Research Questions (RQ)
Select all RQs you are interested in
RQ1: How do we align the incentives of clients, architects, engineers, legislators, and contractors such that minimum embodied energy structures are the preferred outcome on all projects?
RQ2: How can continuous measurement of floor loading in real buildings be used to provide certainty to the statistical basis for SLS loading, and how can this data be used to understand the extents over which such loading conditions are peaky so that decisions about SLS requirements can be made?
RQ3: What is the real envelope of floor loading for which all designs should be undertaken?
RQ4: What might the benefits and consequences be of reducing material and load partial safety factors?
RQ5: How should partial safety factors for workmanship change as construction becomes increasingly automated?
RQ6: How will design and construction automation, along with target values of material efficiency, affect the economics of structural engineering, particularly fee levels?
RQ7: Structural frames account for a small amount of project cost, but a large amount of embodied carbon. What is the value proposition for reducing material use if the cost impact is small?
RQ8: How can the implications of concept design decisions on material use and life cycle use be better understood by and illustrated to design teams?
RQ9: How might Failure Mode Effects Analysis (FMEA) be feasibly applied to the design of buildings to incorporate more detailed consideration of the consequences of failure and an appropriate level of risk?
RQ10: How can structural models be checked in an automated fashion? How can we reduce error rates in structural engineering design? Should there be a partial safety factor for analytical errors in all structural design, and how might this change over time as automation increases?
RQ11: To what extent can automation of construction and digital design be used to drive a cultural change to instil better confidence in construction competence?
RQ12: What is the roadmap to achieving a separation between ULS and SLS design, such that active control can be introduced appropriately?
RQ13: How might serviceability be more appropriately defined such that (whilst maintaining current ULS criteria) SLS is rarely the dominant limit state for most structures? What might the unintended consequences of this be?
RQ14: How can mass-customisation of building components be embedded into design, procurement, and construction processes to maximise value?
RQ15: What prototype demonstrator buildings are required to demonstrate to our community what better looks like?
RQ16: How might a construction contract that requires minimal embodied energy design be drafted?
RQ17: Can the success of the Merton Rule in renewables  be replicated to reduce embodied energy?
RQ18: What barriers exist to making material utilisation a more fundamental part of points-based methods of building assessment? Should we have a “MOT” for buildings?
RQ19: What is the role of big data, computer science, and machine learning in changing the process of design?
RQ20: How do people interact with buildings? How does this change when they are lightweight? Are there any unintended consequences of lightweighting that change the user experience?
RQ21: What should be taught in Universities to prepare new engineers for the demands of design. What disciplines will be needed to work collaboratively in the future design office?