DFAB HOUSE: implications of a building-scale demonstrator for adoption of digital fabrication in AEC

References

• Adel, A. (2020). Computational Design for Cooperative Robotic Assembly of Nonstandard Timber Frame Buildings.
   Google Scholar
• Aghaei-Meibodi, M., Jipa, A., Giesecke, R., Shammas, D., Bernhard, M., Leschok, M., Graser, K., & Dillenburger, B. (2018). Smart Slab: Computational Design and Digital Fabrication of a Lightweight Concrete Slab. ACADIA 2018: Re/Calibration: On Imprecision and Infidelity.
   Google Scholar
• Agustí-Juan, I., Jipa, A., and Habert, G., 2018. Environmental assessment of multi-functional building elements constructed with digital fabrication techniques. International journal of life cycle assessment, 24, 1027–1039. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-018-1563-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Agustí-Juan, I., Jipa, A., and Habert, G., 2019. Environmental assessment of multi-functional building elements constructed with digital fabrication techniques. The international journal of life cycle assessment, 24 (6), 1027–1039.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Agustí-Juan, I., et al., 2017. Potential benefits of digital fabrication for complex structures: Environmental assessment of a robotically fabricated concrete wall. Journal of cleaner production, 154, 330–340.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Apolinarska, A. A., et al., 2019., The sequential roof. In A. Menges, T. Schwinn, and O. D. Krieg eds. Advancing wood architecture. Abingdon: Taylor and Francis.
   Google Scholar
• Bharadwaj, A., et al., 2020. Work design, technology, and artificial intelligence: keeping humans at the center of work. Academy of Management Annual Meeting Proceedings, 2020(1), 12748.
   Google Scholar
• Birkinshaw, J., and Gibson, C., 2004. Building ambidexterity into an organization. MIT sloan management review, 45 (4), 47–55.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blomquist, T., et al., 2010. Project-as-practice: in search of project management research that matters. Project management journal, 41 (1), 5–16,
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bock, T., 2015. The future of construction automation: technological disruption and the upcoming ubiquity of robotics. Automation in construction, 59, 113–121.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bonnard, R., Mognol, P., and Hascoët, J.Y., 2010. A new digital chain for additive manufacturing processes. Virtual and physical prototyping, 5 (2), 75–88.
   Google Scholar
• Brown, J.S., and Duguid, P., 2001. Knowledge and organization: a social-practice perspective. Organization science, 12 (2), 198–213.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Caneparo, L., 2014. Digital fabricationin architecture, engineering and construction. Springer Science and Business Media. [AQ]
   Google Scholar
• Cao, J., et al., 2021. Cross-phase product configurator for modular buildings using kit-of-parts. Automation in construction, 123, 103437.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen, Q., García de Soto, B., and Adey, B.T., 2018. Construction automation: research areas, industry concerns and suggestions for advancement. Automation in construction, 94, 22–38.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chesbrough, H.W., and Teece, D.J., 2002. Organizing for innovation: when is virtual virtuous? Harvard business review, 80(8), 127–135.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cho, J.Y., and Lee, E.H., 2014. Reducing confusion about grounded theory and qualitative content analysis: similarities and differences. Qualitative report, 19 (32), 1–20.
   Google Scholar
• Dainty, A. R. J., 2008. Methodological pluralism in construction management research. Advanced Research Methods in the Built Environment.
   Google Scholar
• Davis, F. D., 1985. A Technology Acceptance Model for Empirically Testing New End-User Information Systems: Theory and Results. Massachusets Institute of Technology.
   Google Scholar
• Dörfler, K., et al., 2019. Mobile robotic fabrication beyond factory conditions: case study Mesh Mould wall of the DFAB HOUSE. Construction robotics, 3 (1–4), 53–67.
   Google Scholar
• Dubois, A., and Gadde, L.-E., 2002. The construction industry as a loosely coupled system: implications for productivity and innovativity. Construction management and economics, 20 (7), 621–631.
   Google Scholar
• Dunn, N., 2012. Digital fabrication in architecture. Laurence King Publishing Ltd.
