DOCSLIB.ORG

Slow Fashion: Developing a Conceptual Apparel Design Process Stefanie Ann Ramirez Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Slow Fashion: Developing a Conceptual Apparel Design Process Stefanie Ann Ramirez Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College Louisiana State University LSU Digital Commons LSU Doctoral Dissertations Graduate School 2014 Slow Fashion: Developing a Conceptual Apparel Design Process Stefanie Ann Ramirez Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_dissertations Part of the Art and Design Commons Recommended Citation Ramirez, Stefanie Ann, "Slow Fashion: Developing a Conceptual Apparel Design Process" (2014). LSU Doctoral Dissertations. 2053. https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_dissertations/2053 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at LSU Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in LSU Doctoral Dissertations by an authorized graduate school editor of LSU Digital Commons. For more information, please [email protected]. SLOW FASHION: DEVELOPING A CONCEPTUAL APPAREL DESIGN PROCESS A Dissertation Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctorate of Philosophy in The Department of Human Ecology by Stefanie Ann Ramirez B.S.M., Tulane University, 2005 M.S., Louisiana State University, 2011 December 2014 Dedicated to the loving memory of my parents, the late Mariano A. and the late Felicitas P. Ramirez; without the basic foundation you left me with I could not, and would not, have made it to this point. ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS While it is almost impossible to thank everyone who provided help and support throughout this process, I am grateful to all those in my life who have helped me reach this accomplishment. My greatest debt of gratitude goes to my major professor Dr. Luz Elisa ‘Lisa’ Barona McRoberts. I am appreciative for her guidance and support as well as the amount of patience, time, and experience she provided. There are no words to describe my thanks for all that she has done. I am inspired by her determination and passion and it has influenced me to strive to become the best professor possible. Although our journey was not perfect, she taught me perfection is not what we should seek. She stood by me until the very end; that will ever be forgotten. I am incredibly appreciative of Dr. Jenna Kuttruff, interim major professor, and my committee, Dr. Michael Burnett, Dr. Cynthia DiCarlo, and Dr. Delisia Matthews. Their willingness to participate as members of my committee as well as their patience, time, and scholarly support are greatly appreciated. Also, I would like to thank Dr. Loren Marks who served previously on my committee. His constant support and insight is a blessing to all graduate students. Additionally, a special thank you is necessary to the professors, instructors, and staff in the Department of Textiles, Apparel Design, and Merchandising at LSU, who have contributed to this accomplishment. Especially, Mrs. Elva Bourgeois, Mrs. Yvonne Leak, Dr. Chuanlan Liu, Dr. Ioan Negulescu, Mrs. Pam Vinci, and Ms. Debbie Welker. Your support and advice throughout my time at LSU will always be remembered and treasured. For my fellow graduate students: the journey is never easy but having each other is what often made it seem like less of a battle. The strength and courage to start and complete this endeavor would never have happened without the loving and faith-based rearing provided by my parents, the late Mariano A. and late Felicitas P. Ramirez. The greatest thanks go to my family for their prayers, support, and love. I am especially grateful to my aunt, Anita Perez, for all the love and prayers she gave in this endeavor; my cousin, Cristina Salas for her daily support throughout this journey; and my big brother, Carlos iii Hernandez, for always believing in me. Without them, and the rest of my family, I could not have made it this far. I would also like to thank my godmothers, Julie Treviño, Rosie Hernandez, Minerva Rodriguez and Oneida Alegria for their support. I am exceedingly grateful for all my friends who have helped in their special ways. Specifically, Christie Wiedmann and her family, Brittany Butler, Juan Carlos Ortiz, Ryan Aldridge, and Claudine