Hornaday, W C; Haas, C T; O’Connor, J T and Wen, J (1993) Computer-aided planning for heavy lifts. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 119(3), pp. 498-515. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
This article presents research into automating some lift planning practices common to industrial construction contractors and owners. A detailed investigation of heavy-lift planning methods was conducted through a series of interviews and lift studies with expert lift planners. This investigation documented a wide variety of manual and computer-aided lift planning methods to perform similar types of planning tasks. Based on the information collected from these interviews and lift studies, a structured systems model was developed of the typical heavy-lift planning process. This structured model is used as an architecture for the development of computer software to aid key planning tasks. An examination of major planning tasks indicates that significant reductions in direct planning costs and indirect construction heavy-lift costs are possible through the implementation of computer-aided planning procedures. Computer-aided procedures would also improve the overall quality of lift planning practices through the automation of tasks which are difficult to perform and are critical to heavy-lift planning accuracy.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Index terms: | industrial construction, implementation, owner, planning method, interview, investigation, automation, planning process, planner, accuracy |
| Subjects: | sociology, contractual arrangements, automation and robotics, project controls, data collection methods, professional development, urban planning, building construction, profession |
| Topics: | Research Practice, Engineering Principles, Digital Applications, Information Management, Procurement, Roles and Professions, Time Control, Stakeholder Management, Governance |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCEA |
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