w-2

dataDesign
ATTACHED FILE(S)

School of Architecture, Building and Civil Engineering
Assessment Brief
1

Module Code: 21CVP324
Module Name: Design Management

Assessment Title:

Conceptual Design Management and Design Planning
Assessment Type: Report Other:
Oral Presentation
Component (TBC)
Date Due:

Tuesday
Monday 23rd May
2022 at 1000
Date Returned:

Monday 13th June
2022
Method of
Submission
Virtual only Feedback
delivery:
E-mail
Weighting: 50% Other:
Individual or
Group:
Group
Word Length OtherOther: 35 sides of A4 in total (plus
individual components and A3
attachments)
Total number of hours expected to the spent on
assignment:
45

Assessment aims:
The aim of this coursework is to understand how to manage the building design process by
playing the role of a team of design management consultants critiquing a conceptual design
proposal (RIBA:Stage 2: Concept Design) in response to a fictional brief.
Your group is then required to develop a plan for undertaking the subsequent schematic design of
your proposed building, based on the Analytical Design Planning Technique.As part of this task,
your team should undertake the following:
1. Produce a model of the schematic design process that represents the main design activities
associated with the building elements (and spaces they create) and information flows between
them. (Not submitted or directly assessed.)
2. Carry-out a dependency structure matrix (DSM) analysis of the model to determine a suitable
design sequence and the necessary decisions which must be made. (Not submitted or directly
assessed.)
3. Propose a design plan for undertaking this design phase. (Not submitted or directly assessed.)

School of Architecture, Building and Civil Engineering
Assessment Brief
2

Task Description:
You need to carry out the following:
1. Design Critique.A design brief is provided, along with a sketchy RIBA Stage 2 design
proposal (preliminary drawings, specification and a client cost plan).As a team, you need to
prepare a RIBA Stage 2 report, in which you review the design and propose revisions before
Stage 2 is signed off.
1.1. Critique the integration between the architectural design and other design aspects and
propose revisions to the architectural proposal
1.2. Critique the integration between the structural design and other design aspects and
propose revisions to the structural proposal
1.3. Critique the integration between the building services design and other design aspects and
propose revisions to the building services proposal
1.4. Critique the constructability of the overall proposal and propose revisions to the design and
construction methods.

2. Design Management Strategy (Individual).As an individual, set out a design management
strategy for subsequent design stages.Each individual to submit a one-page strategy with
individual name clearly marked, and all individual reports appended to the group report.

3. Design Economics, Cost Planning, Value Engineering.The design proposal provided
includes an elemental cost plan for the proposed building.This represents the understanding
of cost distributions at the start of the conceptual design process.The project is now at the
end of the conceptual design process and requires an updated cost plan to reflect the current
design solution. Perform the following tasks.
3.1. Design Economics component: Use design economics principles to identify one building
element that, in your opinion, will benefit from value engineering (design optimisation).
Write a short explanation (c. 500 words) of how you used Design Economics principles to
focus your attention when reviewing the proposed design.
3.2. Value Engineering component:
3.2.1. Use function analysis and other relevant value engineering methods to analyse the
design of the one building element selected in §3.1 above.Use the understanding of
required functionality that you develop to inform the proposition of an alternative design
solution (this may be less expensive or more functional than the current proposal).
3.2.2. Develop the alternative design solution proposed in §3.2.1 above.This design
revision is to be documented under the “architectural/structural/building-services
critique” section of your report.It will not receive marks in this part of this assessment,
but will receive marks elsewhere.For the submission, submit as many analytical
diagrams, lists and/or tables as required to illustrate how you performed this analysis
and its content.Also submit a short description (c. 300 words) explaining how you
produced the analysis: the sequence in which each part was performed, and so on.
An explanation of the principles of these methods is not required, nor is an explanation
of why they were used.A short description of how they were used, and the results, is
however required.
3.3. Cost Planning component: Using one suitably rebased cost analysis (sourced from the
BCIS Online using the website link provided on Learn), update the elemental cost plan

