Han, K; Degol, J and Golparvar-Fard, M (2018) Geometry- and appearance-based reasoning of construction progress monitoring. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 144(2): 04017110, ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
Although adherence to project schedules and budgets is most highly valued by project owners, more than 53% of typical construction projects are behind schedule and more than 66% suffer from cost overruns, partly because of an inability to accurately capture construction progress. To address these challenges, this paper presents new geometry- and appearance-based reasoning methods for detecting construction progress, which has the potential to provide more frequent progress measures using visual data that are already being collected by general contractors. The initial step of geometry-based filtering detects the state of construction of building information modeling (BIM) elements (e.g., in-progress, completed). The next step of appearance-based reasoning captures operation-level activities by recognizing different material types. Two methods have been investigated for the latter step: a texture-based reasoning for image-based 3D point clouds and color-based reasoning for laser-scanned point clouds. This paper presents two case studies for each reasoning approach to validate the proposed methods. The results demonstrate the effectiveness and practical significances of the proposed methods.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | building information modeling; images; information technologies; laser scan; material classification; point cloud; progress monitoring; three-dimensional reconstruction |
| Index terms: | point cloud, general contractor, reasoning, information technology, progress monitoring, construction project, owner, cost overrun, case study, geometry, reconstruction, building information modelling, effectiveness |
| Subjects: | sociology, building construction, cognitive psychology, project controls, information systems, performance management, digital design, production management, financial and cost management, mathematical modelling, data collection methods, computing systems, practitioner |
| Topics: | Roles and Professions, Stakeholder Management, Engineering Principles, Project Management, Research Practice, Cost Management, Time Control, Quality Management, Digital Applications |
| 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