Navon, R and Kolton, O (2006) Model for automated monitoring of fall hazards in building construction. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 132(7), pp. 733-740. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
Construction professionals do not attribute to accident prevention the same importance as they do to the main ("value adding") activities. As a result, not enough time and effort are invested in safety issues. Fall from heights ("fall") is the main cause for fatalities and injuries in construction projects. The objective of the present research is to automate fall prevention procedures. An automated model that identifies the dangerous activities in the project's schedule was developed. It also defines the areas in the building where these hazards appear, proposes protective activities (guardrails erection), and integrates them into the schedule. Additionally, it constantly compares the planned guardrails (location and time) and the ones actually used on site. The model provides textual and graphical reports and warns when guardrails are missing, are incomplete, or have been partially removed. The model was implemented, tested in an ongoing project, and presented to 14 experts who were asked to evaluate it. The experts' main conclusions were (1) the model is accurate; (2) the model is a very useful managerial tool in that it identifies all fall hazards, including ones in less visible areas; (3) it enables early detection of fall hazards before and during construction, even during the design stage; and (4) the model is an important managerial, monitoring, and control tool keeping track of all fall hazards and protective measures, and warns when a safety problem occurs.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | automation; construction sites; control methods; data collection; feedback control; hazards; monitoring |
| Index terms: | fall hazard, design stage, construction project, building construction, construction site, safety issue, injury, accident prevention, prevention, automation, fatalities, construction professional, monitoring, control method |
| Subjects: | building construction, health conditions and diseases, environmental health, health risk and incident analysis, professional development, financial risk, monitoring and control, automation and robotics, production management, work location, professional practice, control systems |
| Topics: | Information Management, Project Management, Health and Safety, Cost Management, Business Strategy, Sustainability, Construction Technology, Digital Applications, Design Practice, Site Management |
| 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