毕业设计（论文）外文翻译**：**学号：**********所在学院：土木工程与建筑学院专业班级： 12建工1班****：***日期： 2016年3月20日Improved Design ReviewThrough Web CollaborationAbstract: An in-depth analysis of the impact of Web collaboration has shown that it is a very effective medium for conducting design reviews and offers many benefits over traditional manual methods of comment collection and resolution. Findings from two federal agencies have shown a signal cant reduction in both the time required to conduct a design review and the number of required participating parties. An economic analysis of the impact of Web collaboration on the design review process done for U.S. Corps of Engineers projects indicates that using the Web for design review collaboration provides a 73% savings in meeting time and travel cost.CE Database subject headings: Internet; Economic analysis; Design; Reviews; U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.IntroductionThe facility-acquisition process encompasses under steps: planning, design, procurement, construction, and start-up. Decisions made during the planning and design phases have a greater impact on the overall acquisition cost of the facility than decisions made during the construction and start-up phases. The Building and Economic Development Committee reports that 50% of the problems encountered during the construction and start-up phases are related to management of information exchange during the design phase.Changes in the design of a facility during the construction phase result in cost and time overruns. The Federal Facility reports that conducting a formal review of the design may considerably reduce the total cost of a facility . This is because a well- and thoroughly designed facility requires fewer changes and corrections during its construction. Moreover, the FFC reported that between 30 and 50% of all changes required during the construction phase resulted from errors in the design documents related to miscommunication between design disciplines. Hence, a formal design review process should be incorporated in any quality management plan governing the delivery of professional design services.Design Review ObjectivesModern facilities and infrastructure systems are quite complex systems, and the design process often requires a group of geographically distributed experts. Comprehensive design reviews are typically performed by teams of experiencedengineers, architects, facility managers, and end users who typically are not geographically collocated. In addition, a design review should be conducted by a team that is independent from the design team to avoid any contact of interest. The design review process is an exchange of information about competing interests, goals, and objectives that must be resolved in a timely manner. A good design review should be contain the following points：Detect problems related to errors, omissions, and inconsistencies caused by design process;Identify inappropriate construction methods and materials that would increase construction costs;Certify compliance with standards, codes, and regulations;Identify components and building systems that would result in making facilities difficult to maintain and operate;Increase project quality, integration, constructability, and maintainability;Reduce construction change orders with consequent decline in construction delays associated with them;Decrease number of requests for information during construction;Acquire knowledge that can be applied in other phases of project life cycle, which can improve returns gained from this knowledge;Improve client satisfaction and usefulness of the facility.Design Review BenefitsThe design review process is an integral part of the quality management plan for improving the engineering and design functions. Several benefits are achieved by using the design review process that different in nature from one another. The design review process produces three immediate benefits.First, the process avoids future contingencies by detecting design errors, omissions, and inconsistencies before the project goes out for bid. As a consequence, future claims are avoided and/or future delays are avoided.Second, the design review process considerably improves the quality of the facility and/or civil works project. Those improvements translate into facilities thatare more functional, have a reduced environmental impact, and are safer for the occupants.Third, a design review system that increases productivity will not only reduce the cost of accomplishing the design review by reducing the number of participants and the time necessary to complete the review phases, but will also shorten the facility delivery cycle. The reduced delivery duration will provide the customer with beneficial occupancy earlier. Earlier occupancy translates into significant total project savings to the customer.Design Review ProcessSeveral design reviews are often conducted during the design phase of a project. The number of design reviews for each project depends upon the size of the project, the complexity and nature of it, and the procurement method used to buy the facility. For instance, review managers at the Corps of Engineers estimate that, on average, each new design/bid/build construction project has three design reviews: concept design, 95% design, and design submit. For design/build projects, the number of design reviews per project is four or five: two reviews before the request for proposal and two or three more during design. For small projects procured through traditional means, the number of reviews may be two: the 35% design review, and the 95% design review.In a typical historical approach for design review, the process starts when the designer submits the previously agreed or partial design to the project manager, who then distributes copies of the submittal to all the members of the review team. Participants in the review process then submit comments to the project manager in various forms and formats, which include hard-copy written comments, faxed comments, and e-mail comments. The project manager then reviews and if necessary the comments and submits them to the designer for action. When the designer has completed the response to these comments, the project manager calls a review conference between all the members of the review team and the architect/engineer. Prior to the conference, the project manager sends copies of the design comments and the designer response to all members of the review team.Under this method the designer answers the reviewer comments at the review conference. As a consequence, all reviewers have to attend the conference. Moreover, since review comments are submitted unformatted and unsorted, the review conference must be conducted in an interdisciplinary form and therefore must involve all participants for the entire duration of the meeting.Design Review AutomationThe Corps of Engineers recognized the need to develop an automated review management system capable of supporting the design review process as early as the mid-1980s. The focus of the effort was to develop a mainframe system to support the collection, collation, and exchange of information required to accomplish the review process. The initial experience, although partially successful, was limited by remote connectivity to the mainframe application. The rapid growth of the World Wide Web as a back-bone for e-business solutions prompted a review and update of the concepts of remote collaboration on design review。