Smack. Additionally, the greatest thank you for immense love and support through this journey goes to my New Orleans family. We might not have been blood relatives but the bond we have is just as strong: Melissa Mendoza, Courtney Ordone, Ghislaine “Gigi” Camey-Ubilla, Katie Brown (Zumwalt), and Dreama Goldsmith. I’d like to also thank other friends who have cheered me on along the way : Richter and Michelle Fridman, Michael Gomez, Krystn Hammond, Wallace ‘Bamm’ Mateen, April Mendoza, Larissa Miller, Jessica Neveu, Kelsey ‘Dobby’ Robinson, Ella Rose, and Jessica ‘Lil Bit’ Walther. While the list of friends may not be complete, I remember each push towards the finish line. Ultimately, I give the greatest thanks and praise to G-d who got me through this and brought such amazing people into my life. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS………………………………………………………………… iii LIST OF TABLES………………………………………………………………………….. vi LIST OF FIGURES………………………………………………………………………… viii ABSTRACT………………………………………………………………………………. ix CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION……………………………………………………… 1 CHAPTER TWO: REVIEW OF LITERATURE………………………………………….. 11 CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY………………………………………………… 39 CHAPTER FOUR: CONTENT ANALYSIS AND DATA COLLECTION……………… 54 CHAPTER FIVE: RESEARCH FINDINGS……………………………………………… 85 CHAPTER SIX: CONCLUSIONS AND DISCUSSION………………………………… 109 REFERENCES……………………………………………………………………………. 125 APPENDICES A PERMISSION TO REPRINT………………………………………………………… 137 B SLOW FASHION APPAREL DESIGN PROCESS: INTERVIEW CONSENT AND SEMI-STRUCTURED INTERVIEW QUESTIONS.. 139 C IRB EXEMPTION APPROVAL……………………………………………………… 141 D SLOW FASHION APPAREL DESIGN PROCESS SURVEY (HARD COPY)……… 142 E E-MAIL INVITATION TO PARTICIPATE…………………………………………... 155 F INTERVIEW INVITATION TO PARTICIPATE……………………………………... 156 VITA………………………………………………………………………………………... 157 v LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Slow City Membership Criterion…………………………………………….......... 21 Table 2: Principles of Slow Design…………………………………………………………. 27 Table 3: Guidelines to Slow Fashion for consumers……………………………………...... 28 Table 4: Guidelines to Slow Fashion for businesses………………………………………... 29 Table 5: Slow Fashion movement principles……………………………………………...... 32 Table 6: Interview Schedule………………………………………………………………... 53 Table 7: Frequency of Slow Fashion Terms ……………………………………………...... 57 Table 8: Design Criteria for Slow Fashion Apparel Design Model………………………... 69 Table 9: Design Criteria for Design Framework…………………………………………… 71 Table 10: Categorization of Slow Fashion Design Criteria (FEADO)……………………... 74 Table 11: Voluntary Categorization of Slow Fashion Apparel Design Criteria (FEADO)… 76 Table 12: Additional Design Criteria Categorization………………………………….…… 78 Table 13: Categorization of Slow Fashion Design Framework Criteria……………………. 79 Table 14: Voluntary Categorization of Slow Fashion Design Framework Criteria………… 82 Table 15: Demographic Profile of Participants……………………………………………... 86 Table 16: Reconfigured Participant Specializations ……………………………………...... 88 Table 17: Participant Expertise …………………………………………………………...... 89 Table 18: Teaching Engagement …………………………………………………….……... 90 Table 19: Creative Scholarship (CS) Engagement …………………………………..…….. 91 Table 20: Adjusted Design Criteria for Slow Fashion Apparel Design Process Model……. 93 Table 21: Adjusted Design Criteria for Slow Fashion Apparel Design Framework……...... 95 Table 22: Interview Content Analysis of Description of Slow Fashion……………………. 100 vi Table 23: Functional, Expressive, Aesthetic, Design and Other Slow Fashion Criteria…… 101 Table 24: Functional, Expressive, Aesthetic, Design and Other Slow Fashion Criteria Content Analysis Frequencies…………………………………………………… 104 Table 25: Framework Considerations………………………………………………………. 106 Table 26: Final Design Criteria for Slow Fashion Apparel Design Process Model………... 111 Table 27: Interviewee Criteria for Consideration Categories in Slow Fashion Apparel Design Framework ……………………………………………………………… 114 Table 28: Final Design Criteria for Slow Fashion Apparel Design Framework…..………. 115 vii LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1: Lamb & Kallal (1992) FEA consumer needs model…………………………….. 14 Figure 2: Lamb and Kallal Apparel design framework……………………………………. 