   Google Scholar
• Eisenhardt, K.M., 1989. Building theories from case study research. Academy of management review, 14 (4), 532–550.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• European Commission. 2019. Horizon 2020 Work Programme 2018-2020 (19 General Annexes, G. Technology Readiness Levels (TRL); p. 27).
   Google Scholar
• Fardhosseini, M. S., Karji, A., Dossick, C. S., Lee, H. W., Jebelli, H., & Beatty, S. (2020). The Cost-Effectiveness of Integrating Digital Fabrication for Concrete Formworks. Construction Research Congress 2020, March, 1077–1086.
   Google Scholar
• Forcael, E., et al., 2020. Construction 4.0: a literature review. Sustainability, 12(22), 9755.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Garcia de Soto, B., & Skibniewski, M. J. (2020). Future of robotics and automation in construction. In Construction 4.0.
   Google Scholar
• García de Soto, B., et al., 2018. Productivity of digital fabrication in construction: cost and time analysis of a robotically built wall. Automation in construction, 92, 297–333.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• García de Soto, B., et al., 2019. Implications of Construction 4.0 to the workforce and organizational structures. International journal of construction management, 0 (0), 1–13.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gardner, L., et al., 2020. Testing and initial verification of the world’s first metal 3D printed bridge. Journal of constructional steel research, 172, 106233.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gershenfeld, N., 2012. How to make almost anything machine! SIGGRAPH 2015: Studio. Siggraph 2015(6), 91.
   Google Scholar
• Ghobakhloo, M., 2020. Industry 4.0, digitization, and opportunities for sustainability. Journal of cleaner production, 252, 119869.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gioia, D.A., Corley, K.G., and Hamilton, A.L., 2013. Seeking qualitative rigor in inductive research: notes on the Gioia methodology. Organizational research methods, 16 (1), 15–31.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Glaister, K.W., and Richard Falshaw, J., 1999. Strategic planning: still going strong? Long range planning, 32 (1), 107–116.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Glass, J., Bygballe, L. E., and Hall, D., 2020. Transforming Construction: The multi-scale challenges of changing and innovating in construction. Construction Management and Economics, Call for P.
   Google Scholar
• Gramazio, F., Kohler, M., and Willmann, J., 2014. The robotic touch how robots change architecture. Zurich: Park Books.
   Google Scholar
• Graser, K., et al., 2021. Parallel Paths of Inquiry: Detailing for DFAB HOUSE. Technology Architecture and Design, 5 (1).
   Google Scholar
• Graser, K., et al., 2020. DFAB HOUSE: a comprehensive demonstrator of digital fabrication in architecture. Fabricate 2020: making resilient architecture, 130–139.
   Google Scholar
• Grieves, M., (2015). Digital Twin: Manufacturing Excellence through Virtual Factory Replication. White Paper, March.
   Google Scholar
• Hack, N., et al., 2020. Structural stay-in-place formwork for robotic in situ fabrication of non-standard concrete structures: a real scale architectural demonstrator. Automation in construction, 115, 103197.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hall, D.M., Whyte, J.K., and Lessing, J., 2020. Mirror-breaking strategies to enable digital manufacturing in Silicon Valley construction firms: a comparative case study. Construction management and economics, 38 (4), 322–339.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hamid, M., Tolba, O., and El Antably, A., 2018. BIM semantics for digital fabrication: a knowledge-based approach. Automation in construction, 91, 62–82.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hartmann, T., and Trappey, A., 2020. Advanced Engineering Informatics - Philosophical and methodological foundations with examples from civil and construction engineering. Developments in the built environment, 4, 100020.
   Google Scholar
• Helm, V., Ercan, S., Gramazio, F., & Kohler, M. (2012). In-situ robotic construction: Extending the digital fabrication chain in architecture. ACADIA 2012 - Synthetic Digital Ecologies: Proceedings of the 32nd Annual Conference of the Association for Computer Aided Design in Architecture, 2012-October, 169–176.
