Anderson, S D; Fisher, D J and Rahman, S P (2000) Integrating constructability into project development: A process approach. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 126(2), pp. 81-88. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
The National Cooperative Highway Research Program initiated a research project to develop a constructability review process (CRP) for transportation facilities. The basic objective of this research was to develop a systematic approach and methodology for constructability reviews. This paper describes the development of a CRP that meets the National Cooperative Highway Research Program's research objectives. A process approach is followed to integrate constructability improvements into project development for transportation projects. A function modeling tool is used to portray the interface between the CRP and the project development process. The function modeling tool captures constructability functions and information necessary to perform these functions. The research method to develop the CRP is presented. The CRP has three phases corresponding to planning, design, and construction of a transportation project. Seven constructability functions are performed in each phase. The model was tested using two transportation projects of different complexity.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Index terms: | complexity, methodology, program, transportation project, modelling, project development, constructability |
| Subjects: | project delivery, analytical methods, infrastructure and transport systems, systems engineering, software systems, construction integration, research methods |
| Topics: | Research Practice, Project Management, Engineering Principles, Design Practice, Digital Applications |
| 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