School of Architecture, Building and Civil Engineering
Assessment Brief
3

provided to represent the current design proposal.When updating the cost plan, ensure
that you rebase all figures for: time, location, size, specification, and any other aspects of
the design, specification or construction context that you think will affect the costs.
3.3.1. Submit an updated elemental cost plan and outline specification in the NRM1 format.
3.3.2. Submit a copy of the cost analysis that has informed your analysis and cost plan
revisions.
3.3.3. Submit all supporting computations performed.This must contain sufficient notes
and annotations explaining the logic of these various calculations.

4. Design planning:
4.1. Design process modelling.
You will be given a generic WBS model in tabular form.Review the generic model table
and cross reference activities to the design proposal using reference numbers. Some
adjustments will be needed to the generic model to reflect our particular building. These
could simply be some changes in terminology, but also where elements or information
flows are missing. Annotate your printout clearly to indicate additions, d deletions or
revisions. Where you add a task, you must also include relevant information flows.
Note that the nature of each information dependency can be indicated as follows:
1. Important (critical). If an assumption is made about this information (such as an estimate of a load or location of an
element in the building) you will have to go back and check that assumption, and definitely do some redesign.
2. Nice to have (non-critical). Assumptions can be made about this information and although you might expect to go
back and check that assumption, you would not expect to do any redesign.
3. Assumed (non-critical). Normally an Important dependency where an assumption has been agreed, but can also
be a Nice-to-have where an assumption has been agreed.

Assumptions can be made in such a way that they do not have to lead to redesign e.g. estimates
can include a margin for error, or be fixed. If this is done, an extra cost is added to the project
through over-design or a loss of design flexibility.Where this cost or loss is unacceptable, the
assumption should not be applied and the dependency should remain Important.These trade-offs
will be considered when you are undertaking the next stage of DSM analysis.
4.2. Dependency structure matrix (DSM) analysis (Not submitted or directly assessed.)
4.2.1. You will be given a group account to access the Adept Flow online platform, in which
the generic WBS model is embedded.Log in to the system as a group and work
through the tutorial provided, without saving your work.
4.2.2. Now restart your work using the fresh generic model and edit the model online to
introduce the changes you identified in 4.1 above.
4.2.3. View and print the initial un-optimized matrix by taking a screenshot(s) and pasting it
in to an MS Word document. Then run the optimisation function to optimise the activity
order. Capture a screenshot of the resulting matrix.Inspect the result and make notes
of your observations (e.g. what you did and didn’t expect).
4.2.4. You will see that the result contains a relatively large block or blocks of iterative
activity.Your main task in this stage is to declassify some less critical dependencies
(1 to 2/3, or 2 to 3) in order to get a manageable design solution. Keep a record of
these de-classifications and your logic/justification in the software and hand-written
notes and screen-print the revised matrix after each one.Go through a series of

School of Architecture, Building and Civil Engineering
Assessment Brief
4

declassification steps until you are happy the process has been broken down to a
manageable level.Remember that although the software’s tearing advice may offer
effective de-classifications, not all of these will be acceptable; you must use your
judgement.Also record declassifications you rejected and the reasoning.
4.2.5. Finally in this stage you should create a scenario anticipating a change to the
optimised sequence of tasks. Then simulate this change by moving a task in the DSM
to another point (but not inside a block). See what effect this has and capture a
screenshot. Then identify what decisions (and associated declassifications) must be
made to resolve the impact (of creating a larger or new block). Capture your rationale.
4.3. Scheduling (Not submitted or directly assessed.)
When you have completed your optimisation and declassification you should produce a design
schedule (bar chart). You can do this by selecting Gantt form the left-hand menu.(You will
need to enter realistic estimates for durations for each task.)
You should endeavour to consider the task order within the blocks and be certain to augment
the design tasks with appropriate design management tasks:
4.4. Individual Critical appraisal.(Only assessed work from task 4 and subtasks.) As an
individual, set out an evidence-based appraisal of using ADePT in design management
based upon your learning from related parts of the module, the coursework and personal
experiences. Each individual should submit a two-age report appended to the group report.
You might consider: the need for improved management of design, and how new methods
may (or may not) help; the challenges of modelling design effectively; the impact on
decision making; and/or any other aspect you feel appropriate. More challenging and
critical considerations should lead to higher marks.This can be a scholarly critical
appraisal, with references.

