Neely, E S and Neathammer, R (1991) Life-cycle maintenance costs by facility use. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 117(2), pp. 310-320. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
The U.S. Army Construction Engineering Research Laboratory, Champaign, 111., has developed several data bases for determining life-cycle costs of building facilities by functional use. Four data bases have been implemented in a DOS environment for an embellished personal computer. The simplest data base contains average annual maintenance per square foot by building use. The second data base contains both yearly component replacement and annual reoccurring maintenance cost per square foot by building use. The third data base contains labor hours per square foot, equipment hours per square foot, and material cost per square foot by building age and building use. The most detailed data base contains labor hours per square foot, equipment hours per square foot, and material costs per square foot for each individual maintenance task. All data bases can be applied by any organization (cities, universities, corporations) for resource prediction. The data bases are currently being applied by several Army organizations, the Department of the Interior-Historical Preservation Council, Department of the Navy, ASTM (American Society for Testing Materials), and many private organizations. Contents and application of the data bases are described in this paper.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Index terms: | society, laboratory, testing, building age, replacement, construction engineering, maintenance cost |
| Subjects: | asset management, financial management, engineering methods, research management, communities and social development, professional practice, materials science |
| Topics: | Engineering Principles, Research Practice, Stakeholder Management, Business Strategy |
| 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