Melhem, N N; Maher, R A and Sundermeier, M (2021) Waste-based management of steel reinforcement cutting in construction projects. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 147(7): 04021056, ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
Waste optimization models are vital to reduce the trim loss in the cutting process of steel reinforcement. Unfortunately, waste minimization is frequently considered as a pure mathematical problem, which is solved apart from the project management context. This perspective creates a gap between the models and their application, and ignores field aspects, which are not less important than developing robust models. This study empirically demonstrates managing the cutting process with optimization models considering three field variables: merging sequential demands, multiple stock lengths, and usable leftovers. Adjusting the variables generated different cutting scenarios and wastes, which were examined in a sensitivity analysis of a huge case study with 136 optimization problems. The sensitivity analysis frames a new concept for managing the cutting process in construction projects based on the waste. Minimizing the cutting waste becomes the primary criteria in production planning at the project level instead of minimizing the cutting waste for independent activities. The systematic framework revealed a distinct performance over the conventional method. The cutting waste of the case study was reduced by more than 70%.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Index terms: | construction project, reinforcement, sensitivity analysis, production planning, minimization, mathematical problem, project management, case study |
| Subjects: | data collection methods, measurement and scaling, project management theory and practice, algorithms, production management, environmental hazards, project delivery, building materials |
| Topics: | Project Management, Sustainability, Digital Applications, Construction Materials, Research Practice |
| 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