FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W1255372680> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W1255372680 abstract "Comparison of Automated and Robotic Support Bodies for Building Facade Upgrading Kepa Iturralde, Thomas Linner, Thomas Bock Pages 1-8 (2015 Proceedings of the 32nd ISARC, Oulu, Finland, ISBN 978-951-758-597-2, ISSN 2413-5844) Abstract: The need for ameliorating the physical properties of existing buildings' envelopes is growing. For that purpose, a widely used solution is to add new layers on the external face. Each layer performs a function; insulation, moisture barrier or finishing. Energy harvesting devices can be installed on too. Each of these layers don't need to be assembled on site separately, there are already experiences with the installation of prefab components on the external face of existing façades. Those components can be accurately customized and adjusted to the geometrical irregularities of the existing building wall. Though, the installation of these prefab components is primarily based on manual tools and techniques. A robotic installing performance would facilitate the fixation of these new components on the exterior of the building. This means that the robotic tools must reach every point of the building's façade with enough stability and accuracy. Therefore, a proper support system (also known as robot body) is needed. Those supporting bodies should host different automated tools for installing the component. Before creating a structure or body from scratch, different existing support systems have been analyzed. First, there are the traditional support systems, where the operator works using manual tools. Second, robots and automated mechanisms that work on the exterior of the building have been studied. And third, technology in other fields has been taken into account. After the results of the virtual simulation have been gathered, those are compared with the data of traditional or manual installation methods. Thus, we can see if the solution is competitive enough in terms of cost and time. Besides, it is remarked the adequacy of each body type to work in different building typologies and it is also pointed out the suitability of each support body type for installing different façade components and materials. Finally, as a conclusion, the article defines possible future research. Keywords: support body, façade, refurbishment, DOI: https://doi.org/10.22260/ISARC2015/0078 Download fulltext Download BibTex Download Endnote (RIS) TeX Import to Mendeley" @default.
• W1255372680 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W1255372680 creator A5015168828 @default.
• W1255372680 creator A5076518905 @default.
• W1255372680 creator A5081784013 @default.
• W1255372680 date "2015-06-18" @default.
• W1255372680 modified "2023-09-27" @default.
• W1255372680 title "Comparison of Automated and Robotic Support Bodies for Building Facade Upgrading" @default.
• W1255372680 cites W171590525 @default.
• W1255372680 cites W2005834880 @default.
• W1255372680 cites W2027700052 @default.
• W1255372680 cites W2325415133 @default.
• W1255372680 cites W2747095801 @default.
• W1255372680 cites W2911940735 @default.
• W1255372680 doi "https://doi.org/10.22260/isarc2015/0078" @default.
• W1255372680 hasPublicationYear "2015" @default.
• W1255372680 type Work @default.
• W1255372680 sameAs 1255372680 @default.
• W1255372680 citedByCount "2" @default.
• W1255372680 countsByYear W12553726802015 @default.
• W1255372680 countsByYear W12553726802018 @default.
• W1255372680 crossrefType "proceedings-article" @default.
• W1255372680 hasAuthorship W1255372680A5015168828 @default.
• W1255372680 hasAuthorship W1255372680A5076518905 @default.
• W1255372680 hasAuthorship W1255372680A5081784013 @default.
• W1255372680 hasBestOaLocation W12553726802 @default.
• W1255372680 hasConcept C111919701 @default.
• W1255372680 hasConcept C121332964 @default.
• W1255372680 hasConcept C127413603 @default.
• W1255372680 hasConcept C146778888 @default.
• W1255372680 hasConcept C147176958 @default.
• W1255372680 hasConcept C154945302 @default.
• W1255372680 hasConcept C168167062 @default.
• W1255372680 hasConcept C170154142 @default.
• W1255372680 hasConcept C2780113678 @default.
• W1255372680 hasConcept C41008148 @default.
• W1255372680 hasConcept C90509273 @default.
• W1255372680 hasConcept C97355855 @default.
• W1255372680 hasConceptScore W1255372680C111919701 @default.
• W1255372680 hasConceptScore W1255372680C121332964 @default.
• W1255372680 hasConceptScore W1255372680C127413603 @default.
• W1255372680 hasConceptScore W1255372680C146778888 @default.
• W1255372680 hasConceptScore W1255372680C147176958 @default.
• W1255372680 hasConceptScore W1255372680C154945302 @default.
• W1255372680 hasConceptScore W1255372680C168167062 @default.
• W1255372680 hasConceptScore W1255372680C170154142 @default.
• W1255372680 hasConceptScore W1255372680C2780113678 @default.
• W1255372680 hasConceptScore W1255372680C41008148 @default.
• W1255372680 hasConceptScore W1255372680C90509273 @default.
• W1255372680 hasConceptScore W1255372680C97355855 @default.
• W1255372680 hasLocation W12553726801 @default.
• W1255372680 hasLocation W12553726802 @default.
• W1255372680 hasLocation W12553726803 @default.
• W1255372680 hasOpenAccess W1255372680 @default.
• W1255372680 hasPrimaryLocation W12553726801 @default.
• W1255372680 hasRelatedWork W138305598 @default.
• W1255372680 hasRelatedWork W2287882110 @default.
• W1255372680 hasRelatedWork W2329081153 @default.
• W1255372680 hasRelatedWork W2377792903 @default.
• W1255372680 hasRelatedWork W2793636143 @default.
• W1255372680 hasRelatedWork W2993787207 @default.
• W1255372680 hasRelatedWork W3208053416 @default.
• W1255372680 hasRelatedWork W4206490988 @default.
• W1255372680 hasRelatedWork W4353062962 @default.
• W1255372680 hasRelatedWork W2288258619 @default.
• W1255372680 isParatext "false" @default.
• W1255372680 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W1255372680 magId "1255372680" @default.
• W1255372680 workType "article" @default.