's facades is an expression of the forces traveling throughout its structure.

Hears Tower, Projects by Chirstian de Portzamparc and Foster & Partners and WSP Canto Senuik

The proposal by Christian de Portzamparc for example, had as main concept the shadow effect in the whole superstructure. However, in the project by Foster and partners, the use of the diagrid as a conceptual dorm generator allowed to save 20% of the total steel from a conventional high rise.

This building has been designed as a worker’s paradise. Most of its publicity has focused on its sustainable technologies, and these are indeed a major advance over other Manhattan towers: it’s the first office building to receive a gold rating from the US Green Building Council’s Leadership in Energy & Environmental Design (LEED) program for core, shell and interiors. But a close look at the Hearst tower shows how it pays as much attention to its internal environment as to environmentalism. Foster & Partners has carefully thought through everything affecting worker well-being and morale, from aesthetics to ergonomics to air-quality control.

Design solutions

Generating possible solutions to the formulated problems

Since the scale of the project is large the scope in the design problems relies in two scales:

Urban scale

In the urban scale the solutions to generate must be oriented with the integration of the towers in the context.

Links with bridges, creating an urban platform
The creation of a large parking space and public pedestrian plaza that communicates the different towers.
A commercial axis that connects the new development with the existent.

Architectonic scale

Within the building it is important to solve the external conditions given by the constraints.

Solve a High Rise structure in the given plot.
Avoid interfering in the Railway system.
Prevent the noise and pollution from affecting the internal environment.
The façade must provide good conditions in the interior.

Design

Combining possible solutions to a coherent concept; in a repeating and elaborating process, generating, selecting and evaluating design variants towards a design

After the situational research, the exercise is purposed to develop in a four tower scheme to fit the sull 500,000 m² program requirements. In the four-tower diagram, the design concept is based in the landmark created by placing high rise buildings in the landscape, generating a tension caused by the density of the PCP itself.

The design concept of creating a landmark with a high rise, would concentrate the design in the impact of the building mass in order to accentuate the character of the PCP as a junction. This would have an important impact in the form finding process while designing, since the perspective and the visual impact can be a qualitative aspect to evaluate in the preliminary renders.

Figure 10. Examples of the perspective volumetric study.

In further design explorations it will be necessary to develop concept in the facades to achieve the objective of creating a new landmark.

Design evaluation

Evaluating the design concept according to the design brief and constraints

Part of the integration of the project and the research is to identify parameters and observe them along the process. In the initial phases, indicators as the indices and parameters explained before in this document are a way to evaluate the design iterations.

In the following phases, it is proposed that the high rise is developed based in a from finding process based in the structural engineering concept. In order to evaluate the optimization of the shape, it is necessary to evaluate indicators as the bending moment acting in the structure because of the wind, the weight of the structure, the proportion of the steel and/or concrete, etc.

After solving this aspect from the model, it will be necessary to evaluate other things in the performance of the design, like the sound isolation, the amount of light that reaches the interior spaces.

At the end, in order to compare the design versus a traditional building it will be necessary to make simulations for the planning process; however this will be conducted in the research part of the project.

Research

30% name scientific domain (or chair): name 2nd mentor

Design informatics: Rudi Stouffs

Project Management: Hermann Mooi

Research question

The research question must be formulated in such a way that the graduation project answers this question

Which are the constraints, variables and trade-offs that the AE-design process influences in the Project Life Cycle?

Which consequences of the tools developed within the AEDP can alter design process from an office building project?

Objective

The objective states what is to be achieved with the final project; it will be assessed whether the objective has been achieved based on assessment criteria defined by the student

· Describe and implement an “Architectural Engineering Design Process”.

· Compare the AE design process and the A design process.

· Explore and identify the parameters (value drivers) and factors that impact the results in the final project, such as the trade-offs and the opportunity cost of the AE process.

· Create a decision assessment tool that integrates the variables and constraints identified.