Assessment Criteria:
Architectural critique and revisions 15%
Structural critique and revisions
Building Services critique and revisions
Constructability critique and revisions
Design Economics Analysis0F1 5%
Value Engineering1F2 10%
Cost Planning2F3 10%

1 Appropriate rules of thumb have been applied appropriately to the design.
2 The tools and techniques adopted are capable of rigorously structuring the analysis of functionality and have been
used to provide a clear definition of the functionality required of the design solution. The analysis does not describe
what the design is and only describes what it must do, represented by functionality.The results of the analysis are
appropriate to the nature of the building element and its proposed concept design solution.The analysis is sufficiently
detailed to allow a designer to develop an alternative solution.Recall that marks for the design content of the
proposed revisions is assessed elsewhere (architectural/structural/building-services critique).

School of Architecture, Building and Civil Engineering
Assessment Brief
5

Individual Design Management Strategy 10%
ind.)
Individual Critical Appraisal: Quality of insights and depth of knowledge and understanding,
critique of learning experience, specific conclusions
50%
(ind.)

The student team presentations in Week 11 will be assessed separately, as follows:
• Oral delivery40%
• Team salesmanship 30%
• Team rapport with audience (client)30%
The group mark (as broken down above, without the 10% + 50% individual components of the
report) will be modified by a Web-PA assessment with a weight of 50%.The Web-PA assessment
categories will be: responsiveness to communications, completing fair share of work and
proposing original design ideas.
Submission Details:
• The report must be submitted as a single PDF document for the whole group with the individual
components appended to the group component by Monday 23rd May 2022 at 1000.
• You must ensure you undertake your WebPA peer assessment between 0900 on 24th May and
09000 on 31stMay 2022.
• Feedback will be provided within three weeks from submission.

3 The elemental cost plan has been updated as required to reflect the characteristics of the proposed design.The
analysis follows the RICS New Rules of Measurement (NRM1).All supporting calculations (rebasing and other
adjustments for specification, size, and so forth) are logical and are clearly explained and illustrated.The cost
analysis used to inform the analysis was appropriate.

School of Architecture, Building and Civil Engineering
Assessment Brief
1

Module Code: 21CVP324
Module Name: Design Management

Assessment Title:

Conceptual Design Management and Design Planning
Assessment Type: Report Other:
Oral Presentation
Component (TBC)
Date Due:

Tuesday
Monday 23rd May
2022 at 1000
Date Returned:

Monday 13th June
2022
Method of
Submission
Virtual only Feedback
delivery:
E-mail
Weighting: 50% Other:
Individual or
Group:
Group
Word Length OtherOther: 35 sides of A4 in total (plus
individual components and A3
attachments)
Total number of hours expected to the spent on
assignment:
45

Assessment aims:
The aim of this coursework is to understand how to manage the building design process by
playing the role of a team of design management consultants critiquing a conceptual design
proposal (RIBA:Stage 2: Concept Design) in response to a fictional brief.
Your group is then required to develop a plan for undertaking the subsequent schematic design of
your proposed building, based on the Analytical Design Planning Technique.As part of this task,
your team should undertake the following:
1. Produce a model of the schematic design process that represents the main design activities
associated with the building elements (and spaces they create) and information flows between
them. (Not submitted or directly assessed.)
2. Carry-out a dependency structure matrix (DSM) analysis of the model to determine a suitable
design sequence and the necessary decisions which must be made. (Not submitted or directly
assessed.)
3. Propose a design plan for undertaking this design phase. (Not submitted or directly assessed.)

