El-Diraby, T E and O'Connor, J T (2001) Model for evaluating bridge construction plans. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 127(5), pp. 399-405. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
Effective planning has considerable influence on the successful completion of a bridge project, particularly with respect to minimizing effects on traffic flow, safety, and adjacent business activity. The optimization of such plans is, hence, desirable. However, designers lack objective tools with which to evaluate the effectiveness of their plans. This paper presents a model for evaluating bridge construction plans during the design phase. The model includes five major factors: safety, accessibility, carrying capacity, schedule performance, and budget performance. An additional 22 subfactors were developed to assist in evaluating these major factors. The model was developed based on observation of actual construction sites and through input from industry experts. It was validated through input from another set of industry experts and application to an actual bridge construction planning case.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Index terms: | bridge project, schedule performance, design phase, construction site, accessibility, bridge construction, designer, traffic flow, effectiveness |
| Subjects: | professional practice, infrastructure engineering, project controls, inclusive design, infrastructure and transport systems, work location, performance management, profession, transportation engineering |
| Topics: | Quality Management, Engineering Principles, Site Management, Roles and Professions, Time Control, Design 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