Tsimberdonis, A I and Murphree, E L (1994) Equipment management through operational failure costs. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 120(3), pp. 522-535. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
This paper defines operational failure costs (OFCs), presents a method for their development, and examines their usefulness as a means of equipment management. It considers variables related to the projected use of the equipment in the context of the production team and the construction site as a whole as well as the importance of each piece of equipment. In addition, it takes into account, the point of view of the company in light of management objectives and the number of projects it undertakes concurrently. Furthermore, this paper examines the magnitude and importance of costs caused by equipment failure; demonstrates the importance of equipment assignment; examines the relative equipment importance within a project; avoids the concept of unit cost that is considered a weakness in linear programming approaches; examines the use of OFC as a decision-support tool for equipment purchase, retirement, replacement, rent, and lease; and evaluates detailed operations plans as well as contingency plans. Finally, it presents an application of the method in a “typical” earthmoving project using SLAM II as the simulation software.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Index terms: | replacement, unit cost, earthmoving, linear programming, construction site, equipment management, lease |
| Subjects: | financial and cost management, operational management, land economics, materials science, algorithms, construction operations, work location |
| Topics: | Cost Management, Plant and Equipment, Urban Studies, Site Management, Engineering Principles, Digital Applications |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCA |
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