School of Architecture, Building and Civil Engineering
Assessment Brief
2

Task Description:
You need to carry out the following:
1. Design Critique.A design brief is provided, along with a sketchy RIBA Stage 2 design
proposal (preliminary drawings, specification and a client cost plan).As a team, you need to
prepare a RIBA Stage 2 report, in which you review the design and propose revisions before
Stage 2 is signed off.
1.1. Critique the integration between the architectural design and other design aspects and
propose revisions to the architectural proposal
1.2. Critique the integration between the structural design and other design aspects and
propose revisions to the structural proposal
1.3. Critique the integration between the building services design and other design aspects and
propose revisions to the building services proposal
1.4. Critique the constructability of the overall proposal and propose revisions to the design and
construction methods.

2. Design Management Strategy (Individual).As an individual, set out a design management
strategy for subsequent design stages.Each individual to submit a one-page strategy with
individual name clearly marked, and all individual reports appended to the group report.

3. Design Economics, Cost Planning, Value Engineering.The design proposal provided
includes an elemental cost plan for the proposed building.This represents the understanding
of cost distributions at the start of the conceptual design process.The project is now at the
end of the conceptual design process and requires an updated cost plan to reflect the current
design solution. Perform the following tasks.
3.1. Design Economics component: Use design economics principles to identify one building
element that, in your opinion, will benefit from value engineering (design optimisation).
Write a short explanation (c. 500 words) of how you used Design Economics principles to
focus your attention when reviewing the proposed design.
3.2. Value Engineering component:
3.2.1. Use function analysis and other relevant value engineering methods to analyse the
design of the one building element selected in §3.1 above.Use the understanding of
required functionality that you develop to inform the proposition of an alternative design
solution (this may be less expensive or more functional than the current proposal).
3.2.2. Develop the alternative design solution proposed in §3.2.1 above.This design
revision is to be documented under the “architectural/structural/building-services
critique” section of your report.It will not receive marks in this part of this assessment,
but will receive marks elsewhere.For the submission, submit as many analytical
diagrams, lists and/or tables as required to illustrate how you performed this analysis
and its content.Also submit a short description (c. 300 words) explaining how you
produced the analysis: the sequence in which each part was performed, and so on.
An explanation of the principles of these methods is not required, nor is an explanation
of why they were used.A short description of how they were used, and the results, is
however required.
3.3. Cost Planning component: Using one suitably rebased cost analysis (sourced from the
BCIS Online using the website link provided on Learn), update the elemental cost plan

School of Architecture, Building and Civil Engineering
Assessment Brief
3

provided to represent the current design proposal.When updating the cost plan, ensure
that you rebase all figures for: time, location, size, specification, and any other aspects of
the design, specification or construction context that you think will affect the costs.
3.3.1. Submit an updated elemental cost plan and outline specification in the NRM1 format.
3.3.2. Submit a copy of the cost analysis that has informed your analysis and cost plan
revisions.
3.3.3. Submit all supporting computations performed.This must contain sufficient notes
and annotations explaining the logic of these various calculations.

4. Design planning:
4.1. Design process modelling.
You will be given a generic WBS model in tabular form.Review the generic model table
and cross reference activities to the design proposal using reference numbers. Some
adjustments will be needed to the generic model to reflect our particular building. These
could simply be some changes in terminology, but also where elements or information
flows are missing. Annotate your printout clearly to indicate additions, d deletions or
revisions. Where you add a task, you must also include relevant information flows.
Note that the nature of each information dependency can be indicated as follows:
1. Important (critical). If an assumption is made about this information (such as an estimate of a load or location of an
element in the building) you will have to go back and check that assumption, and definitely do some redesign.
2. Nice to have (non-critical). Assumptions can be made about this information and although you might expect to go
back and check that assumption, you would not expect to do any redesign.
3. Assumed (non-critical). Normally an Important dependency where an assumption has been agreed, but can also
be a Nice-to-have where an assumption has been agreed.