18 Figure 3: Slow Fashion Design Considerations Model……………………………………. 69 Figure 4: Lamb & Kallal’s (1992) FEA Model Design Process Incorporated with Slow 73 Fashion Apparel Design Framework…………………...………………………... Figure 5: Final Slow Fashion Apparel Design Considerations Model…………………….. 116 Figure 6: Figure 6: Lamb & Kallal’s (1992) FEA Model Design Process Incorporated for 117 Slow Fashion Apparel …………………………………………………………... viii ABSTRACT The purpose of this study is to explore the application of a pre-existing apparel design process model and design framework to the development of a conceptual slow fashion apparel design process and framework. A content analysis of slow design and slow fashion literature identified 38 themes related to specific design criteria, which were applied to design considerations from the Lamb & Kallal Functional, Expressive, and Aesthetic (FEA) model (1992). Additional design considerations were revealed due to the nature of the research topic and relationship to the stages in the applied design framework. For the Slow Fashion Apparel Design model five considerations were established: functional, expressive, aesthetic, designer, and other. The Slow Fashion Apparel
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Jackson: Choosing a Methodology: Philosophical Underpinning
    JACKSON: CHOOSING A METHODOLOGY: PHILOSOPHICAL UNDERPINNING Choosing a Methodology: Philosophical Practitioner Research Underpinning In Higher Education Copyright © 2013 University of Cumbria Vol 7 (1) pages 49-62 Elizabeth Jackson University of Cumbria [email protected] Abstract As a university lecturer, I find that a frequent question raised by Masters students concerns the methodology chosen for research and the rationale required in dissertations. This paper unpicks some of the philosophical coherence that can inform choices to be made regarding methodology and a well-thought out rationale that can add to the rigour of a research project. It considers the conceptual framework for research including the ontological and epistemological perspectives that are pertinent in choosing a methodology and subsequently the methods to be used. The discussion is exemplified using a concrete example of a research project in order to contextualise theory within practice. Key words Ontology; epistemology; positionality; relationality; methodology; method. Introduction This paper arises from work with students writing Masters dissertations who frequently express confusion and doubt about how appropriate methodology is chosen for research. It will be argued here that consideration of philosophical underpinning can be crucial for both shaping research design and for explaining approaches taken in order to support credibility of research outcomes. It is beneficial, within the unique context of the research, for the researcher to carefully
    [Show full text]
  • Applications of Systems Engineering to the Research, Design, And
    Applications of Systems Engineering to the Research, Design, and Development of Wind Energy Systems K. Dykes and R. Meadows With contributions from: F. Felker, P. Graf, M. Hand, M. Lunacek, J. Michalakes, P. Moriarty, W. Musial, and P. Veers NREL is a national laboratory of the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy, operated by the Alliance for Sustainable Energy, LLC. Technical Report NREL/TP-5000-52616 December 2011 Contract No. DE -AC36-08GO28308 Applications of Systems Engineering to the Research, Design, and Development of Wind Energy Systems Authors: K. Dykes and R. Meadows With contributions from: F. Felker, P. Graf, M. Hand, M. Lunacek, J. Michalakes, P. Moriarty, W. Musial, and P. Veers Prepared under Task No. WE11.0341 NREL is a national laboratory of the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy, operated by the Alliance for Sustainable Energy, LLC. National Renewable Energy Laboratory Technical Report NREL/TP-5000-52616 1617 Cole Boulevard Golden, Colorado 80401 December 2011 303-275-3000 • www.nrel.gov Contract No. DE-AC36-08GO28308 NOTICE This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States government. Neither the United States government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States government or any agency thereof.
