Kim, C W; Kim, T; Lee, U K; Cho, H and Kang, K I (2016) Advanced steel beam assembly approach for improving safety of structural steel workers. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 142(4): 05015019, ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
This study describes an advanced steel beam assembly approach to improve the safety of structural steel workers compared with that of the conventional process in construction. The approach uses a self-supported steel joint that changes the shape of existing steel members, an automated wire control machine that supports the assembly process, and control by a worker on the work floor. Development procedures consisted of the following steps: (1) setting up the development direction, (2) designing and producing the prototypes, (3) assessing the proposed approach through mock-up tests and modifying the prototypes, and (4) verifying the proposed approach through field application at a pilot project site. Overall, the time and cost to assemble beams in the pilot project site were reduced by 3 days and 1365.32, respectively. In particular, safety was improved by 82.35% compared with the conventional process. The proposed approach is expected to be a practical alternative providing improved safety of the steel beam assembly process. Furthermore, development procedures involved in this study may be useful to researchers interested in developing advanced construction methods.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | advanced steel beam assembly approach; automated wire control machine; construction materials and methods; safety improvement; self-supported steel joint |
| Index terms: | construction material, beam, prototype, construction method |
| Subjects: | building construction, structural engineering, building materials, modelling and simulation |
| Topics: | Site Management, Engineering Principles |
| 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