Assumptions can be made in such a way that they do not have to lead to redesign e.g. estimates
can include a margin for error, or be fixed. If this is done, an extra cost is added to the project
through over-design or a loss of design flexibility.Where this cost or loss is unacceptable, the
assumption should not be applied and the dependency should remain Important.These trade-offs
will be considered when you are undertaking the next stage of DSM analysis.
4.2. Dependency structure matrix (DSM) analysis (Not submitted or directly assessed.)
4.2.1. You will be given a group account to access the Adept Flow online platform, in which
the generic WBS model is embedded.Log in to the system as a group and work
through the tutorial provided, without saving your work.
4.2.2. Now restart your work using the fresh generic model and edit the model online to
introduce the changes you identified in 4.1 above.
4.2.3. View and print the initial un-optimized matrix by taking a screenshot(s) and pasting it
in to an MS Word document. Then run the optimisation function to optimise the activity
order. Capture a screenshot of the resulting matrix.Inspect the result and make notes
of your observations (e.g. what you did and didn’t expect).
4.2.4. You will see that the result contains a relatively large block or blocks of iterative
activity.Your main task in this stage is to declassify some less critical dependencies
(1 to 2/3, or 2 to 3) in order to get a manageable design solution. Keep a record of
these de-classifications and your logic/justification in the software and hand-written
notes and screen-print the revised matrix after each one.Go through a series of

School of Architecture, Building and Civil Engineering
Assessment Brief
4

declassification steps until you are happy the process has been broken down to a
manageable level.Remember that although the software’s tearing advice may offer
effective de-classifications, not all of these will be acceptable; you must use your
judgement.Also record declassifications you rejected and the reasoning.
4.2.5. Finally in this stage you should create a scenario anticipating a change to the
optimised sequence of tasks. Then simulate this change by moving a task in the DSM
to another point (but not inside a block). See what effect this has and capture a
screenshot. Then identify what decisions (and associated declassifications) must be
made to resolve the impact (of creating a larger or new block). Capture your rationale.
4.3. Scheduling (Not submitted or directly assessed.)
When you have completed your optimisation and declassification you should produce a design
schedule (bar chart). You can do this by selecting Gantt form the left-hand menu.(You will
need to enter realistic estimates for durations for each task.)
You should endeavour to consider the task order within the blocks and be certain to augment
the design tasks with appropriate design management tasks:
4.4. Individual Critical appraisal.(Only assessed work from task 4 and subtasks.) As an
individual, set out an evidence-based appraisal of using ADePT in design management
based upon your learning from related parts of the module, the coursework and personal
experiences. Each individual should submit a two-age report appended to the group report.
You might consider: the need for improved management of design, and how new methods
may (or may not) help; the challenges of modelling design effectively; the impact on
decision making; and/or any other aspect you feel appropriate. More challenging and
critical considerations should lead to higher marks.This can be a scholarly critical
appraisal, with references.

Assessment Criteria:
Architectural critique and revisions 15%
Structural critique and revisions
Building Services critique and revisions
Constructability critique and revisions
Design Economics Analysis0F1 5%
Value Engineering1F2 10%
Cost Planning2F3 10%

1 Appropriate rules of thumb have been applied appropriately to the design.
2 The tools and techniques adopted are capable of rigorously structuring the analysis of functionality and have been
used to provide a clear definition of the functionality required of the design solution. The analysis does not describe
what the design is and only describes what it must do, represented by functionality.The results of the analysis are
appropriate to the nature of the building element and its proposed concept design solution.The analysis is sufficiently
detailed to allow a designer to develop an alternative solution.Recall that marks for the design content of the
proposed revisions is assessed elsewhere (architectural/structural/building-services critique).