    [Show full text]
  • Shaping New Knowledges
    PAPER ABSTRACT BOOK SHAPINGSHAPING NEWNEW KNOWLEDGESKNOWLEDGES ROBERT CORSER SHARON HAAR 2016 ACSA 104TH ANNUAL MEETING Shaping New Knowledges CO-CHAIRS Robert Corser, University of Washington Sharon Haar, University of Michigan HOST SCHOOLS University of Washington Copyright © 2016 Association of Collegiate Schools of Architecture, Inc., except where otherwise restricted. All rights reserved. No material may be reproduced without permission of the Association of Collegiate Schools of Architecture. Association of Collegiate Schools of Architecture 1735 New York Ave., NW Washington, DC 20006 www.acsa-arch.org 2 – 2016 ACSA 104th Annual Meeting Abstract Book CONTENTS THURSDAY, MARCH 17 FRIDAY, MARCH 18 SATURDAY, MARCH 19 2:00PM - 3:30PM 11:00AM - 12:30PM 9:00AM - 10:30AM 05 Acting Out: The Politics and Practices of 15 Divergent Modes of Engagement: 31 Beginnings in the Context of New Interventions: Session 1 Exploring the Spectrum of Collaborative Knowledge Mireille Roddier, U. Michigan and Participatory Practices: Session 1 Catherine Wetzel, IIT Caryn Brause, U. Massachusetts, Amherst James Sullivan, Louisiana State U. 06 Architecture is Philosophy: Beyond the Joseph Krupczynski, U. Massachusetts, Post-Critical: Session 1 Amherst 32 Open: Hoarding, Updating, Drafting: Mark Thorsby, Lone Star College The Production of Knowledge in Thomas Forget, U. N. Carolina @ Charlotte 16 Knowledge Fields: Between Architecture Architectural History and Landscape: Session 1 Sarah Stevens, U. of British Columbia Cathryn Dwyre, Pratt Institute 07 Open: Challenging Materiality: Industry Chris Perry, RPI Collaborations Reshaping Design 33 Water, Water Everywhere…: Session 1 Julie Larsen, Syracuse U. Jori A. Erdman, Louisiana State U. Roger Hubeli, Syracuse U. 17 Knowledge in the Public Interest Nadia M.
    [Show full text]
  • What Knowledge Is of Most Worth in Engineering Design Education?
    Integrated Design: What Knowledge is of Most Worth in Engineering Design Education? Richard Devon Sven Bilén 213 Hammond 213 Hammond Pennsylvania State University Pennsylvania State University PA 16802 PA 16802 [email protected] sbilé[email protected] Alison McKay Alan de Pennington Dep’t. of Mechanical Engineering Dep’t. of Mechanical Engineering University of Leeds University of Leeds Leeds LS2 9JT, UK Leeds LS2 9JT, UK [email protected] [email protected] Patrick Serrafero Javier Sánchez Sierra Ecole Centrale de Lyon Esc. Sup. de Ingenieros de Tecnun 17 Chemin du Petit Bois Universidad de Navarra F-69130 Lyon-Ecully, France 20018 San Sebastián, Spain [email protected] [email protected] Abstract This paper is based on the premise that the design ideas and methods that cut across most fields of engineering, herein called integrated design, have grown rapidly in the last two or three decades and that integrated design now has the status of cumulative knowledge. This is old news for many, but a rather limited approach to teaching design knowledge is still common in the United States and perhaps elsewhere. In many engineering departments in the United States, students are only required to have a motivational and experiential introductory design course that is followed several years later by an experiential and discipline-specific capstone course [1]. Some limitations of the capstone approach, such as too little and too late, have been noted [2]. In some departments, and for some students, another experiential design course may be taken as an elective. A few non-design courses have an experiential design project added following a design across the curriculum approach.
    [Show full text]
  • Budgen, Software Design Methods
    David Budgen The Loyal Opposition Software Design Methods: Life Belt or Leg Iron? o software design methods have a correctly means “study of method.”) To address, but future? In introducing the January- not necessarily answer, this question, I’ll first consider D February 1998 issue of IEEE Software,Al what designing involves in a wider context, then com- Davis spoke of the hazards implicit in pare this with what we do, and finally consider what “method abuse,”manifested by a desire this might imply for the future. to “play safe.”(If things go well, you can take the credit, but if they go wrong, the organization’s choice of method can take the blame.) As Davis argues, such a THE DESIGN PROCESS policy will almost certainly lead to our becoming builders of what he terms “cookie-cutter, low-risk, low- Developing solutions to problems is a distinguish- payoff, mediocre systems.” ing human activity that occurs in many spheres of life. The issue I’ll explore in this column is slightly dif- So, although the properties of software-based systems ferent, although it’s also concerned with the problems offer some specific problems to the designer (such as that the use of design methods can present. It can be software’s invisibility and its mix of static and dynamic expressed as a question: Will the adoption of a design properties), as individual design characteristics, these method help the software development process (the properties are by no means unique. Indeed, while “life belt” role), or is there significant risk that its use largely ignored by software engineers, the study of the will lead to suboptimum solutions (the “leg iron”role)? nature of design activities has long been established Robert L.
