Pulaski, M H and Horman, M J (2005) Organizing constructability knowledge for design. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 131(8), pp. 911-919. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
Construction contractors have significant constructability expertise to contribute to the design process of projects. To utilize this expertise most effectively, the right information must be made available to the design team at the proper point in time and at the appropriate level of detail. Current methods for utilizing construction knowledge in design have made significant advances to improving projects. However, they are typically rudimentary: unstructured, not very efficient, and rely heavily on reviews. Organizing constructability information according to its use in the design process will allow project teams to take the best advantage of the construction expertise. This paper introduces a model for organizing constructability information based on timing and levels of detail. The model differs from current approaches because of this focus. How the model was developed is described. It is tested on six case study projects to assess applicability on different projects. An illustrative example is provided using a detailed case study of the Pentagon renovation project to show how the model can be used as a metric to guide constructability input during design.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | constructability; contractors; design; information management |
| Index terms: | design team, level of detail, design process, construction contractor, case study, constructability, project team, renovation |
| Subjects: | construction integration, renovation and retrofit, practitioner, design methods, data collection methods, project delivery, professional practice, technical documentation |
| Topics: | Engineering Principles, Project Management, Research Practice, Roles and Professions, Design Practice |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCE |
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