Swiggum, K E; Anderson, S D and Russell, J S (1994) Case study of burlington cable-stayed bridge. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 120(3), pp. 649-666. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
Cable-stayed bridges are becoming increasingly popular in the United States. However, the lack of experience in cable-stayed bridge construction may lead to unsuccessful projects including cost overruns and schedule delays. In light of these potential problems, a need exists to document the methods of construction used in past cable-stayed bridge projects. This paper documents the construction of the Burlington Cable-Stayed Bridge. Throughout the paper, issues regarding constructability and innovation are highlighted. Interviewed project participants agreed that this project was successful. The success is measured by the ability of contractors, subcontractors, material suppliers, and inspectors to deliver a project on time and within budget. This case study describes the general characteristics of the project, significant construction methods and techniques, and factors contributing to project success.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Index terms: | constructability, case study, cost overrun, bridge construction, construction method, United States, schedule delay, documents, bridge project, becoming, project success, subcontractor |
| Subjects: | project controls, Geography, professional development, practitioner, infrastructure and transport systems, infrastructure engineering, financial and cost management, data collection methods, philosophical process, building construction, construction integration, project management theory and practice |
| Topics: | Information Management, Geographical Context, Cost Management, Project Management, Roles and Professions, Design Practice, Engineering Principles, Site Management, Time Control, Research Practice |
| 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