Brown, D C (2003) Novel method of excavation. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 129(2), pp. 222-225. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
Construction in city center areas frequently requires below ground construction of underground car parks and basements immediately adjacent to existing buildings. When existing buildings are on shallow foundations, this form of construction poses considerable risks of litigation through damage to the existing buildings caused by ground movement. Consequently, construction costs of below ground construction in this type of environment are considerably higher than above ground construction costs. This paper presents a novel methodology for carrying out this form of construction and offering the advantages of considerably reduced risk of damage to adjacent buildings while still providing a cost-effective means of construction. The paper includes sufficient detail to allow this methodology to be adopted by other practitioners.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | earthwork; excavation; methodology |
| Index terms: | shallow foundation, litigation, car park, construction cost, practitioner, excavation, methodology, city centre, movement, earthwork |
| Subjects: | construction operations, financial and cost management, construction methods, health behaviours and lifestyles, practitioner, dispute resolution, infrastructure and transport systems, structural engineering, research methods |
| Topics: | Roles and Professions, Engineering Principles, Research Practice, Cost Management, Site Management, Urban Studies, Legal Issues |
| 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