Song, Y and Chua, D K H (2006) Modeling of functional construction requirements for constructability analysis. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 132(12), pp. 1314-1326. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
Evaluating construction requirements should be an indispensable part of improving the constructability of a facility project. However, a number of existing function analysis approaches focus mainly on the final functions with respect to the finished facility. The construction industry still lacks methodologies to represent and evaluate the functional construction requirements for constructability analysis. This paper develops the concept of intermediate functions for representing the construction requirements from three perspectives, namely, function user, function provider, and the temporal and spatial relationships between the user and the provider. This is followed by the development of an in-progress product model to abstract the construction lifecycle of a facility product utilizing the concept of component state. Furthermore, the reference relationships among such perspectives as in-progress product, intermediate function, resource, and process are addressed. Based on these reference relationships, the bottleneck states for providing the intermediate functions can be detected. A case study of constructing the deck of a bridge using the balanced cantilever approach is presented to illustrate the utilization of this concept and representation.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | constructability; evaluation; models |
| Index terms: | methodology, product model, lifecycle, constructability, modelling, construction industry, case study, function analysis |
| Subjects: | data science, analytical methods, project delivery, modelling and simulation, data collection methods, industry analysis, research methods, construction integration |
| Topics: | Design Practice, Engineering Principles, Project Management, Research Practice |
| Descriptive scope: | 5 PCTEA |
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