    [Show full text]
  • Design Charrette
    MEETING AGENDA – design charrette CLIENT: STATE COLLEGE AREA SCHOOL DISTRICT PROJECT: Ferguson Township Elementary School Project MEETING DATE: August 13 – 14, 2009 MEETING TIME: 8:30 AM – 4:00 PM MEETING TOPIC: DESIGN CHARRETTE The focus of this design charrette will be to develop the conceptual design for the Ferguson Township Elementary facility that will be carried into the schematic design process. The integration of educational facility design, site design and related sustainable design techniques will be the focus of this process. Participants will be fully engaged in the design process and will have the opportunity to share in the overall design decision making. Ferguson Township Elementary Design Charrette Thursday August 13 8:30 AM – 4:00 PM Time Topic Location 8:30 AM - 8:45 AM WELCOME & INTRODUCTION TO THE CHARRETTE PROCESS FTES 8:45 AM – 9:30 AM WALKING TOUR OF SITE FTES 9:30 AM – 9:45 AM REVISIT PROJECT PARAMETERS (site issues and program) FTES 9:45 AM – 10:15 AM REVIEW OF PROJECT TOUCHSTONES & LEED GOALS FTES 10:15 AM - 10:45 AM THE BUILDING AS A TEACHING TOOL FTES 10:45 AM – 11:00 AM VIRTUAL TOUR OF EDUCATIONAL SPACES FTES 11:00 AM – 11:30 AM SITE FLOWS EXERCISE FTES 11:30 AM – 12:15 PM LUNCH/ TRAVEL FROM FTES to MNMS travel 12:15 PM – 1:45 PM DESIGN SESSION 1 – SITE DESIGN AND “BIG IDEAS” MNMS 1:45 PM – 3:30 PM INTERNAL FEEDBACK MNMS 3:30 PM – 4:00 PM DOCUMENTATION OF THE “BIG IDEAS” MNMS SCHRADERGROUP architecture LLC | 161 Leverington Avenue, Suite 105 | Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19127 | T: 215.482.7440 | F: 215.482.7441 | www.sgarc.com Friday August 14 8:30 AM – 4:00 PM Time Topic Location 8:30 AM – 8:45 AM REFLECTION ON THE S“BIG IDEAS” MNMS 8:45 AM – 10:15AM DESIGN SESSION 2 MNMS 10:15 AM – 12:00 PM INTERNAL FEEDBACK MNMS 12:00 PM – 12:45 PM LUNCH brown bag 12:45 PM – 2:15 PM DESIGN SESSION 3 MNMS 2:15 PM – 3:30 PM INTERNAL FEEDBACK MNMS 3:30 PM – 4:00 PM NEXT STEPS MNMS The information developed during this design charrette will become the basis for the schematic design process to be carried through the process.
