Amirkhanian, S N and Baker, N J (1992) Expert system for equipment selection for earth-moving operations. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 118(2), pp. 318-331. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
Proper earth-moving equipment selection is a major factor when trying to satisfy a project’s budget and schedule requirements. The selection of the equipment is best performed by personnel with experience in earth-moving operations. In this research project, a rule-based expert system (i.e., VP-Expert) was used to develop a system for selecting earth-moving equipment. The system, with 930 rules, interprets information concerning a particular project’s soil conditions, operator performance, and required earth-moving operations. The knowledge for the development of the expert system was obtained from several experts working for two contractors, an equipment rental company, equipment manufacturers' sales representatives (e.g., Caterpillar, Case) and several geotechnical engineers. The system was tested, using the requirements for an actual project, by three contractors. The contractors' selections compared favorably with the developed expert system with regard to the size and type of equipment needed to perform the various tasks.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Index terms: | geotechnical engineer, personnel, equipment selection, expert system, manufacturer |
| Subjects: | procurement capability, practitioner, profession, management, data management |
| Topics: | Human Resources, Supply Chain Management, Roles and Professions, Digital Applications |
| 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