Relevance

The significance of the final project in a broader social and/or academic framework

The Architectural Design Process has adapted the computer tools in the last years in order to support the decisions in the design. However, when it comes to Architectural Engineering there is no a single or specific process defined for it. It is important to define and describe this process to understand what is AE in practice.

In some environments like the architecture offices that already follow this kind of Design Process, it is relatively easy to implement these changes without causing any trouble. However, in the traditional offices it is necessary to point out the opportunity cost and the advantages of this perspective.

The creation of a linear model that can illustrate the process and relate the variables can lead to the creation of a decision support tool that can be used to evaluate the projects from the very first steps.

Structure

Structure of the research process

Feasibility
Definition of parameters in general
Study of the parameters to develop and improve
Analysis of the differences
Project planning with time and cost estimates
Analysis of the differences of the project planning

Data collection method

Selecting a methodology for data collection and data processing

The data collection method is embedded within the complete process.

Data collection

Collecting and selecting relevant data

After every stage in the design process, there will be a “report” that will be integrated in the research. This report will reflect input data, process, results and conclusions for each stage. This data will be used for the research report.

Literature

The literature (theories or research data) to be used in the research[7, 12-20]

1. (AEI), A.E.I. WHAT IS ARCHITECTURAL ENGINEERING? [cited 2008 12-2008]; Available from: www.aeinstitute.org.

2. Hendrickson, C. Project Management for Construction Version 2.2. 2008 [cited 2008 November]; Available from: http://pmbook.ce.cmu.edu/.

3. Christina J. Hopfe, C.S.J.H.a.P.D.W., CONSIDERATIONS REDARDING DECISION SUPPORT TOOLS FOR CONCEPTUAL BUILDING DESIGN, in Joint International Conference on Computing and Decision Making in Civil and Building Engineering. 2006: Montréal, Canada.

4. Managing as Designing. Standford Business Books, ed. R.B.a.F. Collopy. 2004, Stanford California: Stanford Univeristy Press.

5. PMI, A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge. Third Edition ed. 2004: American National Standard.

6. Gerritse, K., Controlling Cost and Quality. 2008, Delft: VSSD.

7. Jonge, H.d., Vastgoed in cijfers, ed. F.d.B. TU Delft. 2002, Delft: TU Delft.

8. Lootsma, B., INTELLIGENT REGIONS, in Topos. 2008: Germany.

9. Vink, A.J.v.d.B.a.B.L., Randstad Holland towards 2040 - perspectives from national government, in 44th ISOCARP Congress, VROM, Editor. 2008.

10. Nilsson, K. PLUREL: Peri-urban Land Use Relationships. 2008 [cited 2008 Dec. 2008]; Available from: http://www.plurel.net/.

11. Sorensen, A., Subcentres and Satellite Cities: Tokyo’s 20th Century Experience of Planned Polycentrism. International Planning Studies,, 2001. 6(1): p. 9-32.

12. Guallard, M.G.a.V. SocióPolis. 2006 [cited 2008 December]; Available from: http://www.sociopolis.net/web/sociopolis.php.

13. Christina J. Hopfe, C.S., Gülsu Ulukavak Harputlugil, and P.D.W. Jan Hensen. EXPLORATION OF THE USE OF BUILDING PERFORMANCE SIMULATION FOR CONCEPTUAL DESIGN. in IBPSA-NVL Conference. 2005. Netherlands.

14. Gülsu Ulukavak Harputlugil, C.J.H., Christian Struck, and J. Hensen, RELATION BETWEEN DESIGN REQUIREMENTS AND BUILDING PERFORMANCE SIMULATION, in 1st International CIB Endorsed METU Postgraduate Conference

Built Environment & Information Technologies. 2006: Ankara.

