Zayed, T M and Halpin, D W (2004) Simulation as a tool for pile productivity assessment. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 130(3), pp. 394-404. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
Subsurface obstacles, lack of contractor experience, site planning in addition to other factors complicated the installation process of pile foundation. Productivity and cost estimates for such a process are affected by these difficulties. Therefore this study focuses on the piling process productivity and cost assessment using simulation. Data were collected for this study through designated questionnaires, site interviews, and telephone calls to experts in different construction companies. Many variables have been considered in the piling construction process. Two simulation models have been designed and validated to assess piling process productivity and cost. Consequently, two sets of charts have been developed based upon the validated models to provide the decision-maker with a solid planning, scheduling, and control tool for piling process projects.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | construction; costs; decision making; models; piles; productivity; simulation |
| Index terms: | cost estimate, productivity, questionnaire, construction process, decision-making, construction company, pile foundation, scheduling, interview |
| Subjects: | operations research, financial and cost management, organization, data collection methods, decision analysis, building construction, structural engineering, management |
| Topics: | Risk Management, Research Practice, Engineering Principles, Business Strategy, Cost Management, Time Control, 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