Mitropoulos, P and Tajima, V (2022) Constructability opportunities in the engineering design of marine pier structures: A case study. International Journal of Construction Management, 22(3), pp. 366-378. ISSN 1562-3599
Abstract
This case study identifies design decisions that generated significant constructability benefits on a concrete pier project at San Diego, California. The new 152 m (1,500-foot) pier was built to support the utility needs of multiple stationed ships. The project was design-build with a fixed-price contract. Based on their experience with similar projects, the engineer and contractor incorporated several new design features to reduce the difficulty of the work, improve the productivity and safety of the operations, and reduce project cost and schedule. The engineer and contractor identified nine design features as most important in improving the constructability of the new pier: (1) Design of plumb rather than battered piles; (2) Optimal and uniform pile spacing; (3) Increased depth of pile dowel tubes; (4) Use of T-headed dowels over angled dowels; (5) Pile caps embedded in concrete deck; (6) Design of flush deck soffit; (7) Reduced variety of rebar sizes; (8) Increased depth of concrete rebar cover; and (9) Minimizing expansion joints.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | case study; concrete pier; constructability; marine construction; pier design |
| Index terms: | engineering design, rebar, constructability, case study, engineer, productivity, design decision, tube, project cost |
| Subjects: | design process, economics, construction integration, management, design practice, materials science, profession, data collection methods, building materials |
| Topics: | Digital Applications, Design Practice, Construction Materials, Engineering Principles, Research Practice, Cost Management, Business Strategy, Roles and Professions |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCE |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here