Park, Y J; Gwak, H S and Lee, D E (2017) Dozer workability estimation method for economic dozing. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 143(2): 04016096, ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
This paper presents a computational method called the dozer workability estimation (DoWe) system. It collects the internal system variables of a dozer machine and the external system environment variables, calculates the engine output loss attributed to these variables, identifies the optimal set of forward and reverse gears that maximizes its economic performance, and computes the gradeability with the gears. This study is of significance to earthwork managers because the method identifies the optimal solution that minimizes the cycle time, thus establishing an earthwork plan that satisfies expense-related and time-related project constraints. This study is also relevant to researchers in that it allows investigation of the variability of cycle time and productivity attributed to the changes in the system attributes. The usability and validity of the DoWe was confirmed experimentally for a test case of a straight shuttle dozing operation administered by the focus group of earthwork managers.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | construction materials and methods; dozer; economic dozing; performance; workability |
| Index terms: | project constraint, estimation, validity, variability, usability, manager, test case, focus group, construction material, workability, investigation, earthwork, productivity |
| Subjects: | professional practice, design methods, practitioner, data collection methods, user-centered design, management, building materials, construction methods, control systems, financial and cost management, evaluation and assessment methods, statistical analysis |
| Topics: | Design Practice, Research Practice, Roles and Professions, Engineering Principles, Project Management, Business Strategy, Cost Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCEA |
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