Home

Footer

DeepDyve Logo
FacebookTwitter

Features

  • Search and discover articles on DeepDyve, PubMed, and Google Scholar
  • Read the full-text of open access and premium content
  • Organize articles with folders and bookmarks
  • Collaborate on and share articles and folders

Info

  • Pricing
  • Enterprise Plans
  • Browse Journals & Topics
  • About DeepDyve

Help

  • Help
  • Publishers
  • Contact Us

Popular Topics

  • COVID-19
  • Climate Change
  • Biopharmaceuticals
Terms |
Privacy |
Security |
Help |
Enterprise Plans |
Contact Us

Select data courtesy of the U.S. National Library of Medicine.

© 2023 DeepDyve, Inc. All rights reserved.

Facilities

Subject:
Architecture
Publisher:
Emerald Group Publishing Limited —
Emerald Publishing
ISSN:
0263-2772
Scimago Journal Rank:
49

2023

Volume 41
Issue 15/16 (May)Issue 11/12 (Jul)Issue 9/10 (Jun)Issue 7/8 (Apr)Issue 5/6 (Apr)Issue 3/4 (Feb)Issue 1/2 (Jan)

2022

Volume 40
Issue 15/16 (Dec)Issue 13/14 (Oct)Issue 11/12 (Jul)Issue 9/10 (Jun)Issue 7/8 (Apr)Issue 5/6 (Feb)Issue 3/4 (Jan)Issue 1/2 (Jan)

2021

Volume 39
Issue 13/14 (Oct)Issue 11/12 (Jul)Issue 9/10 (Jun)Issue 7/8 (Jan)Issue 3/4 (Feb)Issue 1/2 (Jan)

2020

Volume 39
Issue 7/8 (Dec)Issue 5/6 (Aug)
Volume 38
Issue 13/14 (Sep)Issue 11/12 (Sep)Issue 9/10 (Sep)Issue 7/8 (Apr)Issue 5/6 (Mar)Issue 3/4 (Feb)Issue 1/2 (Jan)

2019

Volume 38
Issue 5/6 (Dec)Issue 3/4 (Oct)Issue 1/2 (Aug)
Volume 37
Issue 13/14 (Sep)Issue 11/12 (Jul)Issue 9/10 (Jun)Issue 7/8 (Apr)Issue 5/6 (Mar)Issue 3/4 (Feb)Issue 1/2 (Jan)

2018

Volume 36
Issue 13/14 (Nov)Issue 11/12 (Oct)Issue 9/10 (Aug)Issue 7/8 (May)Issue 5/6 (Apr)Issue 3/4 (Mar)Issue 1/2 (Feb)

2017

Volume 35
Issue 13/14 (Oct)Issue 11/12 (Aug)Issue 9/10 (Jul)Issue 7/8 (May)Issue 3/4 (Mar)Issue 1/2 (Feb)Issue 1 (Feb)

2016

Volume 34
Issue 13/14 (Oct)Issue 11/12 (Aug)Issue 9/10 (Jul)Issue 7/8 (May)Issue 5/6 (Apr)Issue 3/4 (Mar)Issue 1/2 (Feb)

2015

Volume 33
Issue 13/14 (Oct)Issue 11/12 (Aug)Issue 9/10 (Jul)Issue 7/8 (May)Issue 5/6 (Apr)Issue 3/4 (Mar)Issue 1/2 (Feb)

2014

Volume 32
Issue 13/14 (Sep)Issue 11/12 (Aug)Issue 9/10 (Jan)Issue 7/8 (Jan)Issue 5/6 (Jan)Issue 3/4 (Jan)Issue 1/2 (Jan)

2013

Volume 31
Issue 13/14 (Oct)Issue 11/12 (Aug)Issue 9/10 (Jun)Issue 7/8 (May)Issue 5/6 (Mar)Issue 3/4 (Feb)Issue 1/2 (Jan)

2012

Volume 30
Issue 13/14 (Oct)Issue 11/12 (Aug)Issue 9/10 (Jun)Issue 7/8 (May)Issue 5/6 (Mar)Issue 3/4 (Feb)Issue 1/2 (Jan)