School of Architecture, Building and Civil Engineering
Assessment Brief
5

Individual Design Management Strategy 10%
ind.)
Individual Critical Appraisal: Quality of insights and depth of knowledge and understanding,
critique of learning experience, specific conclusions
50%
(ind.)

The student team presentations in Week 11 will be assessed separately, as follows:
• Oral delivery40%
• Team salesmanship 30%
• Team rapport with audience (client)30%
The group mark (as broken down above, without the 10% + 50% individual components of the
report) will be modified by a Web-PA assessment with a weight of 50%.The Web-PA assessment
categories will be: responsiveness to communications, completing fair share of work and
proposing original design ideas.
Submission Details:
• The report must be submitted as a single PDF document for the whole group with the individual
components appended to the group component by Monday 23rd May 2022 at 1000.
• You must ensure you undertake your WebPA peer assessment between 0900 on 24th May and
09000 on 31stMay 2022.
• Feedback will be provided within three weeks from submission.

3 The elemental cost plan has been updated as required to reflect the characteristics of the proposed design.The
analysis follows the RICS New Rules of Measurement (NRM1).All supporting calculations (rebasing and other
adjustments for specification, size, and so forth) are logical and are clearly explained and illustrated.The cost
analysis used to inform the analysis was appropriate.
MSc Student Centre Cost Plan
ElementPercentage
(%)
Total cost of
element (£)
£ per
m2
1 Substructure 7.4 58816.25 88.45
2A Frame 8.3 65695.85
2B Upper Floors 2.5 19787.91
2C Roof 1.2 9498.20
2D Stairs 2.6 20579.42
2E External Walls 5.2 41158.85
2F External Windows and Doors 2.7 21370.93
2G Internal Walls and Partitions 6.6 52240.07
2H Internal Doors 1.8 14247.29
2 Superstructure 30.9 244578.53 367.79
3A Wall Finishes 7.8 61934.76
3B Floor Finishes 2.4 19056.85
3C Ceiling Finishes 1.69 13419.20
3 Finishes 11.89 94410.8 141.52
4 Fittings and furnishings 14.64 115865.47 174.23
5A Sanitary Appliances
5B Services Equipment
5C Disposal Installations
5D Water Installations 1.1 8705.91
5E Heat Source (Costs included in 5F) 2.1 16620.37
5F Space Heating and Air Conditioning
(Costs include other elements)
1.5 11871.69
5G Ventilating Systems 1.3 10288.80
5H Electrical Installations 0.8 6331.57
5I Fuel Installations (Costs included in
5F)
1.3 10288.80
5J Lift and Conveyor Installations 1.1 8705.91
5K Fire and Lightning Protection
5L Communications and Security
Installations
2.1 16620.37
5M Special Installations
5N Builder’s Work in Connection 0.86 6806.44

5O Management of the Commissioning
of Services

5 Services 12.16 96239.84 144.72
Building Sub-total 77.01 609610.89 916.71
6 External works 13.16 104212.15 156.71
7 Preliminaries 8.6 68057.37 102.34
8 Contingencies 1.23 9737.5 14.64
Total (less Design Fees) 100 791617.91 1190.4

