Paek, J H and Ock, J H (1996) Innovative building construction technique: Modified up/down method. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 122(2), pp. 141-146. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
The up/down construction method has great potential to shorten construction time. Until several years ago, this method had rarely been used in the United States. Recently, however, it has emerged, being applied in several projects, and its effectiveness in saving construction time is being proven. While efficient in terms of scheduling, the up/down method poses some disadvantages and risks for the contractor due to its unusual and complicated construction procedures. Various modifications of the up/down technique can be devised to accommodate project conditions and the contractor's experience and familiarity with a given construction methodology. This paper presents a modified up/down method that depends on more conventional construction techniques, but that can still result in significant construction time savings. A real construction project is presented to illustrate the effectiveness of the modified up/down method in terms of construction time saving and practical cost considerations. Applying the method presented in this paper provides an easy and useful way for the contractor to shorten construction duration and, in the long run, reduce costs.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Index terms: | savings, effectiveness, construction time, duration, scheduling, United States, construction method, building construction, construction project, methodology |
| Subjects: | operations research, economic analysis, building construction, project controls, performance management, research methods, Geography, production management |
| Topics: | Construction Technology, Geographical Context, Project Management, Research Practice, Business Strategy, Site Management, Time Control, Quality Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCT |
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