2011

Volume 29
Issue 13/14 (Oct)Issue 11/12 (Aug)Issue 9/10 (Jul)Issue 7/8 (May)Issue 5/6 (Apr)Issue 3/4 (Mar)Issue 1/2 (Feb)

2010

Volume 28
Issue 13/14 (Oct)Issue 11/12 (Aug)Issue 9/10 (Jul)Issue 7/8 (May)Issue 5/6 (Apr)Issue 3/4 (Mar)Issue 1/2 (Feb)

2009

Volume 27
Issue 13/14 (Jan)Issue 11/12 (Jan)Issue 9/10 (Jan)Issue 7/8 (May)Issue 5/6 (Apr)Issue 3/4 (Feb)Issue 1/2 (Jan)

2008

Volume 26
Issue 13/14 (Oct)Issue 11/12 (Aug)Issue 9/10 (Jul)Issue 7/8 (May)Issue 5/6 (Apr)Issue 3/4 (Feb)Issue 1/2 (Feb)

2007

Volume 25
Issue 13/14 (Oct)Issue 11/12 (Aug)Issue 9/10 (Jul)Issue 7/8 (May)Issue 5/6 (Apr)Issue 3/4 (Mar)Issue 1/2 (Feb)

2006

Volume 24
Issue 13/14 (Nov)Issue 11/12 (Sep)Issue 9/10 (Jul)Issue 7/8 (Jun)Issue 5/6 (Apr)Issue 3/4 (Feb)Issue 1/2 (Jan)

2005

Volume 23
Issue 13/14 (Nov)Issue 11/12 (Sep)Issue 9/10 (Jul)Issue 7/8 (Jun)Issue 5/6 (Apr)Issue 3/4 (Feb)Issue 1/2 (Jan)

2004

Volume 22
Issue 13/14 (Nov)Issue 11/12 (Sep)Issue 9/10 (Jul)Issue 7/8 (Jun)Issue 5/6 (Apr)Issue 3/4 (Feb)Issue 1/2 (Jan)

2003

Volume 21
Issue 13/14 (Dec)Issue 11/12 (Nov)Issue 10 (Oct)Issue 9 (Jan)Issue 7/8 (Jul)Issue 5/6 (May)Issue 3/4 (Mar)Issue 1/2 (Jan)

2002

Volume 20
Issue 13/14 (Dec)Issue 11/12 (Nov)Issue 10 (Oct)Issue 9 (Jan)Issue 7/8 (Jul)Issue 5/6 (May)Issue 3/4 (Mar)Issue 1/2 (Jan)

2001

Volume 19
Issue 13/14 (Dec)Issue 11/12 (Nov)Issue 10 (Oct)Issue 9 (Jan)Issue 7/8 (Jul)Issue 5/6 (May)Issue 3/4 (Mar)Issue 1/2 (Jan)

2000

Volume 18
Issue 13/14 (Dec)Issue 10/11/12 (Oct)Issue 9 (Sep)Issue 7/8 (Jul)Issue 5/6 (May)Issue 3/4 (Mar)Issue 1/2 (Jan)

1999

Volume 17
Issue 12/13 (Dec)Issue 11 (Nov)Issue 9/10 (Sep)Issue 7/8 (Jul)Issue 5/6 (May)Issue 3/4 (Mar)Issue 1/2 (Jan)

1998

Volume 16
Issue 12/13 (Dec)Issue 11 (Nov)Issue 9/10 (Sep)Issue 7/8 (Jul)Issue 5/6 (May)Issue 3/4 (Mar)Issue 1/2 (Jan)

1997

Volume 15
Issue 12/13 (Dec)Issue 11 (Nov)Issue 9/10 (Sep)Issue 7/8 (Jul)Issue 5/6 (May)Issue 3/4 (Mar)Issue 1/2 (Jan)

1996

Volume 14
Issue 12/13 (Dec)Issue 10/11 (Oct)Issue 9 (Jan)Issue 7/8 (Jul)Issue 5/6 (May)Issue 3/4 (Mar)Issue 1/2 (Jan)

1995

Volume 13
Issue 13 (Dec)Issue 12 (Dec)Issue 11 (Nov)Issue 9/10 (Sep)Issue 8 (Aug)Issue 7 (Jul)Issue 6 (Jun)Issue 5 (Jan)Issue 4 (Apr)Issue 3 (Mar)Issue 2 (Feb)Issue 1 (Jan)

