With the imminent rise of vehicle automation the human driver will have increasingly less responsibility for driving. At one point this will even mean that cars will be able to fully drive themselves, so that the driver is relieved of all driving related tasks. In this situation the car effectively becomes a robot, resulting in a novel relationship between human and car. This project explored that relationship by looking at the possible overlap between autonomous vehicles and robotics, aiming to answer the following research questions: What emerging phenomena can be identified from the combination of AVs and robotics? In what way could the combination of AVs and robotics add value to humans’ lives? The project started by reviewing previous shifts in this relationship that came about with technological developments, and a similar analysis of robotics and its relationship to humans. After providing historical context and formulating the current state, the project continued with an exploration of existing work in academia and industry. The findings from this initial exploration helped define a further focus into the relationship between an AV and a community of people that surrounds it. To gain user insights a co-creation workshop was conducted. In these workshops the participants were all part of a certain community, and their task was to envision how a ‘shared mobile space’ (an abstract term used in substitution of AV) and robotics could add value to their lives. The outcomes of these workshops were analysed and together with insights from the related work review they served as input for finding a design analogy for the envisioned future role of the AV. The selected analogy was that of a language buddy, which acts as a sort of catalyst for expats or refugees to be included in a community. To finally bring all findings together and link them to the envisioned future role, a set of design principles was created. After iteration with mobility-related experts they were formulated as follows: when researchers and designers are working on future AVs, they should keep in mind that AVs should be considered shared mobile spaces rather than self-driving cars. Because of the robotic characteristics of the AV, its use-opportunities are far greater than just an evolution of current-day car use. To help with this notion, the following principles should be followed. AVs provide opportunities for interest-based communities to be nonsimultaneously connected in a physical space; Tailored NDRAs should be used to catalyse community inclusion; Adaptability should be a core characteristic of an AV, therefore also of its design process. The work that is presented aims to contribute to both academia and industry. Firstly by shining light on the overlooked community perspective on AV design. By providing the aforementioned design principles this work advocates researchers and practitioners to take on this perspective, to ensure a positive impact on the community level as well. Secondly, by promoting a less car-centric approach to AV design, broader and more experience-focused AV use opportunities may arise.

This research optimizes the environmental impact of a conventional building foundation in Northern Europe while considering the economic cost. The foundation is composed of piles and ground beams. Calculations are performed following relevant building Eurocodes and using life cycle assessment methodology. Concrete and steel accounted for the majority of the environmental impact of foundation alternatives; in particular, steel on piles has a significant influence. Selecting small sections of precast piles or low-reinforcement vibro-piles instead of continuous-flight auger piles can reduce the environmental impacts and economic costs of a foundation by 55% and 40%, respectively. However, using precast beams rather than building them on site can increase the global warming potential (GWP) by up to 10%. Increasing the concrete strength in vibro-piles can reduce the eco-costs, ReCiPe indicator, and cumulated energy demand (CED) by up to 30%; the GWP by 25%; and the economic costs by up to 15%. Designing three piles instead of four piles per beam reduces the eco-costs and ReCiPe by 20–30%, the GWP by 15–20%, the CED by 15–25%, and the costs by 12%. A Pareto analysis was used to select the best foundation alternatives in terms of the combination of costs and eco-burdens, which are those with vibropiles with higher concrete strengths (low reinforcement), cast in situ or prefabricated beams and four piles per beam.@en