Bernold, L E (1989) Simulation of nonsteady construction processes. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 115(2), pp. 163-178. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
Construction, with its uniqueness and unusual operational characteristics, faces special handicaps dealing with process planning and control. In order to study the productivity and the resource efficiency of construction operations, one has to consider the impact of a wide variety of factors. This paper presents a framework for the identification of sources of process delays. It focuses on the study of the relationship between storage limitations of flow units within a production system and the productivity of the system. In addition, the effect of breakdown delays in combination with different storage conditions are discussed. The CYCLONE (CYCLic Operations NEtwork) modeling and simulation technique was used as an analytical tool for this study. Enhancements to the existing Micro-CYCLONE simulation program, which enable it to handle the necessary new modeling elements, will be introduced. The analysis shows that generally higher storage constraints result in higher overall productivity. However, certain constraints and process structures present specific conditions where the general rule does not apply.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Index terms: | productivity, construction operation, cyclone, modelling, resource efficiency, face, production system, construction process, program |
| Subjects: | manufacturing engineering, management, software systems, building construction, climate science, psychology, construction operations, analytical methods |
| Topics: | Engineering Principles, Business Strategy, Sustainability, Digital Applications, Site Management, Organizational Design |
| Descriptive scope: | 2 PC |
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