1994

Volume 12
Issue 13 (Dec)Issue 12 (Dec)Issue 11 (Nov)Issue 10 (Oct)Issue 9 (Sep)Issue 8 (Aug)Issue 7 (Jan)Issue 6 (Jun)Issue 5 (May)Issue 4 (Apr)Issue 3 (Mar)Issue 2 (Feb)Issue 1 (Jan)

1993

Volume 11
Issue 12 (Dec)Issue 11 (Nov)Issue 10 (Oct)Issue 9 (Sep)Issue 8 (Aug)Issue 7 (Jul)Issue 6 (Jun)Issue 5 (May)Issue 4 (Apr)Issue 3 (Mar)Issue 2 (Feb)Issue 1 (Jan)

1992

Volume 10
Issue 12 (Dec)Issue 11 (Nov)Issue 10 (Oct)Issue 9 (Sep)Issue 8 (Aug)Issue 7 (Jul)Issue 6 (Jun)Issue 5 (May)Issue 4 (Apr)Issue 3 (Mar)Issue 2 (Feb)Issue 1 (Jan)

1991

Volume 9
Issue 12 (Dec)Issue 11 (Nov)Issue 10 (Oct)Issue 9 (Sep)Issue 8 (Aug)Issue 7 (Jul)Issue 6 (Jun)Issue 5 (May)Issue 4 (Apr)Issue 3 (Mar)Issue 1/2 (Jan)

1990

Volume 8
Issue 12 (Dec)Issue 11 (Nov)Issue 10 (Oct)Issue 9 (Sep)Issue 8 (Aug)Issue 7 (Jul)Issue 6 (Jun)Issue 5 (May)Issue 4 (Apr)Issue 3 (Mar)Issue 2 (Feb)Issue 1 (Jan)

1989

Volume 7
Issue 12 (Dec)Issue 11 (Nov)Issue 10 (Oct)Issue 9 (Sep)Issue 8 (Aug)Issue 7 (Jul)Issue 6 (Jun)Issue 5 (May)Issue 4 (Apr)Issue 3 (Mar)Issue 2 (Feb)Issue 1 (Jan)

1988

Volume 6
Issue 12 (Dec)Issue 11 (Nov)Issue 10 (Oct)Issue 9 (Sep)Issue 8 (Aug)Issue 7 (Jul)Issue 6 (Jun)Issue 5 (May)Issue 4 (Apr)Issue 3 (Mar)Issue 2 (Feb)Issue 1 (Jan)

1987

Volume 5
Issue 12 (Dec)Issue 11 (Nov)Issue 10 (Oct)Issue 9 (Sep)Issue 8 (Aug)Issue 7 (Jul)Issue 6 (Jun)Issue 5 (May)Issue 4 (Apr)Issue 3 (Mar)Issue 2 (Feb)Issue 1 (Jan)

1986

Volume 4
Issue 12 (Dec)Issue 11 (Nov)Issue 10 (Oct)Issue 9 (Sep)Issue 8 (Aug)Issue 7 (Jul)Issue 6 (Jun)Issue 5 (May)Issue 4 (Apr)Issue 3 (Mar)Issue 2 (Feb)Issue 1 (Jan)

1985

Volume 3
Issue 12 (Dec)Issue 11 (Nov)Issue 10 (Oct)Issue 9 (Sep)Issue 8 (Aug)Issue 7 (Jul)Issue 6 (Jun)Issue 5 (May)Issue 4 (Apr)Issue 3 (Mar)Issue 2 (Feb)

1984

Volume 2
Issue 12 (Dec)Issue 11 (Nov)Issue 10 (Oct)Issue 9 (Sep)Issue 8 (Aug)Issue 7 (Jul)Issue 6 (Jun)Issue 5 (May)Issue 4 (Apr)Issue 3 (Mar)Issue 1 (Jan)

1983

Volume 1
Issue 9 (Sep)Issue 8 (Aug)Issue 7 (Jul)Issue 6 (Jun)Issue 5 (May)Issue 4 (Apr)Issue 3 (Mar)Issue 1 (Jan)
journal article
Open Access Collection
Facilitating campus interactions – critical success factors according to university facility directors

Jansz, Sascha Naomi; van Dijk, Terry; Mobach, Mark P.