15. Voorden, P.d.W.a.M.v.d., COMPUTATIONAL SUPPORT FOR THE SELECTION OF ENERGY SAVING BUILDING COMPONENTS, in Eighth International IBPSA Conference. 2003: Eindhoven, Netherlands.

16. Key Market Indicators The Netherlands, in Pulse. 2008, Jones Lang LaSalle.

17. Sebastian, R., Managing Collaborative Design, in Architecture. 2007, Technische Universiteit Delft,: Delft. p. 204.

18. Chris Couch, C.F., Susan Percy, Urban Regeneration in Europe. Real State Issues. 2003, Liverpool: Blackwell Publishing.

19. Castells, M., The Mobile Communication Society. 2004, University of Southern California: Los Angeles.

20. Certeau, M.d., The Practice of Everyday Life 2002, California: University of California Press.

21. Construction Project Management Handbook, ed. F.T. Administration. 2006, USA.

Theoretical framework

Embedding the research in a theoretical framework

The understanding of the decision support tools as a fundamental part in the project life cycle.

Design and construction management / Project Management

During the complete process, the project management integrates all the stages, and in the traditional architectonic design seeks for equilibrium in the PM constraints (Turner, 1999): cost, scope and time; and quality being a product of this combination. The project manager is an actor in the design process that establishes design criteria and assesses and address project risks; and also develops engineering criteria, among other activities in the complete project cycle.[21]

The variations in this might result from circumstances in the development of the project. In the Architectural Engineering Design Process, however, the scope definition of the project influences the trade-offs in the functions for the entire project.

Working with the project constraints as design drivers will allow analyze and reflect the decisions in the design process.

Design Management:

A Design Manager makes rational choices and generates alternatives based on tools such as:

• Economic analysis

• Risk assessment

• Multiple criteria decision making

• Simulation

• Time value of money

Precedent design tools and decision assessment systems

SPeAR (Sustainable Project Appraisal Routine)

Developed by the UK-based engineering firm ARUP, The SPeAR® (Sustainable Project Appraisal Routine) framework presents a graphically appealing, universally verifiable and yet still flexible method to evaluate design projects at varying scales (product, building, campus, community, etc.)

The key elements of SPeAR® assessment categories are:

· Environmental Protection

· Social Equity

· Economic Viability

· Efficient Use of Natural Resources.

The information generated by the appraisal intends to push a rigorous and robust, yet also intuitive and flexible snapshot of sustainability. As such the information generated by the appraisal prompts innovative thinking and informs decision-making at all stages of design and development.

Building Performance Simulation BPS
Collaborative design
Project Management in Construction

Research methodology

A description of the methodology to be used in the research

After the feasibility study the project will be divided in two parts, one to be developed from the AE approach by performing analysis in the structural part mainly, and the other in the traditional architectonic design process. After developing both, the results will be analyzed and processed.

Conclusions

Drawing conclusions / making decisions

The implementation of the BPS within the design process sets other kinds (different from the traditional) of constraints that conditions the results of the process. If the parameters that interact in all process and have a greater impact are identified since the very early stages of the design process, and controlled with criteria aligned with the project; the result has an added value as a successful project.

Recommendations

Recommendations from the research for the design

Time plan

The phasing of the final project in a timetable of 42 weeks, linked to the prescribed evaluation points (P1 to P5); this timetable states when the various activities will be performed

Table of Content

Tentative table of content of the research thesis

1. Introduction

1.1. Architecture Design

1.2. Architectural Engineering Design

2. Traditional process in Architectural Design

2.1. Scope definition

2.2. Interaction Engineering-Architecture

3. Architectural Engineering Design Process

3.1. Risk Analysis

3.2. Scope definition

3.3. Process

3.4. Tools

4. Parameters, variables and constraints

5. Discussion

6. A proposed model to implement in the AE design process

7. Conclusions

8. Bibliography

AE

Test 2

volumes and models

Format Curriculum (leerplan) P2

More master plans...

Master plan

Urban Plan

Diagrams 4