McCahill, D F and Bernold, L E (1993) Resource-oriented modeling and simulation in construction. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 119(3), pp. 590-606. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
In modeling for simulation, the proper representation of crucial real-world variables is of prime importance. This paper describes the creation of a model that allows simulation of the construction process to be conducted in a simple fashion, in the field, and in a way that is oriented to the attributes of the specific resources available for the process. The developed model uses resources and their attributes as variables. This allows for consideration of resources of different sizes for the same work task, calculation of running task durations during simulation, rule-based release of resources from queues, and maintenance of detailed statistics on each type and size of resource used in the system. Experimentation with established equipment mixes and conditions as shown in published handbooks for earthwork processes has verified the capability of the system to predict production rates for differing equipment mixes and site conditions.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Index terms: | duration, modelling, statistics, earthwork, experiment, construction process |
| Subjects: | construction methods, analytical methods, data collection methods, mathematical modelling, project controls, building construction |
| Topics: | Time Control, Site Management, Engineering Principles, Research Practice |
| 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