2021 Facilities

doi: 10.1108/f-03-2020-0031

The purpose of this paper is to investigate which critical success factors (CSFs) influence interaction on campuses as identified by the facility directors (FDs) of Dutch university campuses and to discuss how these compare with the literature.Design/methodology/approachAll 13 Dutch university campus FDs were interviewed (office and walking interview), focussing on CSFs relating to spaces and services that facilitate interaction. Open coding and thematic analysis resulted in empirically driven categories indicated by the respondents. Similarities and differences between the CSFs as previously identified in the literature are discussed.FindingsThe following categories emerged: constraints, motivators, designing spaces, designing services, building community and creating coherence. The campus is seen as a system containing subsystems and is itself part of a wider system (environment), forming a layered structure. Constraints and motivators are part of the environment but cannot be separated from the other four categories, as they influence their applicability.Research limitations/implicationsThis study was limited to interviews with FDs and related staff. The richness of the findings shows that this was a relevant and efficient data collection strategy for the purpose of this study.Practical implicationsBy viewing the campus as an open system, this study puts the practical applicability of CSFs into perspective yet provides a clear overview of CSFs related to campus interaction that may be included in future campus design policies.Social implicationsThis (more) complete overview of CSFs identified in both literature and practice will help FDs, policymakers and campus designers to apply these CSFs in their campus designs. This improved campus design would increase the number of knowledge sharing interactions, contributing to innovation and valorisation. This could create a significant impact in all research fields, such as health, technology or well-being, benefitting society as a whole.Originality/valueThis study provides a comprehensive overview and comparison of CSFs from both literature and practice, allowing more effective application of CSFs in campus design policies. A framework for future studies on CSFs for interaction on campuses is provided.
journal article
LitStream Collection
Understanding the knowledge and engagement of facilities management with dementia-friendly design in Irish hospitals: an exploratory study

Xidous, Dimitra; Grey, Tom; Kennelly, Sean P.; O’Neill, Desmond

2021 Facilities

doi: 10.1108/f-01-2020-0012

This exploratory study stems from research conducted between 2015–2018 focussing on dementia-friendly design (DFD) in hospitals (Grey T. et al. 2018). Specifically, this study focusses on facilities management (FM) staff in Irish hospitals to gain a preliminary understanding of the level of knowledge and engagement of FM in the implementation of dementia-friendly hospital (DFH) design.Design/methodology/approachA mixed-methods approach based on a series of ad hoc semi-structured interviews, and an online survey. The aims were, namely, assess the extent of FM engagement in hospital works; measure the level of awareness regarding DFD; and identify facilitators and barriers to DFD in hospital settings. Participants (74) comprised FM staff in 35 Irish acute care hospitals. The research findings are based on thematic analysis of ad hoc semi-structured interviews (participants, n = 4) and survey responses (participants, n = 13).FindingsWhile FM staff reported to possess important knowledge for building DFH, they also mentioned a lack of engagement of FM in design processes and hospital works.Practical implicationsThe research has gained insight into the role of FM in promoting a dementia-friendly approach. Lack of or poor engagement of FM in design processes and hospital works means not fully tapping into rich expertise that would be invaluable in the development, implementation and maintenance of DFH. Universal design is a key driver for facilitating their engagement in the design, implementation and maintenance of DFH environments.Originality/valueThis is the first study exploring the role of FM in supporting a DFD approach in acute care hospitals.
journal article
LitStream Collection
Expert-based approach to rank critical asset assessment factors for healthcare facilities

Salem, Dalia; Elwakil, Emad

2021 Facilities

doi: 10.1108/f-05-2020-0060

This research’s main objective is to develop an expert-based approach to rank critical asset assessment factors for health-care facilities. This approach will improve the asset management of health-care buildings. This paper aims to study and prioritize the relative importance of asset criticality factors.Design/methodology/approachThe research methodology begins with a comprehensive literature review of state-of-the-art health-care facilities management, asset management tools, critical asset assessment and approaches to model techniques. Then, using the expert-based opinion and the collected data through the analytical hierarchy process approach to developing the asset assessment model contains physical, environmental, general safety and revenue loss assessment models.FindingsResults showed that the general safety factors and the sub-factors of life safety and physical safety contributed to asset condition assessment.Practical implicationsThe proposed critical asset assessment ranking will benefit health-care facility organizations by assessing their asset performance according to capital renewal needs.Originality/valueThis study offers a novel conceptual framework to understand and determine rank critical asset assessment factors for health-care facilities.
journal article
LitStream Collection
Who should clean the university? The in-house outsourcing decision from a student perspective