Proposed extension of the CBE for MSc construction students: Sir Barry Gibb
Building
1
Proposed MSc Construction
Student Centre
Sir Barry Gibb Building
TeamX
DESIGN TASKS
• Tasks split
according to
discipline
• Format agreed
by consensus
• Regular Design
Meetings
3/7/2018Design Management 2
Proposed extension of the CBE for MSc construction students: Sir Barry Gibb
Building
2
3/7/2018DesignManagement 3
A9
Architectural
Design
Proposed extension of the CBE for MSc construction students: Sir Barry Gibb
Building
3
SITE AND SURROUNDINGS
3/7/2018Design Management 5
CONCEPTUAL DESIGN
Alternatives for the client
• Cladding to match with the Sir Gibb building or different design
• Terrace in first floor
• Skywalk connecting the new building with Sir Gibb building
• Quiet study areas – individual rooms or open areas
• Exposed structure and services
• Movable partitions or static walls
• Green Roof
O
P
T
IO
N
1
O
P
T
IO
N
2
O
P
T
IO
N
3
3/7/2018Design Management 6
Proposed extension of the CBE for MSc construction students: Sir Barry Gibb
Building
4
DESIGN EVOLUTION
Single Floor Building G+1 Floor Building with initial areas Integration of architectural and structural
concepts / space distribution
3/7/2018Design Management 7
FLOOR PLAN # 1
3/7/2018Design Management 8
N
Proposed extension of the CBE for MSc construction students: Sir Barry Gibb
Building
5
FLOOR PLAN # 2
3/7/2018Design Management 9
N
ELEVATION &
SECTIONS
3/7/2018Design Management 10
Proposed extension of the CBE for MSc construction students: Sir Barry Gibb
Building
6
Structural Design
STRUCTURAL CHOICES
FRAMED / UNFRAMED
• Flexibility / Change in usage
• More Floor Space
• Lighter Building
• Faster erection
TYPE OF MATERIALS
• Speed of erection
• Cost/economics
• Fire Protection
• Availability
• Stiffness
• Ability to
accommodate
movement
• Durability
• Disposal
• Size and nature of
site
• Need for temporary
work
• Service integration
TARGET: Handover before the academic year
starts Earlier ROI
3/7/2018Design Management 12
Proposed extension of the CBE for MSc construction students: Sir Barry Gibb
Building
7
STRUCTURAL MATERIALS
BLDG 1: STEEL COMPOSITE BEAMS AND SLAB FRAME PROGRAMME
Fast Track Project Prefab / Composite Deck
Table of key costs for Building 1 (Q4, 2015)
Cost in London Steel Composite Steel + Precast
Concrete Slabs
Reinforced Concrete
Flat Slab
Post Tensioned Flat
Slab
Frame and Upper
Floors
£171/sqm GIFA £187/sqm GIFA £170/sqm GIFA £198/sqm GIFA
BLDG 1: STEEL COMPOSITE BEAMS AND PRECAST CONCRETE SLAB
FRAME PROGRAMME
3/7/2018Design Management 13
FLOORS
PRECAST SLABS
• Advantages
• Fireproof per se
• Better quality
• No need temporary support
• (Hollowcore cheaper than composite?)
• Disadvantages
• Long fabrication period?
• Best suited for structures that are totally
regular and repetitive in nature
• Lifting equipment
CONCRETE SLABS
• Advantages
• Faster (up to 400m2/day?)
• Flexible to changes in scope
• Constructability
• Disadvantages
• Fireproofing required?
• Secondary beams
3/7/2018Design Management 14
Proposed extension of the CBE for MSc construction students: Sir Barry Gibb
Building
8
FLOORS: PREFAB / COMPOSITE SLAB
3/7/2018Design Management 15
STRUCTURAL SYSTEM
3/7/2018Design Management 16
Proposed extension of the CBE for MSc construction students: Sir Barry Gibb
Building
9
STRUCTURAL SYSTEM CONT.
3/7/2018Design Management 17
FOUNDATION
Bearing stress +‐ 110 kN/m2 from a depth of ‐1.4 m
Ground water level
Structural design: Structural steel frame with
combined slabs.
Load analysis and Detail of Spread Footing:
Services to be connected to existent lines;
Water, drainages, gas,
voice/data/telephone, HV cable.
Spread Foundations: 2.5m x 2.5m x 0.7m
3/7/2018Design Management 18
Proposed extension of the CBE for MSc construction students: Sir Barry Gibb
Building
10
EMPHASIS ON COORDINATION ISSUES
• Thermal Insulation (SE with MEP)
• Green roof insulation and access (All
with MEP)
• Services Shaft positioning (All with
MEP)
• Floor footprint (SE with MEP)
• Skywalk
3/7/2018Design Management 19
BuildingServices
Proposed extension of the CBE for MSc construction students: Sir Barry Gibb
Building
11
BUILDING SERVICES PROPOSAL
HVAC system embedded with BMS.
Type: Hybrid (Mechanical plus Natural ventilation)
• Client demands intelligent/efficient & sustainable building.
• Natural ventilation not sufficient
• Only Mechanical too expensive.
• Building divided into many compartments/divisions, like communal and private
areas.
3/7/2018Design Management 21
WORKING OF
HVAC SYSTEM
BMS Embedded
3/7/2018Design Management 22
Proposed extension of the CBE for MSc construction students: Sir Barry Gibb
Building
12
INTELLIGENT
BUILDING
MANAGEMENT
SYSTEMS
3/7/2018Design Management 23
PRELIMITARIES
Elementalcosts Cost/M2(£) Area(M2) TotalCost(£) Proportion(%)
Scaffolding 4.06 750.00 3045.00 0.38
Excavatetopsoil 30.66 60.00 1839.60 0.23
Excavatereinforcedsurfaceconcrete 11.27 375.00 4226.25 0.53
Temporaryfencing 10.59 80.00 847.20 0.11
Temporaryproject 241.48 240.00 57955.20 7.32
Framedgates 36.03 3.00 144.12 0.02
PRELIMINARIES 102.34 665.00 68057.37 8.60
Proposed extension of the CBE for MSc construction students: Sir Barry Gibb
Building
13
TOTAL COST
Element Percentage(%) Totalcostofelement(£) £ perm2
Substructure 7.43 58816.25 88.45
Superstructure 30.90 244578.53 367.79
Internalfinish 11.89 94410.80 141.52
Fittingsandfurnishings 14.64 115865.47 174.23
Services 12.16 96239.84 144.72
BuildingSub‐total 77.01 609610.89 916.71
Externalworks 13.16 104212.15 156.71
Preliminaries 8.60 68057.37 102.34
Contingencies 1.23 9737.50 14.64
Total 100.00 791617.91 1190.40

