Using Gaussian and hyperbolic distributions for quality improvement in construction: Case study approach

Tam, V W Y; Le, K N and Le, H N (2008) Using Gaussian and hyperbolic distributions for quality improvement in construction: Case study approach. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 134(7), pp. 555-561. ISSN 0733-9364

Abstract

The Gaussian distribution and the 6 principle have been widely used in the field of construction quality management with great success. This paper proposes a theoretical study on a new hyperbolic distribution using the 6 principle to improve quality in construction management. The hyperbolic and Gaussian distributions are then numerically compared by estimating their important statistical properties, such as population in range, number of defects, yield percentage, and defects per million opportunities. The impacts of these factors are briefly discussed to give guidance to organizations in the construction industry on how to lower cost and improve project quality by prevention. A case study showing the cost data of a construction consultant company is presented. The data's population in range and defects per million opportunities are estimated using Gaussian and hyperbolic distributions. In this particular case study, the hyperbolic distribution is shown to be more effective in quality improvement by prevention than the Gaussian distribution. This also validates the hyperbolic distribution as a suitable distribution for construction quality management.

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: case reports; gaussian process; quality control
Index terms: population, estimating, construction quality, case study, quality improvement, quality control, prevention, construction industry, cost data
Subjects: financial and cost management, project delivery, data collection methods, demography, industry analysis, quality assurance, accounting and finance, financial risk
Topics: Quality Management, Urban Studies, Research Practice, Cost Management
Descriptive scope: 4 PCTE

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