Fisher, D J; Anderson, S D and Rahman, S P (2000) Integrating constructability tools into constructability review process. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 126(2), pp. 89-96. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
This paper describes research to develop a constructability review process (CRP) for transportation facilities. This process must incorporate tools to aid in performing constructability reviews. A comprehensive review of literature and existing constructability practices provided the basis for identifying and developing 52 analytical tools for use in a CRP. Detailed descriptions of each tool were developed. Tools were classified by whether they were used to understand/communicate constructability, were used to implement/measure constructability, or were cutting edge technology/computing based. Tools were integrated into the CRP by linking a tool(s) to each constructability function of the review process. Twenty-one constructability functions were included in the final CRP model, supported by 27 basic tools. These 27 selected tools were integrated into the CRP in a user-friendly format, using tables to communicate tool concepts, rather than by merely using text. Another 25 review tools were identified as advanced tools for future application. Road maps were used to indicate the linkage between basic and future tools and the constructability functions the tools support.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Index terms: | linkage, constructability, maps, computing |
| Subjects: | construction integration, spatial and geospatial analysis, business, computing systems |
| Topics: | Digital Applications, Design Practice, Business Strategy, Research Practice |
| 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