    [Show full text]
  • Choosing a Mixed Methods Design
    04-Creswell (Designing)-45025.qxd 5/16/2006 8:35 PM Page 58 CHAPTER 4 CHOOSING A MIXED METHODS DESIGN esearch designs are procedures for collecting, analyzing, interpreting, and reporting data in research studies. They represent different mod- R els for doing research, and these models have distinct names and procedures associated with them. Rigorous research designs are important because they guide the methods decisions that researchers must make dur- ing their studies and set the logic by which they make interpretations at the end of studies. Once a researcher has selected a mixed methods approach for a study, the next step is to decide on the specific design that best addresses the research problem. What designs are available, and how do researchers decide which one is appropriate for their studies? Mixed methods researchers need to be acquainted with the major types of mixed methods designs and the common variants among these designs. Important considerations when choosing designs are knowing the intent, the procedures, and the strengths and challenges associated with each design. Researchers also need to be familiar with the timing, weighting, and mixing decisions that are made in each of the different mixed methods designs. This chapter will address • The classifications of designs in the literature • The four major types of mixed methods designs, including their intent, key procedures, common variants, and inherent strengths and challenges 58 04-Creswell (Designing)-45025.qxd 5/16/2006 8:35 PM Page 59 Choosing a Mixed Methods Design–●–59 • Factors such as timing, weighting, and mixing, which influence the choice of an appropriate design CLASSIFICATIONS OF MIXED METHODS DESIGNS Researchers benefit from being familiar with the numerous classifications of mixed methods designs found in the literature.
    [Show full text]
  • A Quantitative Reliability, Maintainability and Supportability Approach for NASA's Second Generation Reusable Launch Vehicle
    A Quantitative Reliability, Maintainability and Supportability Approach for NASA's Second Generation Reusable Launch Vehicle Fayssai M. Safie, Ph. D. Marshall Space Flight Center Huntsville, Alabama Tel: 256-544-5278 E-mail: Fayssal.Safie @ msfc.nasa.gov Charles Daniel, Ph.D. Marshall Space Flight Center Huntsville, Alabama Tel: 256-544-5278 E-mail: Charles.Daniel @msfc.nasa.gov Prince Kalia Raytheon ITSS Marshall Space Flight Center Huntsville, Alabama Tel: 256-544-6871 E-mail: Prince.Kalia @ msfc.nasa.gov ABSTRACT The United States National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is in the midst of a 10-year Second Generation Reusable Launch Vehicle (RLV) program to improve its space transportation capabilities for both cargo and crewed missions. The objectives of the program are to: significantly increase safety and reliability, reduce the cost of accessing low-earth orbit, attempt to leverage commercial launch capabilities, and provide a growth path for manned space exploration. The safety, reliability and life cycle cost of the next generation vehicles are major concerns, and NASA aims to achieve orders of magnitude improvement in these areas. To get these significant improvements, requires a rigorous process that addresses Reliability, Maintainability and Supportability (RMS) and safety through all the phases of the life cycle of the program. This paper discusses the RMS process being implemented for the Second Generation RLV program. 1.0 INTRODUCTION The 2nd Generation RLV program has in place quantitative Level-I RMS, and cost requirements [Ref 1] as shown in Table 1, a paradigm shift from the Space Shuttle program. This paradigm shift is generating a change in how space flight system design is approached.
    [Show full text]
  • 3 System Design 71 NYS Project Management Guidebook
    Section III:3 System Design 71 NYS Project Management Guidebook 3 SYSTEM DESIGN Purpose The purpose of System Design is to create a technical solution that satisfies the functional requirements for the system. At this point in the project lifecycle there should be a Functional Specification, written primarily in business terminology, con- taining a complete description of the operational needs of the various organizational entities that will use the new system. The challenge is to translate all of this information into Technical Specifications that accurately describe the design of the system, and that can be used as input to System Construction. The Functional Specification produced during System Require- ments Analysis is transformed into a physical architecture. System components are distributed across the physical archi- tecture, usable interfaces are designed and prototyped, and Technical Specifications are created for the Application Developers, enabling them to build and test the system. Many organizations look at System Design primarily as the preparation of the system component specifications; however, constructing the various system components is only one of a set of major steps in successfully building a system. The prepara- tion of the environment needed to build the system, the testing of the system, and the migration and preparation of the data that will ultimately be used by the system are equally impor- tant. In addition to designing the technical solution, System Design is the time to initiate focused planning efforts for both the testing and data preparation activities. List of Processes This phase consists of the following processes: N Prepare for System Design, where the existing project repositories are expanded to accommodate the design work products, the technical environment and tools needed to support System Design are established, and training needs of the team members involved in System Design are addressed.
