Analysis of earth-moving systems using discrete-event simulation

Smith, S D; Osborne, J R and Forde, M C (1995) Analysis of earth-moving systems using discrete-event simulation. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 121(4), pp. 388-396. ISSN 0733-9364

Abstract

This paper outlines experiments performed on a simulation model of excavator-dump-trucktype earth-moving operations with the intention of indicating the parts of an earth-moving system to which the output is most sensitive. Response-surface methodology was used initially to indicate the relationship between two factors: The truck travel time, from loader to dump area and back; and the truck spot (or maneuver) time at the loader. This method indicated that the form of the relationship between these factors varied at different values but did not indicate how often factors affected the output. Full factorial designs were then done that not only were more economical in terms of the number of experimental runs required but also indicated that the most important factors are number of trucks, the haul and return (travel) time, the number of passes per load, and the loading rate. The simulation has highlighted a number of sensitivities. If load pass time is reduced then production will not increase if the operation is already under resourced. Conversely, production will not automatically increase by adding more trucks to the operation.

Item Type: Article
Index terms: loading, experiment, methodology
Subjects: data collection methods, construction operations, research methods
Topics: Research Practice, Site Management
Descriptive scope: 3 PTE

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