LeBlond, D; Owen, F; Gibson Jr, G E; Haas, C T and Traver, A E (1998) Control improvement for advanced construction equipment. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 124(4), pp. 289-296. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
Advancements in the control of construction equipment can have significant benefits in the industry. Better control can lead to improvements in safety, cost, labor turnover, and productivity. It is helpful to characterize improvements in a control system using performance tests. Results of such tests provide a means of comparing control systems. Research at The University of Texas at Austin has resulted in the development of tests to characterize improvements in the control of a large-scale manipulator (LSM). Tests have shown that autonomous control of the LSM has better performance capability than manual control for well-defined movements or simple tasks. However, computer-enhanced manual control is still required for operation in a typical construction environment. Object-oriented programming was used to implement computer-assisted operation modes that enhance the LSM's performance. This paper discusses the development of performance tests for characterizing control systems for LSMs. The new computer-assisted operation modes also are explained. A description is included identifying lessons learned during this research that should be considered during future development of LSMs.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Index terms: | movement, turnover, lessons learned, control system, programming, productivity, construction equipment |
| Subjects: | construction equipment, professional development, monitoring and control, management, health behaviours and lifestyles, programming, business management |
| Topics: | Plant and Equipment, Business Strategy, Research Practice, Information Management, Digital Applications |
| 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