Moselhi, O; Fazio, P and Hason, S (1992) Automation of concrete slab-on-grade construction. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 118(4), pp. 731-748. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
This paper addresses the effective use of various levels of automation in concrete slab-on-grade construction, considering conventional manual construction, semiautomated placing using a laser-guided screeding machine and automated finishing using a robotic floor finisher. For both manual construction and semiautomated placing, information is obtained through structured interviews of concrete contractors and site observations. Information on robotic finishing is obtained from robot developers. When compared to the conventional manual construction of a typical (Equation presented) 150-mm-thick slab, accomplished in 10 hours with a 12-man placing crew and a six-man finishing crew, automation of finishing alone is found to offer benefits through a 30% reduction in the size of the finishing crew, whereas automation of placing alone offers benefits through a 33% reduction in the placing crew size and a 20% activity-duration reduction. Automation of both placing and finishing allows a 33% placing-crew-reduction, 25% finishing-crew increase, and a 60% activity-duration reduction. These benefits are considerably increased when higher quality is explicitly specified.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Index terms: | automation, duration, placing, interview |
| Subjects: | project controls, automation and robotics, concrete and cementitious materials, data collection methods |
| Topics: | Research Practice, Construction Materials, Digital Applications, Time Control |
| 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