Place your order
(550 words)

Approximate price: $22

Calculate the price of your order

550 words
We'll send you the first draft for approval by September 11, 2018 at 10:52 AM
Total price:
$26
The price is based on these factors:
Academic level
Number of pages
Urgency
Basic features
  • Free title page and bibliography
  • Unlimited revisions
  • Plagiarism-free guarantee
  • Money-back guarantee
  • 24/7 support
On-demand options
  • Writer’s samples
  • Part-by-part delivery
  • Overnight delivery
  • Copies of used sources
  • Expert Proofreading
Paper format
  • 275 words per page
  • 12 pt Arial/Times New Roman
  • Double line spacing
  • Any citation style (APA, MLA, Chicago/Turabian, Harvard)

Our guarantees

Delivering a high-quality product at a reasonable price is not enough anymore.
That’s why we have developed 5 beneficial guarantees that will make your experience with our service enjoyable, easy, and safe.

Money-back guarantee

You have to be 100% sure of the quality of your product to give a money-back guarantee. This describes us perfectly. Make sure that this guarantee is totally transparent.

Read more

Zero-plagiarism guarantee

Each paper is composed from scratch, according to your instructions. It is then checked by our plagiarism-detection software. There is no gap where plagiarism could squeeze in.

Read more

Free-revision policy

Thanks to our free revisions, there is no way for you to be unsatisfied. We will work on your paper until you are completely happy with the result.

Read more

Privacy policy

Your email is safe, as we store it according to international data protection rules. Your bank details are secure, as we use only reliable payment systems.

Read more

Fair-cooperation guarantee

By sending us your money, you buy the service we provide. Check out our terms and conditions if you prefer business talks to be laid out in official language.

Read more