    [Show full text]
  • Draft Conceptual Design Report Bolinas Lagoon North End Restoration Project
    DRAFT Draft Conceptual Design Report Bolinas Lagoon North End Restoration Project Marin County Parks and Open Space District August 2017 DRAFT Draft Conceptual Design Report DRAFT Marin County Parks and Open Space District Prepared for: Marin County Parks and Open Space District 3501 Civic Center Drive Suite 260 San Rafael, CA 94903 Prepared by: AECOM 300 Lakeside Drive Suite #400 Oakland, CA, 94612 aecom.com Prepared in association with: Carmen Ecological Consulting, Watershed Sciences, Peter Baye Ecological Consulting Prepared for: Marin County Parks and Open Space District AECOM ǀ Carmen Ecological, Watershed Sciences, and Peter Baye Consulting Draft Conceptual Design Report DRAFT Marin County Parks and Open Space District Table of Contents Executive Summary ................................................................................................................................................. ES-1 PART I – PROJECT OVERVIEW ................................................................................................................................... 3 1. Introduction ......................................................................................................................................................... 3 1.1 Project Location ....................................................................................................................................... 4 1.2 Purpose and Need ..................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Work System Theory: Overview of Core Concepts, Extensions, and Challenges for the Future Steven Alter University of San Francisco, [email protected]
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by University of San Francisco The University of San Francisco USF Scholarship: a digital repository @ Gleeson Library | Geschke Center Business Analytics and Information Systems School of Management February 2013 Work System Theory: Overview of Core Concepts, Extensions, and Challenges for the Future Steven Alter University of San Francisco, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: http://repository.usfca.edu/at Part of the Business Administration, Management, and Operations Commons, Management Information Systems Commons, and the Technology and Innovation Commons Recommended Citation Alter, Steven, "Work System Theory: Overview of Core Concepts, Extensions, and Challenges for the Future" (2013). Business Analytics and Information Systems. Paper 35. http://repository.usfca.edu/at/35 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the School of Management at USF Scholarship: a digital repository @ Gleeson Library | Geschke Center. It has been accepted for inclusion in Business Analytics and Information Systems by an authorized administrator of USF Scholarship: a digital repository @ Gleeson Library | Geschke Center. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Research Article Work System Theory: Overview of Core Concepts, Extensions, and Challenges for the Future Steven Alter University of San Francisco [email protected] Abstract This paper presents a current, accessible, and overarching view of work system theory. WST is the core of an integrated body of theory that emerged from a long-term research project to develop a systems analysis and design method for business professionals called the work system method (WSM).
    [Show full text]
  • A Handling Qualities Analysis Tool for Rotorcraft Conceptual Designs
    The Aeronautical Journal June 2018 Volume 122 No 1252 960 pp 960–987.© Royal Aeronautical Society 2018 doi: 10.1017/aer.2018.43 A handling qualities analysis tool for rotorcraft conceptual designs B. Lawrence [email protected] NASA’s Ames Research Center, San Jose State University Moffett Field, California US C. R. Theodore and W. Johnson NASA’s Ames Research Center, National Aeronautics and Space Administration Moffett Field, California US T. Berger U.S. Army Aviation Development Directorate Moffett Field California US ABSTRACT Over the past decade, NASA, under a succession of rotary-wing programs, has been moving towards coupling multiple discipline analyses to evaluate rotorcraft conceptual designs. Handling qualities is one of the component analyses to be included in such a future Multidisciplinary Analysis and Optimization framework for conceptual design of Vertical Take-Off and Landing (VTOL) aircraft. Similarly, the future vision for the capability of the Concept Design and Assessment Technology Area of the U.S Army Aviation Development Directorate also includes a handling qualities component. SIMPLI-FLYD is a tool jointly developed by NASA and the U.S. Army to perform modelling and analysis for the assessment of the handling qualities of rotorcraft conceptual designs. Illustrative scenarios of a tiltrotor in forward flight and a single-main rotor helicopter at hover are analysed using a combined process of SIMPLI-FLYD integrated with the conceptual design sizing tool NDARC. The effects of variations of input parameters such as horizontal tail and tail rotor geometry were evaluated in the form of margins to fixed- and rotary-wing handling qualities metrics and the computed vehicle empty weight.
    [Show full text]