Al-Bayati, A J and Panzer, L (2019) Reducing damage to underground utilities: Lessons learned from damage data and excavators in North Carolina. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 145(12): 04019078, ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
Damages to underground utilities are unfortunately a common occurrence on many construction projects. Damaging an underground utility during construction often leads to work delay, road closures, social costs, and safety accidents. Through a combination of damage data analysis and a construction practitioner survey, this paper examined the current deficiencies in damage prevention efforts as well as the possible root causes. Understanding the current root causes that contribute the most to underground utility damages presents opportunities to reduce future damages. The analyses presented in this paper are the result of a survey completed by 477 excavators who experienced the current damage prevention efforts. Data on 11,160 damages in the state of North Carolina were collected and analyzed. The key contributions of the study include, among others, recommendations to improve education material, tailoring construction firms' plans to address locating delay and inaccuracy, and improving utility owners' locating efforts. Accordingly, the findings can help the industry improve its efforts to reduce the damages to underground utilities and enhance the performance of construction projects.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Index terms: | lessons learned, construction project, construction practitioner, survey, construction firm, damages, data analysis, prevention, owner, utilities |
| Subjects: | data analysis and analytics, dispute resolution, organization, data collection methods, construction type, sociology, professional development, financial risk, production management |
| Topics: | Construction Technology, Stakeholder Management, Research Practice, Project Management, Information Management, Business Strategy, Cost Management, Legal Issues |
| 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