Zhang, J and El-Diraby, T E (2006) Constructability analysis of the bridge superstructure rotation construction method in China. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 132(4), pp. 353-362. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
Constructability analysis can provide valuable input to optimizing urban bridge construction in terms of reducing impacts on traffic, safety, and overall project budget and duration. This paper presents a constructability analysis of the superstructure rotation method for bridge construction. The method includes building the bridge parallel to the obstacle being overpassed (a river or a highway) and then rotating the superstructure into place. The method has been used successfully in over one-hundred bridges (mostly in China). The paper documents two case studies of bridges that used this method and provides an analysis of the constructability of the method. This includes identification of the factors influencing the constructability of the methods and lists of design and construction objectives/strategies that support the constructability of bridges using this method.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | bridge construction; China; constructability; construction costs; construction methods; superstructures |
| Index terms: | strategy, duration, constructability, construction method, bridge construction, case study, documents, design and construction, China, construction cost |
| Subjects: | management, data collection methods, Geography, project controls, construction integration, infrastructure engineering, contractual arrangements, financial and cost management, professional development, building construction |
| Topics: | Geographical Context, Cost Management, Information Management, Time Control, Business Strategy, Site Management, Procurement, Research Practice, Design Practice, Engineering Principles |
| 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