Everett, J G and Kelly, D L (1998) Drywall joint finishing: Productivity and ergonomics. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 124(5), pp. 347-353. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
Gypsum drywall panels are used extensively for wall cladding and structural fireproofing. Most interior building walls are of sufficient length and width to require at least two panels of drywall for complete coverage. Generally speaking, in residential construction, boards are placed horizontally (perpendicular to studs), and in commercial construction, boards are placed vertically (parallel to studs). This paper analyzes the effect of drywall panel and joint orientation on joint finishing operations. Productivity comparisons are made by investigating the total quantity of joint produced, productivity rates for various types of horizontal and vertical joints, and total time required to finish the joints. For typical residential applications, horizontal joints require less time to finish. For many commercial applications, vertical joints require less time to finish. However, there are many exceptions. Contractors and designers can save time and money by selecting the proper orientation. The locations of the joints on the wall also affects the motions and positions the craft worker must endure to complete the work. Professional finishers prefer horizontal joints because they greatly reduce the ergonomic stresses associated with bending down and reaching overhead.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Index terms: | gypsum, ergonomics, designer, commercial construction, productivity, cladding, residential construction |
| Subjects: | occupational health and safety management, management, construction integration, building materials, profession, construction type |
| Topics: | Design Practice, Construction Materials, Business Strategy, Health and Safety, Construction Technology, Roles and Professions |
| Descriptive scope: | 2 PC |
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