   Google Scholar
• Helms, M.M., and Nixon, J., 2010. Exploring SWOT analysis – where are we now? Journal of strategy and management, 3 (3), 215–251.
   Google Scholar
• Hu, R., et al., 2021. A simple framework for the cost-benefit analysis of single-task construction robots based on a case study of a cable-driven facade installation robot. Buildings, 11 (1), 1–17.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kaseman, K., and Graser, K., 2020. Digital fabrication in the construction sector. In A. Sawhney, M. Riley, and J. Irizarry, eds. Construction 4.0. Abingdon: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Katila, R., Levitt, R.E., and Sheffer, D., 2018. Systemic innovation of complex one-off products: the case of green buildings. Advances in strategic management, 40, 299–328.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Keating, S.J., et al., 2017. Toward site-specific and self-sufficient robotic fabrication on architectural scales. Science robotics, 2 (5), eaam8986.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Knippers, J., et al., 2021. Integrative computational design and construction: rethinking architecture digitally. Civil engineering design, 98, 194.
   Google Scholar
• Kuckartz, U., 2019. Qualitative text analysis: a systematic approach. In G. Kaiser and N. Presmeg eds. Compendium for early career education in mathematics researchers (pp. 181–197). Cham: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Kuzmenko, K., et al., 2021. Assessing environmental impact of digital fabrication and reuse of constructive systems. Structures, 31, 1300–1310.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lenfle, S., Midler, C., and Hällgren, M., 2019. Exploratory projects: from strangeness to theory. Project management journal, 50 (5), 519–523.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lindgren, J., Emmitt, S., and Widén, K., 2018. Construction projects as mechanisms for knowledge integration: mechanisms and effects when diffusing a systemic innovation. Engineering, construction and architectural management, 25 (11), 1516–1533.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lloret-Fritschi, E., et al., 2019. Challenges of real-scale production with smart dynamic casting. RILEM Bookseries, 19, 299–310..
   Google Scholar
• Mata-Falcón, J., Bischof, P., and Kaufmann, W., 2019. Exploiting the potential of digital fabrication for sustainable and economic concrete structures. In: RILEM Bookseries, Vol. 19. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-99519-9_14
   Google Scholar
• Mayring, P. (2014). Qualitative Content Analysis. In Qualitative content analysis: theoretical foundation, basic procedures and software solution.
   Google Scholar
• Melenbrink, N., Werfel, J., and Menges, A., 2020. On-site autonomous construction robots: towards unsupervised building. Automation in construction, 119, 103312.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Knippers, J. and Menges, A. 2020a. BUGA Fibre Pavilion. Architecture Research Building: ICD/ITKE 2010-2020. Berlin: Birkhäuser. 162–173. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783035620405-031
   Google Scholar
• Menges, A., and Knippers, J., 2020b. Buga wood pavilion. In Architecture research building Birkhäuser. 150–161.
   Google Scholar
• Meuer, J., et al., 2019. A typology of digital building technologies: implications for policy and industry. IOP conference series: earth and environmental science, 323 (1), 012053. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/323/1/012053
   Google Scholar
• Midgley, G., and Lindhult, E., 2017. What is systemic innovation? Research Memorandum: University of Hull, 99.
   Google Scholar
• Muñoz-La Rivera, F., et al., 2021. Methodological-Technological Framework for Construction 4.0. Archives of computational methods in engineering, 28, 689–711.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nam, B.C.H., and Tatum, C.B., 1989. Toward understanding of product innovation process in construction. Journal of construction engineering and management, 115 (4), 517–534.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nascimento, S., et al., 2016. Sustainable technologies and transdisciplinary futures: from collaborative design to digital fabrication. Science as culture, (4), 25.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• NCCR Digital Fabrication. (2021). dfabhouse.ch. https://dfabhouse.ch/
   Google Scholar
• Ng, M. S., Bonanomi, M. M., Hall, D. M., & Hackl, J. (2020). Design for digital fabrication: an industry needs analysis of collaboration platforms and integrated management processes. Proceedings of the 37th International Symposium on Automation and Robotics in Construction (ISARC), 318–325.