Palm, Peter

2021 Facilities

doi: 10.1108/f-03-2020-0025

This paper aims to investigate how the students perceive the cleaning of the university, from an in-house and outsourced perspective.Design/methodology/approachThis research is based on a survey conducted in the different university buildings with a total of 240 students. The survey was then analysed through an ordinal regression.FindingsThe ordinal regression indicates a statistically significant result were student are more satisfied with the cleaning performed by the outsourced service provider.Research limitations/implicationsThe research in this paper is limited to one Swedish university. But, the overall strategies for how to organise the cleaning service at the university do address all universities. However, the research is limited and more research has to be performed.Practical implicationsThe insight the paper provides regarding how the students perceive the cleaning service at the university gives direct implications to university in relation to how to consider the cleaning service as an important factor.Originality/valueIt provides the first study from a student perspective on the question of cleaning of the university, when previous studies have indicated cleaning as an important function not least to student’s performance and academic results.
journal article
LitStream Collection
Environmental demands and resources: a framework for understanding the physical environment for work

Roskams, Michael; Haynes, Barry

2021 Facilities

doi: 10.1108/f-07-2020-0090

The purpose of this paper is to explore the extent to which Job Demands-Resources (JD-R) theory (Demerouti et al., 2001; Bakker and Demerouti, 2017) is an appropriate conceptual framework for understanding the physical environment for work.Design/methodology/approachA conceptual analysis of the multidisciplinary workplace literature was performed to assess the core propositions of JD-R theory as they relate to the workplace environment.FindingsThe analysis confirms that the workplace environment can be viewed as a composite of environmental demands (which instigate a health impairment process) and environmental resources (which trigger an engagement process). Employees proactively try to improve the suitability of their workspace through environmental crafting, motivated by minimising demands and maximising resources.Originality/valueThe application of JD-R theory to the workplace environment fills a gap in the literature for a framework which captures the dynamic nature of the employee-workplace relationship.
journal article
LitStream Collection
Chiller system performance management with market basket analysis

Ho, Wai Tung; Yu, Fu Wing

2021 Facilities

doi: 10.1108/f-09-2020-0107

This study aims to apply association rule mining (ARM) to uncover specific associations between operating components of a chiller system and improve its coefficient of performance (COP), hence reducing the electricity use of buildings with central air conditioning.Design/methodology/approachFirst, 13 operating variables were identified, comprising measures of temperatures and flow rates of system components and their switching statuses. The variables were grouped into four bins before carrying out ARM. Strong rules were produced to associate the variables and switching statuses with different COP classes.FindingsThe strong rules explain existing constraints on practising chiller sequencing and prioritise variables for optimisation. Based on strong rules for the highest COP class, the optimal operating strategy involves rescheduling chillers and their associated components in pairs during a high load operation. Resetting the chilled water supply temperature is the next best strategy, followed by resetting the condenser water entering temperature, subject to operating constraints.Research limitations/implicationsThis study considers the even frequency method with four bins only. Replication work can be done with other discretisation methods and different numbers of classes to compare potential differences in the bin ranges of the optimised variables.Practical implicationsThe strong rules identified by ARM highlight associations between variables and high or low COPs. This supports the selection of critical variables and the operating status of system components to maximise the COP. Tailor-made optimisation strategies and the associated electricity savings can be further evaluated.Originality/valuePrevious studies applied ARM for chiller fault detection but without considering system performance under the interaction of different components. The novelty of this study is its demonstration of ARM’s intelligence at discovering associations in past operating data. This enables the identification of tailor-made energy management opportunities, which are essential for all engineering systems. ARM is free from the prediction errors of typical regression and black-box models.
Browse All Journals

Related Journals:

Architectural Science Review