AbouRizk, S and Mather, K (2000) Simplifying simulation modeling through integration with 3D CAD. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 126(6), pp. 475-483. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
This paper discusses an evolutionary approach for simplifying the process of building and experimenting with computer simulation models of heavy earthmoving construction operations. Simulation models are automatically generated from high-level descriptions in CAD by making use of add-on tools to capture key information. This includes product information (facility to be constructed or components thereof), construction resources utilized, construction methods or processes followed, and general project data. The automation and generalization of this approach relied heavily on advancements in the area of computer simulation, specifically in the use of modular and hierarchical simulation concepts. This paper discusses the required CAD developments, the modular simulation modeling approach, and a prototype earthmoving simulation system.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Index terms: | integration, project data, computer simulation, prototype, construction method, simulation modelling, automation, earthmoving, product information, construction operation |
| Subjects: | innovation studies, data collection methods, analytical methods, construction operations, modelling and simulation, automation and robotics, building construction, organizational analysis |
| Topics: | Engineering Principles, Research Practice, Business Strategy, Digital Applications, Organizational Design, Site Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCEA |
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