   Google Scholar
• Nonaka, I., and Lewin, A.Y., 1994. A dynamic theory of organizational knowledge creation author(s): Ikujiro Nonaka Source a dynamic theory of organizational knowledge creation. Organization Science, 5 (1), 14–37.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pan, M., and Pan, W., 2019. Determinants of adoption of robotics in precast concrete production for buildings. Journal of management in engineering, 35 (5), 05019007.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Popescu, M., et al., 2020. Structural design, digital fabrication and construction of the cable-net and knitted formwork of the KnitCandela concrete shell. Structures, 31, 1287–1299.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pries, F., and Janszen, F., 1995. Innovation in the construction industry: the dominant role of the environment. Construction management and economics, 13 (1), 43–51.
   Google Scholar
• Ribeirinho, M.J., et al., 2020. The next normal in construction. Mckinsey and company, 84.
   Google Scholar
• Richner, P., et al., 2017. NEST - A platform for the acceleration of innovation in buildings. Informes de la construccion, 69 (548), 1–8.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Robeller, C., Gamerro, J., and Weinand, Y., 2017. Thétre Vidy Lausanne - A double-layered timber folded plate structure. Journal of the international association for shell and spatial structures, 58(4), 194.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sacks, R., et al., 2020. Construction with digital twin information systems. Data-Centric engineering, 1, e14.
   Google Scholar
• Sandelowski, M., 2000. Whatever happened to qualitative description? Research in nursing and health, 23 (4), 334–340.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scheurer, F., and Stehling, H., 2020. New paradigms for digital prefabrication in architecture. Design transactions, 42–49.
   Google Scholar
• Singh, V., and Holmstrom, J., 2015. Needs and technology adoption: observation from BIM experience. Engineering, construction and architectural management, 22 (2), 128–150.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Slaughter, S., 1993. Innovation and learning during implementation: a comparison of user and manufacturer innovations. Research policy, 22 (1), 81–95.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Strauss, A., and Corbin, J., 1990. Basics of qualitative research: grounded theory procedures and techniques. California: SAGE.
   Google Scholar
• Taylor, J. E., and Levitt, R. E., 2004. A new model for systemic innovation diffusion in project-based industries. In CIFE Working Paper #WP086 (Issue May). Stanford University.
   Google Scholar
• Taylor, J.E., Dossick, C.S., and Garvin, M., 2011. Meeting the burden of proof with case-study research. Journal of construction engineering and management, 137 (4), 303–311.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thoma, A., et al., 2019. Robotic fabrication of bespoke timber frame modules. Robotic fabrication in architecture, art and design, 2018, 447–458.
   Google Scholar
• Valente, M., Sibai, A., and Sambucci, M., 2019. Extrusion-based additive manufacturing of concrete products: revolutionizing and remodeling the construction industry. Journal of composites science, 3 (3), 88.
   Google Scholar
• Vazquez, A.N., and Jabi, W., 2019. Robotic assisted design workflows: a study of key human factors influencing team fluency in human-robot collaborative design processes. Architectural science review, 62 (5), 409–423.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wangler, T., et al., 2016. Digital Concrete: Opportunities and Challenges. RILEM Technical Letters, 1, 67.
   Google Scholar
• WEF. 2016. Shaping the Future of Construction A Breakthrough in Mindset and Technology. In World Economic Forum (WEF) (Issue May).
   Google Scholar
• Willmann, J., et al., 2016. Robotic timber construction - expanding additive fabrication to new dimensions. Automation in construction, 61, 16–23.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Xu, W., et al., 2020., Fabrication and application of 3D-printed concrete structural components in the Baoshan Pedestrian Bridge Project. In J. Burry, J. Sabin, B. Sheil, & M. Skavara, eds. Fabricate 2020. UCL Press.
   Google Scholar
• Yin, R. K., 2014. Case study research: design and methods (5th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Yuan, P., Menges, A., and Leach, N., 2018. Digital fabrication. Tongji University Press.
   Google Scholar